The Sun. — London, England, 1863-02-20 00:00:00

IMPERIALPARLIAMENT and e h d e a h r i s t n h o e b evidence d o w f o s u o l m d e a c o e f e t p h t e t p h ri e s c o o n mtnit inspectors. He The Earl of CATHCART advocated good diet, and strongly disapproved of whipping in gaols. The Earl of CARNARVON accepted the offer of the committee, and appointed Friday (this day) t ) move for it. TICKE CS OF LEAVE. The Earl of DUDLEY inquired of her Majesty's Go vernment whether they would consent to refuse to all second convictions involving a sentence of penal servitude any remission of the time of such sentence. He was afraid that much of the debate which had just ended referred so nearly to his question, that he 'right almost anticipate the reply which would be given him. He wished her Majesty's Government to promise that all sentences passed by the judges should be carried out. Earl GRANVILLE could not pledge the Government. There was a Royal commission now inquiring into the sub ject, and it would be quite out of the question for the Exe cutive, without waiting for the report of the commission to pledge itself. What the noble earl required would amount almost to the abolition of tickets of leave. As to persons convicted of garotting, they had no chance of getting any remission of their sentences whatever. Beyond that her Majesty's Government could not go. After a few words from the Earl of DERBY and the Earl of DUDLEY, the subject dropped. Their lordships adjourned at 25 minutes past 7 o'clock. HOUSE OP LORDS—Last Evening. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. POLAND. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH gave notice that to morrow he should ask the noble earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether there was any intention of lay ing on the table a despatch from the Consul. General at - Warsaw as far as related to the origin of the insurrection in Poland, and also to ask the noble lord whe ther any despatch had been received from the Russian Government relative to the origination of the outbreak; and also whether any communication had been received froum the Prussian Government as to the means to be taken for its suppression. HOUSE OF COMMONS---Last Evening. The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. NEW MEMBER. Mr. GORE LANGTON took the oaths and his seat for West Somersetshire. SECOND READINGS. The following bills were read a second time :—Boston and Frieston Shore, Railway, and Pier—Bristol Railways Junction Railways—Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway— Penarth Harbour, Dock, and Railway —and London and Epsom Downs Railway. ROME. The Marquis of NOR NIANBY complained of some mis representation which had been made of a despatch which he had written, and which had been referred to by the noble earl opposite (Russell) the other evening. Earl RUSSELL said he had quoted the despatch re ferred to by the noble marquis for the purpose of proving the general position of the advantage of giving advice to countries to follow the practice and usage of constitutional liberty. He had not meant to imply that on the particu lar question at issue the sentiments of the noble marquis were different from what they were. The Marquis of NORMANBY said everything in the despatch referred to a particular transaction and did not give a general opinion. He had also to complain of the de spatch being quoted, although he had been checked for doing the same with other despatches which were not produced. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said it was a general rule that no public official had a right to give documents which hecatne to the knowledge of through his official posi tion till they were published. Earl RUSSELL said he had not violated the general rule, as at the time ho referred to the papers he announced that it was the intention to publish them. PRISON DISCIPLINE. The Earl of CARNARVON called the attention of the house to the state of discipline in the different gaols and houses of correction. The noble earl said the criminal population was divided into two classes, namely, those whe were sentenced to three years penal servitude and over, and those sentenced to shorter terms of imprisonment. The Royal Commission would only inquire into the former, the latter would be altogether overlooked. It was of the ut most importance that a Government inquiry into the subject should be made, especially as in some instances the old system of association was kept up in many of the country gaols. The system of taking sta tistics was excsedingly defective, because they were always in arrear of the present time; but taking those up to 1861, he found there was an increase of 13 per cent. in the committals over those of the preceding year; en increase of 9 over committals. end an increase upon other classes. There was nut the slightest reason to believe that there was any decrease is the following year, whilst in the present the alarm caused by the increase of crime had been so great that numbers of persons looked upon it as unsafe to walk in the streets after dark. He thought a great deal of the evil was brought about by the kind of punishment inflicted. Since 1850, when the subject was under the con sideration of the House of Commons, the system in the gaols was admitted to be against hard labour, and an aet stating the limits to which it was applied was passed. The reality, however, was that in most of the gaols the stan dard of hard labour was very far from being reached, and they would find that in recent cases the minimum of six hours labour - sunk down to three or four. In many large prisons there was a great deficiency in the means of tarrying out the punishment of hard labour, whilst the dietary was far too high, meat being given in some form or other every day of the week. Not content with this the luxuries of tea, sugar, cocoa, and other articles were pro fusely given, In one of the prisons what was called extra diet was allowed, and this indulgence was given with out the slightest rule, as was evidenced by the fact that while in some the prisoners extra dieted was as 1 to 8, in others it was as I to 35. The diet given in workhouses had been compared with that given in prisons, and he knew for a fact that in some workhouses in the south meat was seldom given, and that the diet was much below that of pri sons. The work done in workhouses was far more severe than in some prisons he could mention, yet in the one case the in mates of workhouses were perfectly willing to earn their sub sistence, while in the other complying with the rules of the prison was all that was required to secure good and plenti ful food. He was not an advocate for starvation of crimi nals, yet he thought there was a medium between that and the plentiful manner in which they were treated ; and if that were only observed, and offenders were treated in a manner their offences deserved, they would do much to bring about a better state of things. The decrease in the infliction of whipping was most extraordinary. In 1862-60 it appeared that one in every 1,000 prisoners was whipped in the following year, 1860-61, only one in I,boo ; and in 1861-62 the proportion had decreased to one in 2,240. The inspectors had resolved upon its discontinuance, and the whole course of Parliamentary action had been against the infliction of corporal punishments. But brutalised men, who had over and over again been convicted, feared corpo ral punishment when nothing else had terrors for them. As to the hours of rest, too, there were great differences between gaols. In some 14 hours of sleep were allowed, in others only eight hours. The present system was mischievous as regarded the prisoner. It was a mere gambling with the chances of the law, and most painful as regarded the admi nistration of justice. Lord Denman, Bat on Parke, whose absence he regretted on that occasion —(here Baron Parke, now Lord Wensleydale, bowed to the noble earl, who pro ceeded)—Baron Parke and Baron Alderson had all declared their opinit ns that suitable punishment for crime was the most merciful course in the long run. He did not wish to exclude moral reformation— God forbid I but he thought that attempts at moral reformation should be secondary and sub ordinate to punishment. His lordship was cheered on re suming his seat. Earl GRANVILLE said that the subject was a very difficult one. As to the hard labour, there were many men with whom you could not carry labour beyond a certain point. To make some men do unproductive labour was more irksome than any other punishment. As to the diet, the pro bability was that the system was rather too lenient. Public opinion had gone in opposition to the former system, and had deprecated undue severity, and the result had been that too much attention had been paid to the comfort and too little to the punishment of prisoners. Howtver, the Go vernment could not do much on that point. The visiting justicss arranged the rules of the county gaols. Sit Benja min Brodie, who was not likely to be unduly influenced, said that so serious was the effect of confinement on prisoners that great care should be taken of their dietary. He (Earl Granville) believed that if they compared the entire cost of the keep of paupers with that of prisoners, it would be found that the paupers cost two-fifths more than the prisoners. As to his noble friend's example in support of the advan tages of prison life, that prisoners often thanked the judge for sentencing them to hard labour, he (Earl Granville) ranch doubted the sincerity of such thanks. Prisoners liked to appear bold, and when they had heard the worst, they liked to —as the common expression had it—they liked to 4 ' chaff" the judge. (Laughter.) His noble friend might rely upon it that the greatest boon that could be granted to those, and to all prisoners, would be to let them out. (Hear, hear.) The food of prisoners must be sufficient, in order to prevent their bodies from being wasted by low fever. Even for the sake of moral reformation they must have a sound body, in order that the mind might be sound. (Hear, hear.) The prisons, too, might be properly warmed and ventilated. It would be very difficult to secure consistency and unifor mity in all the gaols without strengthening the central Power But, if the noble earl would move for a c omm i ttee of their lordships—as he had suggested to one of his (Earl Granville's) colleagues—to take up the subject of gaols and discipline, her Majesty's Government would have no objection. The recommendations of such a committee would have great weight with the justices. The Earl of AL.A.LMESBUItY said that he could certify as well as his noble friend that the pauper was less well off than the occupant of the county gaol. He had often heard them say, " Why, 'tis better to be in Winchester Gaol than to get out-door relief." The allowances for soldiers and sailors were less than the allowances for diet in some of the gaols, The effect must bo very bad upon men who see cri minals better off than those who have passed their lives honestly labouring, or in the service of her Majesty. Cri minals ought to be convinced that the punishment for their Crimes would be certain, and that the sentences passed by the judges wo u ld b e i mmu t a bl e . B u t a t p resen t they think they may escape altogether ; or, if convicted, that their sen tence will n o t b e carried out. Lord WODEROUSE sai d that the nobl e lord o pp osite had quoted the criminal returns for 1861 as showing an incl ease upon the preceding year ; but he should not take one year,but rather look at the average of a number of years, Undoubtedly there h a d been an increase in 1861 over the preceding year ; but in 1860 there had been a great decrease upon the returns of 1859, and decrease had been the con stant rule back to 1857. In 1847 the committals were 22,00', whereas in 1861 they were only 18,226. For the five years from 1847 to 1851 the committals were 142,771 in the five years from 1852 to 1856 they were 129,335; whilst for the last five years they amounted to only 89,121; so that there was a continuous decrease in the number of committals'. The great defect of the prison system was want of uniformity. The prisoners required good food ; but there was no occasion to supply them with luxuries. Lord WENSLEYDALE thought the prison diet too good. In Prussia he had visit ed the principal npdristrai which was modelled after Pentonville , and he u there the prisoners were only allowed 21bs of meat In the year. They received only half a pound each on each of the four h o lid ays i n t h e year. Th a t was the entire allow ance of flesh meat which the prisoners received. Lord TRURO advocated the giving of more generous diet to prisoners than to paupers, the prisoners not being allowed the fresh air and exercise which the paupers en joyed. - The Marquis of SALISBURY thought that it would be very useful to have the committee, but they did not want to hear many witnesses. They should examine the reports of the prisons and of the former committees of both houses, COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS. The general committee on elections were then sworn at the table. THAMES CONSERVANCY BILL. On the second reading, Alderman SALOMONS opposed the measure. His constituents complained that they had to go through all the inconveniences incidental to those interested in private bills, whereas this was a public measure of considerable im portance. The Thames Conservators enjoyed enormous powers over the river utterly inimical to the interests of denizens on the banks of the river. The bill would endow the Board with enormous taxing powers on parties selling goods on the river, and enable them to charge tol s upon all who travelled on the river. As it would materially interfere, and unjustly so, with the trade of the river, he begged to move that the bill be read a second time that day six months. Mr. W. WILLIAMS seconded the motion. This should have been a public not a private bill. It would endow a private board with enormous and exceedingly arbitrary powers to interfere with the trade of the liver, and all people transacting business on its banks. He confessed he was surprised to see the name of the hon. members for Bath (Mr. rite) and Abingdon (Mr. Norris) on the back of the bill. Mr. NORRIS supported the bill. The object of the bill was simply to alter the license tax fixed by the bill of 1857 which was introduced and passed as a pri vate bill. A toll would be charged per head on pas sengers by steamboats, instead of now a specific sum for the ordinary license. The conservators would ob tain no more power by this bill than they now enjoyed by law. The fishing powers proposed by the bill would be like those in force before the passing of the Act of 1857. Power, too, would be taken to punish, by fine, persons shooting offensive matter from barges or otherwise into the Thames ; thus the cleanliness of the river would be promoted. The house ought to read the bill a second time. and then subject it to an ordeal of a committee up stairs. Mr. TITE supported the bill, and had put his name on the back of it, because it would enable the Conservators to punish gas companies and others who polluted the river. Surely this was an object worthy of the support of the house. (Hoar, hear.) Mr. LOCKE supported the amendment, because the bill would be inimical to the interests and pursuits of his con stituents. Mr. CRAWFORD opposed the bill, and trusted that the Government would institute an early inquiry into the con dition of the river and the powers of the various municipal bodies under whose management it was placed. There were innumerable objections to the bill. Mr. MASSEY said the act of 1857 was a compromise, under which certain disputed rights between the Crown and the Conservators were accommodated and defined. That bill had worked well for six years, but the Conserva tors urge that they needed some slight extension of their powers, the chief of which was the right to frame bye-laws to prevent the pollution of the river, He agreed with his hon. friend that it would be well to make the inquiry he proposed, but that was no reason why the salutary powers sought by this bill should not be granted. He wished to express no opinion as to the mode in which the Conservators had performed their duties. It would be best to read the bill a second time, and to enter up stairs in committee into a careful examination of its provisions. Alderman SIDNEY and Mr. ANGEBSTEDI supported the amendment. Mr. HENLEY considered it rather anomalous, after giving the Conservators taxing powers, to suggest in. quiry. This should have been done before the powers were given. The house negatived the bill without a division. SPIRITS DUTY. In reply to Mr. STANSFELD, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER intimated that her Majesty's Government had obtained all the infor mation requisite to ascertain the exact nature of the work ing of these duties. He wished decidedly to state that it was not the intention of the Government to propose any change in the spirit duties. (Hear, hear.) POST-OFFICE SAVINGS BANK BILL. The second reading was postponed until Monday. Allowance to the Prince and Princess of Wales. The house having resolved itself into a committee for the consideration of the Queen's Message upon the subject of the marriage of the Prince of Wales, cated with an arrangement for the payment of the large debts at that tirab due by his royal highness ; but the total amount of allowance which was granted, including that portion which was set aside for the liquidation of debt, was £138,000 a year, placed partly upon the Civil List andpartly upon the Consolidated Fund. And although for a certain number of years the appropriation of a large portion of that amount reduced the available income of the then Prince of Wales to something, I believe, between £60,000 and £70,000, yet I apprehend that about the year 1806, those debts having been liquidated, the Prince of Wales of that day then entered into the receipt of the £138,000. It is not the intention of her Nrajesty's Government nor the desire ()flier Majesty that the present application to Parliament should be founded upon what was proposed for the then Prince of Wales. (Hear.) His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales is in the enjoyment of the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall, and to the honour of her Majesty and the late Prince Consort be it said, that whereas in for mer reigns it was understood, and was the practice, that during the minority of the Prince of Wales the revenues of the l uchy of Cornwall were added to the available income of the Crown, in the present reign those revenues have been carefully and studiously set apart to accumulate for the be nefit of the Prince when he came to be of age. Those ac cumulations, or a very considerable part of them, have been invested in the purchase of land, of an estate which has been bought in the county of Norfolk, the purchase money of which was, I believe, £220,000, upon a nominal rental of £7,000 a year, but which probably, with those usual deduc tions to which estates are subject—(laughter)—and which many hon. gentlemen will well understand, may not pro duce more than £5,000 of available income. A part must be set aside for the outfit of his royal highness, who will pro bably want more than he did at college of those things which are necessary to form an establishment, and part also will be required for the purpose of building upon the Norfolk estate a mansion more suitable than the present one to the dignity and station of the Prince of Wales. Making these deductions, the details of which I will not trouble the house with going into, the actual probable income from the Duchy of Cornwall, together with the income arising from these investments and the remaining accumulations, may be taken in round numbers at £60,000 a-year. We think that a sum of £lOO,OOO a year would not be disproportionate to those expenses which naturally fall upon a person in the exalted position of his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales (Cheers.) I shall therefore have to propose to the house to grant £40,000 a year upon the Consolidated Fund for the establishment of the Prioce and Princess of Wales. (Renewed cheers.) But those whom I am now address ing, and who are not, fortunately for them, in the single and bachelor condition—(a laugh)—will know that there are expenses which the Princess of Wales will be ex posed to which will require that she should have a sepa rate and sufficient income. And by the treaty of marriage concluded between her Majesty and the King of Denmark the allowance which was undertaken to be secured to her royal highness was £lO,OOO a year for her own separate use. The resolutions, therefore, which I shall have to p , opose to the house will therefore, in the whole, amount to a charge of £50,000 a year—£4o,ooo for the aggregate establishment and £lO,OOO for the separate use of the Princess. (Cheers.) I should mention that up to the time when the Duchy of Cornwall was managed under a commission, over which the late Prince Consort presided, it was the custom of the duchy to grant long leases or life leases at a reduced rate upon the payment of a heavy fine, and those fines formed a material element in the annual income of the Duke of Corn wall. His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales is quite sensible that that is not a proper mode of management, and is willing that an act should be passed restraining him from granting such leases in future, and ordering that the duchy property should be managed in the usual way in which properties are managed, not allowing the occupant for the time to take advantage of fines upon renewals and upon granting leases to the detriment of those who may fol low after. (Hear, hear.) I am told that the bill is in actual course of production, and will without delay be submitted to the house. Hon. gentlemen will naturally be desirous of seeing more amply than it would be fitting for me to detai upon the present occasion the condition of the duchy and the state of its revenues and property. There is a very correct and detailed report prepared, which I shall have to lay upon the table this evening, and which will be in the hands of members, I trust, to-morrow or next day, which will give them the fullest information with regard to all the details of the duchy which they may wish to have. There is only one point which I have to add to that which I have already stated. There, of course, must be provision made for the jointure to be given to the Princess of Wales in the event, which we trust will not happen, of her surviving her husband, the Prince of Wales. In the case of the Princess of Wales, the wife of George IV., the jointure was fixed at £50,000 a year. We do not pro pose that, in the present case, it should be fixed at so high an amount—we think that £30,000 a year would be suffi cient, and therefore, although the allowance to the then Princess of Wales during the joint lives of herself and hus band was less than the amount which has been stipulated for the princess who is now to be Princess of Wales, yet setting the one against the other, though the allowance is greater—but not greater I think than it ought to be —the dower will be reduced to the amount I have stated. lam not aware that I have anything to add to that which I have stated, and I have now only to put into your hands the first resolution. (Cheers.) Sir H. WILLOUGHBY considered the proposition of the noble lord to be moderate and reasonable, with one ex ception—he thought the £40,000 a year should be at the command of the house. (No, no.) They were placed in considerable difficulty in dealing with this matter, because the whole question turned upon the condition of the finances of the Duchy of Cornwall, about which hon. members at pre sent knew nothing. He did not object to the allowance of £lOO,OOO a year—that was a fair and reasonable charge, but the house was not in a position to form a judgment as to the charge to be made upon the consolidated fund until they had seen the accounts. He did not quite agree in the historical (account given by the noble viscount, because he did not believe that Frederick Prince of Wales, in 1745, had £lOO,OOO. He believed that the allowance on that occa sion was £60,000 a year, and that it was no' till some years had elapsed, and his royal highness had a family grown up, that he had £lOO,OOO a year. Mr. WILLIAMS wanted to ask whether the noble lord, in the accounts which he had promised to lay before the house, would state the amount that had accumulated upon the Duchy of Cornwall property during the minority of the Prince of Wales, and also the amount of the revenues received from it. Lord PALMERSTON said—l rise, sir, to propose to the committee a resolution for the purpose of providing, in the words of the Message from her Majesty, an establishment for the Prince and Princess of Wales suitable to the rank and dignity of that station. (Hear, hear.) And in doing BO I would remind the committee of that of which they are all aware, that we have the happiness of living under a constitutional monarchy, and the people of thiseountry not only are, perhaps, more than at any former period, sensible by positive experience of the blessings which that form of government confers, but they have also an opportunity of appreciating its value by contrasting it with events which are passing in other parts of the world. (Cheers.) We see in the East some of the evils which are incident to arbitrary sway. 'We witness in the West the wide spread misery and desolation which are sometimes created by democratic and republican institutions. (Loud cheers.) We enjoy a happy medium between those two extremes. Our institutions not only confer happiness and tranquillity upon the people of these realms, but enable them to enjoy the most perfect freedom of thought, of speech, of writing, and of printing, and above all uncontrolled either by the dictates of despotic authority or by the Lynch law of an un governable mob. (Cheers.) I trust that the people of this nation will long continue to enjoy these advantages, and that their hearts will be directed towards the Almighty Dispenser of events with thankfulness—reverential thank fulness for the lot which has thus been assigned them, and I am persuaded that their bosoms will be full of the most affectionate attachment towards that sovereign and family under whose mild and beneficent sway, humanly speaking, thosel,hree blessings have been admini s t ere d. (H ear, h ear. ) are maatrteeres an • occasions s i joy y s in an h a u m r el: i affairs cin g pirna produce pleasure vent s h t which at begins and ends with arises. But there are other w ther occasions connect the pres en t w i th the future—when joyful the happiness which mankind enjoy s a t the moment is also an earnest and a security for future happiness. Such aocis gi asion. is the pre sent, when the heir apparent of the Crown a marriage which will not only, I t rus t , be productiveng t o contract f do mestic happiness for the family irrahich it is t o be celebrated, but will hold out to this country a prospect of a long line of succeeding sovereigns who by transmitted qualities and by the recollection of the conduct of those who went before them, will, I trust, imitate the virtues of the stock from which they may spring, and will contribute as much a s th e present family does to the happiness, and welfaro,and dignity of the country over which they reign. (Hear.) The people of this country have always been disposed readily to give whatever may be necessary to maintain that due dignity which is essential for the monarchical institutions of the country, and I am persuaded that upon the present occasion the proposal which it will be my duty to make will be acceded to with pleasure and readiness by this house, and will be sanctioned by the people of this country. In consi dering that which it may be fitting upon the present occa sion to grant to the Crown for the establishment of the Prince and Princess of Wales, it is right to look back a little to see what has been done upon similar occasions in times gone by. Now, if gentlemen will look at the speech of Mr. Pitt, w h en, i n 1795, he proposed an establishment for that the then Prince and Prince ss o f W a l es, t h ey w ill se e he stated th a t th e P r i nce of Wales in 1715, and the Prince of Wales at an earlier period, in 171 - , h ad each their a net i ncome of £lOO 0 addition to th e revenues of the D ' i f clear from th e word a , 00 a year n the one case, in uchy of Cornwall. It i s no t words made use of whether in both that income w as i n addition to the revenue of the cases Cornwall, but I ra th er infer that it was . Eve D r yuhcohdyy e : f i s aware what a great c h ange has taken place in the value of money since either of these remote periods, and how little the same nominal amount in the present day represents the c ommand of things which that amount gave either in 1745 or i n 1715. Coming down toll later period, in 1795, when Mr. Pitt proposed, and the house consented, to an este , blishment for the then Prince and Princess of Wales, the arrangement was not a simple one, because it was compli- Mr. A. SMITH thought the documents with regard to the Duchy of Cornwall ought to be laid before the house to enable them to judge whether this additional sum of £40,000 was required from the consolidated fund. He did not think, after the good management to which the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall had been subjected, that the house would have been called upon to vote anything out of the consolidated fund for the Prince of Wales. Already a large portion of the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall came out of the consolidated fund, and large sums had been paid from time to time for the Prince of Wales, including £20,000 for Marlborough .house and £6,000 for stabling attached to Marlborough-house, and last year, notwithstanding that some £40,000 was paid for the privy purse of his royal highness, the public were called upon to pay his expenses in Canada, amounting to something like £14,000. The total amount of the various charges paid during the minority of the Prince of Wales was very nearly £50,000 a year, and . he hoped, therefore, the house would at least pause before they determined upon this additional payment out of the consolidated fund. H e was glad to learn that a bill would be introduced relat ing to the duchy, because it had been shown that the ex pense of management was about 20 per cent. ; and this was a lesson to show how expensive it was to provide for the princes of the royal family by anything like landed estates. As regarded the dower of the Princess of Wales, it appeared to him that instead of its being settled on the consolidated fund it ought to be fixed on the revenues of the duchy (Oh, oh.) The revenues of the duchy were so peculiar that he believed on the death of a Prince of Wales they would `net go to a son, supposing he had one, but would revert to the crown. It was quite clear that an additional revenue of £60,000 a year to the sovereign would be altogether waste, and therefore he hoped the Government :would consider whether it was not wise and just that the dower of the Princess of Wales should be settled on the revenues of the duchy. There were one or two other points on which he wished to have some explanation. He wished to know whether the £600,000, part of which had been expended on the new estate at Sandringham, was to be tied up with (he revenue of the duchy, or whether it was to be regarded as the private property of the Prince of Wales. He was en deavouring to point out incidents connected with this set tlement so as to secure the public at large against being un fairly charged with a heavy expenditure which ought not to fall upon them. Mr. DISRAELI—Sir, I should have hope I that the reso lution would have been passed nemine contradicente— (loud cheers)—but as it has met with some unexpected and plhlorobrondepl . unnecessary ioiegssveiaetni proposition. am. be the discuss ion, feeling I think to on it my this side dutyo of the to h eh e o x u p s express s s e n what f peenragt e en , aernadl I , h t a h v a e t t n h o e d p o r n o h p t o s e i t i w on e f ll the n consideredobl e (Cheers.) We trust it may be adequate, and I think no one can describe it as excessive. What strikes me as most remarkable in the observations of the hon. gen tleman a-d others that have been made is, that the good management of the Duchy of Cornwall is brought forward as a reason why we should not assent to this proposition. (Hear, hear.) It appears to me that we ought to be thankful for that good management of the duchy, and not make it a basis for an argument in i f tn av et o hd u eu r c o ph f ays t t. mh eayrletbdieuscvteicrny possible even better of the vote proposed by her Ma j est y's Government. (C h e managed e rs.) It is verythepossible than in h er are the rents n rentss of and eni revenues osevery mayes estate be ten the increased countryin ; a time, nd as I do not think the country is prepared to grudge to his Royal Highness the advantage of that increase—(hear, dehear)—andoeend discretion e i r s e n t t o o t n a t o n all theimpossible thathis Royal wlth Highness gr e t pru he may find means to employ that increase and put it to a good use. (H ear , h ear .) I th ere f ore t ru st the house will allow the vote to pass without—l will not say without a dis sentient voice, but at least without a dissentient vote — (general cheering) —and if there be any point of detail in regard to the management of the duchy that hon. gentle- THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 20, 1861 men opposite may wish to be made acquainted with, the of,portunity will be open to them at some future stage of the bill. (Loud cheers from both aides of the house.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Sir, I wish to say, on the part of her Majesty's Government, that I admit the perfect fairness of the claim of the hon, baronet the member for Evesham to reserve his judgment on the proposal so favourably received by the house until he shall have had an Opportunity of examining carefully the report which will be laid on the table to-night. There are, however, two or three points of detail, with regard to which I think some misunderstanding might prevail unless a word of ex planation were offered. I entirely concur in the spirit of the remarks of the right hon. gentleman opposite, and think it would be desirable—and I have no doubt we shall see it as the result—that the house will give a cheerful and un divided assent to the proposition. (Cheers.) The hon. baronet the member for Evesham impeached my noble friend's history, and said that Frederick Prince of Wales did not obtain the allowance of £lOO,OOO per annum from the civil list until a later period than the year named by my noble fr'end. The noble lord named 1745, and it does to happen that his history was in a very minute point open to impeachment, for instead of Frederick Prince of Wales obtaining that allowance later than that year, he obtained it earlier—it was granted in 1743. (Hear, hear.) However, I am more anxious to advert to a point mentioned by the hon. member for Truro (Mr. A. Smith), who said he thought the jointure of the Princess of "ales ought to be charged upon the revenue of the Duchy of Cornwall. That might be a point of moment for consideration if we were in cir cumstances in which, while we had a Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall, there was a likelihood of our being with out one to follow ; but looking at the state of the royal family no such likelihood is to be perceived --(hear, hear) — and I apprehend so long as you have a Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall to provide for, it is immaterial to the public purse whether the jointure of the Princess of Wales is taken from the revenues - of the d..chy in the first instance, which would leaveso much more to be provided for from the consolidated fund, or whether the more simple, and, I am bound to add, usual course is adopted, of charging the jointure upon the consolidated fund. (Hear.) It may be well the committee should understand that of course the moderate sum named by my noble friend for the jointure of the Princess of Wales would be a jointure for her own esta bli-hment. and it is obvious it is not a jointure out of which it would be possible for any Princess of Wales to defray the very considerable expenses which might be necessary in the education of her children. (Hear.) But my hon, friend was not entirely just in the observations he made in regard to charges which he said the consolidated fund had to bear on account of the Prince of Wales. He said we had paid a large sum on account of Marlborough-house. We did, but we had value received. (Hear, hear.) We had the use of Marlborough-house for important public purposes, which would otherwise have coat us a considerable sum of money during a number of years. (Hear, hear.) We had taken great liberties with Marlborough-house—in homely phrase, we had pulled it to pieces, and the sum voted was merely to place it in the condition in which we found it. There• fore we are not in a position to urge that that sum has been voted to the Prince of Wales. (Hear, hear.) With regard to the vote of money for the Prince of Wales's tour in Canada and the United Stares, that vote was not in aid of the personal expenses of his royal highness, it was,for the purpose of meeting expenditure undertaken by , the Prince of Wales, while a minor, on behalf of her Majesty, and for purposes strictly political ; and whether we regard his journey in Canada or in the United States, and the re ception he there met with, I think it was money well laid out. (Cheers.) Th a t vo t e , however, forms no item on the question the house has to consider in the proposition of my noble friend ; an d I mus t sa y it is scarcely just to refer to it. (Hear, hear.) My hon. friend says the Prince of Wales re eeives £16,000 annually out of the Consolidated fund. No doubt he does ; but what is the history of that sum ? It is a composition in lieu of revenues, in which he would other wise have been in receipt at the present time as Duke of Cornwall. (Hear, hear.) There were certain tin duties which were unquestionably his own, but it was thought expedient for the public interest, with a view to the eaten , sion of commerce and for the benefit of Cornwall, that these duties should be abolished; and the Duke of Cornwall, ' exactly like any other proprietor, received compensation. , (Hear, hear.) If so, then it is perfectly obvious that a con sideration of that kind cannot possibly enter into the pre sent discussion. I have felt it right to make these observa tions, and to show that the introduction of the annual pay ment of .£16,000 to the Prince of Wales has no bearing upon the present question. It has been said that this vote is in • addition, whereas there id no foundation for any supposi tion of the kind, (Cheers.) Sir J. TRE LAWNY wished to know what would be come of the income of the Prince of Wales from the duchy of Cornwall in the event of his death. It was right they should know what would become of that fund. He recol lected on a former occasion, when a settlement was made on the Princess Royal, assuring the Prime Minister that, ac cording to the peculiar tenure of the duchy, on the death of the eldest son of the Sovereign the roperty would revert to the Crown. On that occasion it was maintained that he was wrong, no one in the house being aware of the fact he had , stated except himself and his hon. friend (Mr. A. Smith). (Laughter.) '1 he point to which he now wished to call at tention was of another character. Edmund Burke in his speech on economical reform proposed that the revenues of the Duke of Cornwall and Lancashire should be sold, and the proceeds applied to the public exchequer. What was the object ? No doubt that the Crown might depend solely upon votes of Parliament for all grants of money. That was Burke's Conservative policy. Why did he (the hon. member) refer to it? Because he should like Parliament t o have the management of this property in order to get as much out of it as possible, and thus diminish the burdens of the people. If the property were judiciously exchanged and sales took place at the right time and in a proper manner, very large proceeds would have accrued, and they would not have found themselves in their present position that evening. He believed he was expressing the true feeling of the public out of doors ; but there was a time when Conser vatives were bold enough to propose a reduction in a grant of this kind. With regard to the £16,000, that might fairly be considered the Prince's property. But if the present Chancellor of the Exchequer had been in office when the tin duties were compounded, would he not have abolished them ? He did not wish to throw an apple of discord into the house, but he knew the people out of doors, and that they were not represented there. (Oh I) Re hoped they would not spend the public money without due consideration. Mr. KENDALL said that in former tithes there was a p w o h ic ic a h tio c n rus t h o e p d a t r h l e iam tin en n t er a s o e f oni Co p r r n o: wall, o b n u e t r u ous pon loc t a h l ei t r ax a mise was made, and while Cornwall was relieved, the public generally were also benefited. Such being the case, he very much regretted the remarks which had been made by hon. gentlemen connected with that county. Mr. BOUVERIE thought his hon. friend (Sir J. Tre lawny) was rather unreasonable in complaining that Burke's advice was not taken. If it had been, Parliament would have had to provide now the lull amount necessary to maintain the dignity and station of the Prince. Those revenues which cost £12,000 a year in management, and only yielded £12,000 net a year before the council of the Duchy of ornwall undertook their control, had by dint of good management, which was greatly owing to the late Prince Consort risen highly in value—the income had been raised to £50,000 a year, and the expense of management were be tween £7,000 and £B,OOO a year. This, he thought, was a sufficient reason why we should not be guided by Burke's advice in the matter. (Hear, hear.) What he wished prin cipally to say was that he totally disagreed with the state ment made by his hon. friend the member for Tavistock (Sir J. Trelaw ny) that the people out of doors would grudge this amount. He believed the public at large would do no• thing of the kind. (Hear, hear.) On the contrary, they would feel a sensation of agreeable surprise at the modera tion of proposal. (Cheers.) From what he had heard the general impression was that a larger proposal would have h en made than that submitted by the noble lord, and he thought the publio ought to rejoice at the volunteer state "ment of his noble friend that for the future the income of the duchy was not to be anticipated by grants of leases for life. (Hear, hoar.) In reply to a question from Mr. AYRTON, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUERstated that the accumulations, having been made out of income which was legally the property of the Duchy of Cornwall, were of _ . course to be regarded as belonging to the Prince of Wales, and that their amount had been taken into view by the Government in considering the vote now before the house. The resolution was then agreed to nem. con. The following resolutions were likewise proposed, and agreed to nem. con.:— " Thut the annual sum of £lc,ooo be granted to her Ma jesty out of the said Consolidated Fund, to be paid quar terly to her Royal Highness Princess Alexandra, for her s ,, le and separate use during the period of their Royal Highnesses' marriage." " That her Majesty may be enabled to secure to her Royal Highness the Princess Alexandra, in case she shall survive his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, an annual sum not exceeding £30,000 during her life to support her Roya dignity." CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS BILL. Sir G. GREY moved the second reading of this bill. Mr. H, BERKELEY, who had placed on the paper an amendment, postvAing the second reading for six months, said he was opposed to the bill, because it had no title to stand as the electoral law of the country. It had been the law ever since the period of Lord Aberdeen's Administra tion, and it had been framed upon the recemmf ndation of a select committee. Nevertheless, it had been found miserably wanting, and it was now the laughing-stock of every attor ney's clerk throughout the country. The bill was wrong in principle, for it punished the electors and not the candi date. I t appeared that the candidate must name an agent, and by whose acts he must stand or fall. Therefore it was the duty of Brown, the nominated agent, to take care that the caddidate was not drawn into an illegal act, while it was permitted to Jones and Robinson, who were not recognised acsomagmeonntss,mteoandtobsasit. And dpl what was late Mr. Coppock, the election agent, said of the act at the time of its p assin g that the country might know very well what the Hou se of expenditure the sugar that enabled the noxious d raught to be swallowed ? Why, the expenses of candidates and bards wer e t o b e put down—that wa s to say, the legiti mate wer e to was b toe reduced.eColoursed, were abolished, and the illegitimate was to have full flow. The law as to agency was monstrous, and under it it was impossible for any candidate with the commonest management, no matter how corrupt he had been, to get unseated. Then, what was done with treating and intimidation—how were they dealt with by the bill ? What was done to the breakfasts to electors on the morning of the election ? intimidation—which was without doubt the greatest evil of our electoral system—was left un touched. The Government had been pleased to reject the measure which he was in the habit of regarding as the only real remedy for the evils complained of. He had a right then, to call upon them to produce a proposal calculated to palliate those evils. If they did not be warned them that at next election the richest party would surely win the day. It was not his intention to put the house to the trouble of dividing. Mr. M'MAHON pointed out the necessity there was for a consolidating statute with respect to the law of elections. Let this bill be withdrawn and a consolidation bill intro duced. (Hear, hear.) Lord HENLEY objected to the provisions of the bill, which disentitled paid agents from voting. He thought it would lead to greater evils than those against which it was directed. Mr. BENTINCK thought the annual discussion of this measure, like that on the ballot, was an annual farce. It was going through a ceremony which could lead to no pos sible result. The real difficulty of the matter was that there was no belief, either in or out of the house, that an act of bribery entailed any moral culpability. The justice of the House of Commons ought, like charity, to begin at home. The ostensible object in all such bills was to prevent the bribery of the voter, by enacting that he should be punished if it could be proved that money had been paid to influence his vote. But what did they do in the House of Commons ? Did not hon. members of that house receive what was dig by the name of a testimonial, which was neither more nor less than a sum paid to him as the price of his vote, and he was distinctly and clearly bound by his acceptance of that sum to continue his vote in the same sense, whatever his opinion on the particular question might be. The practice of allowing members of the house to receive money tes imonials was directly at variance with the principle upon which they prohibited a voter from being paid for his vote So long as thr, hi ,use sanctioned the principle of allowing memt ers to receive money testimonials, it was bound, in common justice, to allow every voter in England to receive every shilling ne could get for his vote, otherwise it was drawing a monstrous distinction in favour of a member of that house against the voter. Mr. POWELL could only give a qualified support to the bill. It was defective in form, had many omissions, and retained some clauses which were unnecessarily harsh. Mr. PHILLIPS was of opinion that the best remedy to diminish bribery would be by disfranchising individuals in stead of a whole constituency. Mr. PIGOTT was convinced tLat the clauses of the bill would have a valuable effect in repressing - corrupt practices. Lord R. MONTAGU thought some more effective pro vision ought to be made for preventing bribery and undue influence by persons holding high ffices in the Govern ment, and cited several instances within his knowledge in which he believed improper steps had been taken by the First Lord of the Admiralty (the Duke of Somerset) and by the Secretary of the Admiralty, to influence voters in favour of their nominees. Sir F. GOLDSMID supported the bill, and hcped the amendment would be considered in committee. Mr. PACKE said he thought the house ought to be very careful how they interfered with the electors of the country by a clause so comprehensive as that proposed by the amendment. Sir G. GREY briefly replied to the various objections that had been made, and aisavowed any special merit in its character. It was quite true, as an hon. member had ob served, that the mea ,, ure would not prove perfectly effectual for the objects intended, but it did not follow that because they could not frame a perfect bill they should therefore de nothing at all. After a few words from Mr. Brady, Mr. Bentinck, and Mr. Griffith, the bill was read a becond time. UNION RELIEF AID ACT (1862) CONTINUANCE BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this bill, Gen. LINDSAY presented a petition against the second reading of the bill, or any bill which did not make provision for a general rating throughout the kingdom. Mr. VILLIERS said the bill had been discussed a good deal some nights ago, and upon that occasion several suggestions had been thrown out and observations made by several hon. members, who were, perhaps, the best entitled to make them. The first suggestion made upon the subject of the Act was by the noble lord the member for King's Lynn, and which was concurred in by the hon. mem ber for Rochdalde and others, with respect to their irnper ft ct experience, and the uncertainty of the circumstances with which the house had to deal ; and which made it ne cessary that the duration of the Act should be for a shorter time. Finding from numerous communications which came to him from the distressed districts, and from the represen tations of a deputation who had waited upon him at the de pi.rtuient over which he presided, that there was a general feeling that there should be another discussion of the ques tion at a more advanced period of the session, the Govern ment were disposed to accede to the general desire, and therefore the present Act would only be operative for the next two quarters. (Hear, hear.) Another important sug gestion which had been made was, that the time for the repayment of the loans should be extended over a greater number of years. (Flea., hear.) Although at the time it was proposed to introduce a provision iu the Act to enabla the boards of guardians to make loans, sui•h provision was re ceived with distrust as a novelty, yet trom all the informa tion he had received there was no reason to apprehend there had been any laxity or irregularity in the administration of the poor law. Under these circumstances, then, he was wil ling to introduce an amendment allowing the annual instal ments to be spread over 14 years instead of 7. (Hear, hear.) _ _ There was an error in the Act which could not have been premeditated, and which he would remove by introducing a new clause ; the wording of the clause as it now stood was to the effect that any union whose expenditure reached a cer tain point, which was 3s. in the pound, was not bound to contribute towards other distressed unions. These were the only changes he intended to propose, and he trusted hon. members would allow the bill to be now read a second time, and reserve their observations until the bill went into com- mittee. Col. W. PATTEN said he was not going to throw any obstacles in the way of the second reading, nor would he occupy more of the time of the house than was necessary. The right hon. gentleman had met two of the principal ob jections, but there were other points worthy of considera tion. The rate in aid principle was good, but when it was put in operation it fell upon the occupiers and not upon the property—(hear, hear)—and the agricultural part of the distressed districts complained at having the burthen thrown upon them. If they lived in close proximity with large towns they paid an increased rent. The extra charge of the rate in aid ought to be charged upon the property. The period for contracting loans was too limited. The con sequence was that some banks would not advance the money, and when it was lent a higher rate of interest had to be paid. Unions that had paid, comparatively speaking, heavy rates, complained of their having to afford assistance to those unions which had always paid a lower amount of rate. The unions wished Covernment to lend the money for a period of not less than ten years, and that the prin ciple end interest might be repaid by equal annual instal ments. Every landlord in Lancashire had voluntarily con tributed a larger rate in aid than the rates levied wider the act. Mr. GREUSON called attention to the prospect of a mit tee. diminution of the distress. He doubted, however, if we could depend for the future on a supply of cotton, even if the American war was to terminate. Should it, howeier, continue for some time longer, he thought it would be well for the manufacturers to consider whether it would not be better for s,•tue of the operatives to seek other employment. Gen. LINDSAY thought it wise co limit the bill to six months. Alderman SIDNEY regarded the principle of a rate in aid as most sound, but he viewed the borrowing powers of the bill with great susobion. Mr. HUM BE RSTON E hoped the bill would not be hur ried forward, in order that the country might pronounce upon it. Lord E. HOWARD thanked the President of the Poor- law BoarJ for the concession he had made with respect to the borrowing powers. He had no doubt the rate in aid operated detrimentally as regarded some districts, hut at the same time he could not see how they could get on with out one. Mr. EVANS urged the desirability of allowing the dis tressed unions to borrow money. Mr HIB tiERT trusted the house would be inclined to give Lancashire what she required—liberal borrowing power to enable her to deal with the distress. Mr. CO BD EN received with satisfaction the proposal, in the present bill, to extend the time over which the repay ment of loans was to be made. He was not at all enamoured last session of giving relief by a rate-in-aid; he wanted greater facility to be given to the boards of guardians to borrow money. That was his opinion then, and he enter tained it still. They had been thwarted in that not so much by the right hon. gentleman as by the board over which he presided, which had every great aversion to any change i n their traditional policy of a rate-in-aid. The inconvenience whioh the hon. and gallant member for North Lancashire (Col. Wilson Patten) complained of—namely, that the rate in-aid fell upon the occupying tenants, and not upon the landlords—was not easily remedied, but it might be to some degree by a clause enabling tenants to charge the whole of the increased rate upon their landlord. He wished to call the attention of the hon. and gallant gentleman to the fact that the principle of the rate-in-aid was inherent to our poor-law legislation, in the interest not of property but of the rights of the poor, and must be preserved as an alterna tive. Where a union became so pauperised as to be unable to maintain their por, it was right to go upon the county for a rate-in-aid. But he did not contemplate the neces si,y for that, provided there were no obstacles thrown in the way even now to a fair mode of borrowing money. The agricultural districts and the manufacturing dis tricts of Lancashire were in accord in desiring that faci lity should be given to borrow money instead of resorting for the present to a rate-in-aid. Why, then, should any restrictions be thrown, for the next twelvemonth to come, in the way of those unions raising money to meet their difficulties ? He would repeat his sugges tion of last year, of imposing a limitation as to the amount to be borrowed—say to the extent of 50 per cent. of the assessed annual value of their property, but, with such a limitation he would ask, in the name of common sense and humanity, by what rule of stupidity could it be said that the unions should not borrow until they had inflicted on them selves the inconceivable torture of raising rates to the extent of 3s. in the pound. He would appeal to his right hon. friend to shake off altogether the influence of those heredi tary red tapists with whom he was associated, to take the matter into his own hands, t., meet the members represent ing the manufacturing and agricultural districts, talk this matter over, and arrange it upon principles of common sense before going into committee, if the right hon. gentleman would only do that, it might be arranged so as to evade the difficulty of a rate in aid, and enable the distressed unions to tide over the period of distress in a way the least hurtful to themselves and the least injurious to their neighbours. Mr. NE W DE GATE suggested that the borrow ;ng powers should be resorted to up to a given point before the rate in aid was brought into operation, so as to prevent the abuse of the old law coming into operation, namely the payment of money not raised in the locality in aid of wages. The bill was then read a second time. TELEGRAPHS BILL. This bill was read a second iime. MALT DUTY BILL. Upon the motion to read this bill a second time, Colonel Bartelott, Sir M. Farquhar, and Major Parker objected to the bill on the ground that it did not give suffi cient relief to the manufacturers. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that was scarcely the time to discuss the question, and he would therefore propose to postpone the discussion until the com- Mr. WALPOLE thought the relief to the maltsters would be almost neutralised by the 4 per cent, interest they would have to pay. Mr. PULLER urged that the bill should be discussed then, for there would be very little opportunity of doing so in committee. Mr. JACK ON defended the course proposed by the Chancellor or the Exchequer, as it was the duty of the right hon. gentleman to obtain the most he could obtain for the revenue. lie could not see why the country should furnish capital to the maltsters to carry oil their business Mr. BENTINOK., although concurring so far with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the present was not the time to go into all details of the malt question, trusted that hon. members who were prepared to support the rights of the agriculturists would be prepared on the proper occasion to attend in their places, and see that justice was done to them. The bill was then read a second time. BIRTHS AND DEATHS REGISTRATION (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion for going into committee on this bill, Lord NAAS moved that it be an instruction to the com mittee to make provision for the registration of marriages in Ireland. He reviewed the plans that bad been submitted to the consideration of the house on the subject of registra tion of marriages. He thought all that was now required was a registration of the Roman Catholic marriages, which might be done by the priests without imposing on ►hem any great additional labours. He was opposed to the idea that a general registration of marriages would increase civil marriages. He was surprised at the timidity of the right hon. baronet in not dealing with that branch of the subject, as it was easy to bring forward a measure that would meet with the approval of the people of Ireland. The provision for registering the marriages of the members of the Church of Ireland and Protestant Dissenters might re main as at present. Mi. HADFIELD hoped that equal facilities of registra tion would be granted to all denominations. Mr. MO NSELL said the Scotch system of registration had been found to work well in that country, and he thought it would be the best system to introduce into Ireland, and he urged on the Government to try it. The only difficulty they had to contend with was the registration of Roman Catholic marriages. _ _ Sir G. BOW YER approved of a complete registration of marriages, but admitted it was surrounded with greater difficulties than the registration of births and deaths Be fore they introduced a system of registration of marriages they must get rid of the Irish law w th reference to mixed marriages, which made it penal for a Roman Catholic priest to celebrate mixed marriages. There would be time to con sider and discuss the registration of marriages after they had decided on the registration of births and deaths. By divid ing the subject they were more likely to come to a satisfac • tory c nctusion. Mr. BAGWELL admitted it was the Roman Catholic clergy who stood in the way of a system of registration of marriages being introduced in Ireland; but he considered this a most inopportune occasion on which to deal With the question. Colonel DICKSON saw no reason why marriages should not be registered by the par ties interested in them. He supported the atnendit,ent. Mr M'MAHON felt quite sure it would be impossible to establish a system of registration of marriages in Ireland as long as the penal enactments prohibiting mixed marriages by Roman Catholic priests were kept in force, but, then, nothing could be easier than to introduce a clause in the present bill abolishing those enactments. Mr. I. BUTT supported the bill, and deprecated the off. hand legislation which had been suggested by the hon. mem ber opposite. sir It. PEEL quite agreed that it would be very impor tant, if it were possible, to establish at the same time with the registration of births and deaths, a registration of marriages; but the discussion which had taken pl.ce had convinced him that the house was in tavour of the bill going on as at present framed rather than he should be charged by the house to introduce a subject which would certainly require material alteration in the machi- nery of the b,ll, and make all impraciicable. The proposal of his noble friend would involve material alteration of the marriage law of Ireland. The act of 1844 imposed great re strictions on a portion of the dissenting body in Ireland, and they would never allow any exception to be made in favour of the Roman Catholics until their own grievances had been amended. He trusted that the house would pass the bill in its present shape, and not put upon him the painful task of seeming to endeavour to fix upon Roman Catholics restrictions which were conscientiously distaste ful to them. After a f_w words from several hon. members, The house divided. The numbers were— For the motion Against Majority -23 The house went into committee, and, on the motion of Colonel DUNNE, the Chairman reported progress, and the house resumed. ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN (IRELAND) BILL. This bill was recommitted, and an amendment proposed by Sir R. Peel was agreed to. DRAINAGE OF LAND (IRELAND) BILL. This bill, as amended, was considered and agreed to. QUALIFiCATION FOR OFFICES ABOLITION BILL. This bill passed through committee, on the understand • ing that the discussion on the bill should be taken on the third reading, on the 4th of March PARTNERSHIP LAW AMENDMENT. The house went into committee, on the motion of Mr. SCHOLEFIELD and a resolution was agreed t.) for bring ing in a bill for the amendment of the law relating to partnerships. REGISTER OF 'VOTERS. Mr. LOCKE KING obtained leave to introduce a bill to provide for an alphabetical index to the register of voters in the counties in England and Viales. THE DUCHY OF CORNWALL. Lord PALMERSTON brought up the report of the council of the Duchy of Cornwall, which was laid upon the table. The House adjourned at twenty minutes to one o'clock, COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL. A Court of Common Council was holden yester day in the Council Chamber, Guildhall. The Rignt Hon. the Lord Mayor presided THE METROPOLITAN RAILWAY. The Coal, Corn, and Finance Committee brought up a report by which it appeared the committee had disposed of 18,000 out of the 20,000 shares held by the corporation in the above railway, at prices vary ing from £l2 12s. 6d. to £l3 10s., and the reimit was that this corporation had realised a net profit of £32,000, after dedue ing interest for the time the corporation money had been lying idle. (Hear, Lear.) The report also recommended that the remaining 2,000 shares should be held by the corporation, as this course would enable them to appoint members of the board of directors, who would have an oppor tunity of watching over their interests. The report also stated that the corporation would be entitled to a certain number of new shares, and the committee asked the court to allow them to do what was ne cessary in reference to this matter ; and at all events to permit them to retain possession of the remaining 2,000 shares for the present. Deputy HARRISON opposed the proposition for the corporation to continue shareholders in the railway. He said that in the first instance great doubts were entertained whether it was a prudent course to have connexion with any railway ; but, having done so, and having realised a considerable profit, he consi dered there ought to be an end to the matter. (Hear, hear.) They had heard already that the Me tropolitan Railway intended to raise £600,000 addi tional capital, and he thought the corporation ought not to be parties to any railway speculations what ever, and it appeared to him the time had arrived when the connexion between the Corporation of London and the Metropolitan Railway should be put an end to, and that the corporation should have nothing to do with the raising. of any additional capital, or any fresh spLculation connected with this railway. (Hear.) The honourable deputy concluded by proposing a motion to the effect that the committee should be instructed to dispose of the remaining shares as soon as' they shout d consider it advisable to do so. Alderman SALOMONS, M.P.r seconder I the motion, which appeared to meet with the almos t unanimous approbation of the court. Mr. NORRIS, M.P., however, erpresset tan opinion he ot neighbourhoodthat, having regerd to the numer.uus r a il wa y propo sitions at present before Parliament, man f which proposed to come to the neighbourhood of . tropolitan Riilway, it would be advisable toi retain possession of the shares for the present, in Order that some members of the corporation, might have a board of directiors, with a r right to act upon the view to the protection of Zh!3 interestoi of the cor ration and those of the pubi,:c. Alderman LAWRENCE s upported the report, and observed that at present the Metropolitan Rail way was not completed, that no arrtngements had yet been made to c,nnect i t w ith the it iptrowpaos at allsednew dead meat market, and he considerec ,l events desirable to retain possession otc the remain ing 2,000 snares for the present. (Heat...) Mr. H. L. I'AYLUR said that, it' he unders. t "d the meaning of the motion, it did not go to the b.xtent of directing the immediate disposal of the remaining shares, but merely gave them (the committee) a discretionary power to act in the matter when they considered it advisable. (Hear.) He at the same time considered it was not a proper thing for the corporation to have anything further to do with the railway, and that the shares ought to be die* posed of as quickly as possible. (Hear.) Mr. LUsK and Mr. Deputy FRY supported the motion of Deputy Harrison, and expressed their opinion that as so large a number of the shares had already been disposed of, the sam course ought to be aoopteo. with the remainder. (Hear.) Ihe motion was eventually put 10 the court and decla,ed to be carried, and the report, witn the Deo cessary alteration, was then agreed to. E ROYAL HOSPITALS Alderman BESLEY moved that the Library Com mittee be empowered to have reprinted, at an ex pense not exceeding £5O, the Book of Memoranda, References, and D icuments, relating to the Royal Hospitals of the Ci y of London. Agreed to. THE PRINCE OF WALES'S MARRIAGE. Deputy HARRISON moved that this court contri bute the sum of on.- hundred guineas towards the cost of an entertainment, to ba provided by the guardians of the three City unions, fcr the indoor poor of the Ci'y of London upon the occasion of the marriage of his Royal highness the Prince of Wales. Agreed to unanimously. Mr. ANDERTON then proceeded to bring forward three motions he had placed upon the paper of business. The first was :—" That a medal be struck com memorative of the occasion of the public entry of the Princess Alexandra of Denmark into the City.', The second was :—" That it be referred to the Royal Reception Committee to take such steps as they may deem advisable with respect to the illu minating the several public buildings in the City on the occasion of the marriage of his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, on the 10th March next." The third and most important proposition to be submitted to the (mutt was that a committee should be appointed to consider and agree upon a suitable present to oe made to the Princess, at a cost not exceeding the sum of £10,000; and it was expected that this last-mentioned proposition would be op posed, and lead to a great deal of warm discussion. Mr. ANDERTON was about to address the court, when Alderman SALOMONS interposed, and said that it was the usual course for discussions of the nature that was now about to take place to be conducted with closed doors, and he therefore moved that strangers be requested to withdraw. (Loud cries of No, no.") The LORD MAYOR said that if the court desired to have strangers excluded while this subject was being discussed, it had the power to do so ; and it the motion was persisted in, he must take the sense of the court upon it. Alderman SALOMONS intimated that he was of opinion that the subject had better be discussed with closed doors, and his motion to that effect WO therefore put and declared to be carried. Toe court was thereupon cleared, and a long and somewhat argry argument, it was understocd, took place. The public were not re-admitted for more than two hours, and it was then stated that all the motions had been carried in the affirmative, after an animated discussion and a division had taken place upon the third one, A further report was brought up from the Coal, Coin, and Finance Committee, recommending the pas ment at certain law charges and o her moneys. This gave rise to some discussion, during which he affairs of the late City solicitor, Mr. Charles Pearson, were incidentally alluded to, but as it ap peared that the accounts of that gentleman with he corporation are not yet finally arranged it would un air to make any flintier allik.ion to the sub ject, and more particularly as a format report will in all pribability be made by a committt e in refe rence to it. The court shortly afterwards adjourned. COUNTRY MARKETS. MAN C HESTER-FEB. 19 - - --- Our market this morning was of a languid character, but there was no pres.ure to sell on the part of holders, and to the limited business which occurred previous prices were supported for all articles, except those of secondary or to' terior quality. BIRMINGHAM-FEB. 19. English wheat was sold at 48s to 56s for white, and 400 to 56s per 36 stone for red. Barley, new malting, 33s to 42s per qr ; grinding, 26s to 30s Oats, old, 24s to 300 per 30 stone; Irish, 22s to 255. Beans, 40a to 448 per qr• Peas, 40s to 48s per 36 stone. PLYMOUTH-FEB. 17. White, 56s to 60s; red, 64s to b6s per qr; Dantzic, 570 to 58s ; American, 61s to 55s ; Spanish, —s to —s ; Rus sian, —s to - s. Barley at previous rates-34s to 38s per, qr for malting ; grinding, 27s to 28s ; oats, 23s to taw beans, —s to —8; flour, 38s to 41s Od. EDINBURGH GRAIN-FEL 18. A good supply of farmers' wheat to-day, which met a fair sale at the prices of this day week Wheat on the top 3s Od down average 3s 8d up. Barley on the top 4s 6d down .average is 2d up. Oats on the top Is Od up average Os 4d up. Beans on the top 2s Od down average is Od up• Flour sells as follows :—Whites, 45s Od ; extras, 42s 6d ; superfine, 40s 6d ; fine, 38s 6d. Total Supply and Sales. Wheat ... 887 qrs Sold 698 qrs 8ar1ey........ 970 qrs Sold 677 qrs Oats Beans 260 qrs Sold 139 qrs CORK—FEB. 18. The following were the quotations this morning wheat, 6s dto9s 6d ; white, 7s 6d to lle ld , barley, "' 6d to 7a 4d ; oats, 55 6d to 8s Od. ; new here, —s Od to —a Od. DERBY SMITHFIELD-Fzß. 17, - - --- A good supply of fat beasts to-day. Those from the North of England were of the best quality, and brought high prices. The number of sheep was improved, and good supply of tat pigs. Calves were a large show, an d readily disposed of. Beet 6dto 7d Veal . Mutton .... 8d to 9d Pork dto to Lamb ...—d to —d , Rough fat, 4s 3d per stow Hides, 3d to 4d; calf skins, 5d to 6d. 5101 [ADVERTISEMENT.]—ROYAL AnTlLLEuv.—Holloway 's Oiutrutnt and Pills.—A sergeant in the Royal Artillery writes on Dec. 12, 1862, from Posnamattee, Madras Presi dency, that his right leg, from the allele to the calf, was a quagmire of disease and corruption—that he was on the hospital roll for 12 months without, any improvement in his case—that he, as a forlorn hope, re-olved t try Holkwayo celebrated ointment and pills. These soon gave ease, el" polled the bad hutuours from the limb, healed the apP. 3 " rent ly incurable sore, and renter -d him to sound health. Soldiers and sailors are earnestly recommended to have re' course to these invaluable medic , wients for curing old wounds, sores, or ulcers, more particularly when they 1 10° arisen from imprudence and seem incurable. Births. nottl o BYRON.—On the 17th inst., the Hon. Mrs. ling Byron, of a son, prematurely. CRETWYND.—On the 17th We., at Dover, the wife of Captain the Hon. C. C. Chetwynd, 10th Regiment, of $ SOD. COMBE.—On the 18th inst., the wife of Charles t °whet Esq., Cobham-park, surrey, of a son. Marriages. BUSIIELL—WESTROPP.—On the 17th inst., at St. Peter'St Kensington-park, George Bushell, Esq., late of Cape Town, Cape of Good Hope, to Emily, second surviving daughter of the late Berkeley Westropp, E sq., R. N., of The Lodge, East Sheen, Surrey. MAY—REED.—On the 19th inst., at the parish church of Aldenham, Herts, Mr. Francis May, of High Holborn, to Ila Karena, youngest daughter of the late Jus. Ree d, Esq., Holloway. Deaths. COTTENHAM —On the 18th inst., at Felcourt, t h e Righ t Hon. Charles Edward, Earl of Cotteaham, aged 38. _ cp , FULCHER.—On the 16th .n s t., at S ur b iton, Capt. Wm. Fuicher, aged 60. H A UTLEY.On the 17th i ns t., F ounta i n Hartley. Esc'' , fe Harrison's-wharf, St, Katherine's, Tower, aged 65. LITCHFIELD.—On the 17th inst., at Cheltenham, Sarah Elizabeth, wife of Capt a i n Ri chard Litchfield, o.'"' aged 65. LITTLER.—On the 17th inst., at the Deanery e , Battle Sub_l; sex, he Very Rev. John Littler, M,A Dan and , Vic' s ` .) of Battle. REAY.—On the 18th inst., at Plymouth, the Right 1011. Lord Reay. ROBINSON.—On the 30th ult., at Toronto, Sir John •1 Robinson, Bart., C. 8., aged 72. London : Printed and Published by WILLIAM' ANDRfirt of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at THE SUN Ofilig , 4 7; 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the COlll/ of aiddlesex—Friday, February . 40, 1803. 1