The Sun. — London, England, 1839-07-19 00:00:00

-~ S E VPN't/sTO- Lrab IT lON. LAW INTELLIGENCE. HOUSE OF LORDS-JULY I. Their Lordships sat to-day to hear Scotch appeals. The Peers present were the Lord Chancellor, the Mar. quis of Londonderry, and the Ent of Airlie. BARRY V. WADDELL The arguments on this part-heard appeal were resumed and concluded to-day. The case C 3.110 before their Lord ships upon appeal from four interlocutors pronounced by the Court of Session. The Loan CHANCELLOR, at the conclusion of the argu ments, directed two of the interlocutors complained of to be affirmed, and postponed giving judgment on the other two till Monday. ALEXANDER V. CASIAMAJOR. The LORD CHANcELLon. gave judgment in this case, in part affirming, end reversing the decision of the Court below. RI LSON V. TAIT. The arguments in this appeal oc,mpied their Lordships the remainder of the day, and had not concluded when their Lordships rose. The further consideration of the case was adjourned to Monday. SUMMER ASSIZES. HOME ClRCUlT—Clinr.msronn, JuLr 17. CROWN COURT —( Before Lord DENMAN. ) Joseph Bt.con, aged 34, labourer, and Sarah Bacon, 37, his wife, were charged with the manslaughter of Wil liam, their infant child. The death was alleged to have bey n occasioned by the prisoners having neglected the child, and not giving it sufficient nourishment and food to main tain life. After several witnesses had been examined, as to the treatment of the child, . Mr. Dixon, the surgeon, who had attended upon the deceased, was called, but he did not appear. Lord DENmaN summed up, and the Jury returned a Yen. d;ct:of—Not Guilty._ Lord DENMAN said he was sorry the surgeon had not thought proper to attend, they had a ri g ht t o his evidence, and his recognizance must be estreated. Abraham - Dansie, who was convicted on Tuesday of stealing a c.c. sheep, was br oug h t up f or j u d gment , and the Court, after remarking upon the crime of which he had been convicted, and also adverting to the difficulty of its detection, sentenced the prisoner to be transported for 14 years. This case concluded the hUsiness in the Crown Court. WESTERN CIRCUIT-11 7 1.vcnESTRA, Jur.r 13. THE QUEEN V. ROBERT SPINCER. The prisoner, who is a farmer living near Southampton, was indicted for uttering a Bill of Exchange drawn by i himself upon, and purporting to be accepted by, his brother, John Spincer, knowing such acceptance to have been forged. Mr. MISSING Stated the case. The bill had been ori ginally uttered for Mr. Deacon, of Southampton, from whom it had found its way through v ar i ous h an d s i nto t h e I possession of Mr. Mott, the prosecutor. Witnesses ware then called, after which Mr. MISSING said that he could not carry the case further. The Learned JUDGE observed to the Jury that the son having written the acceptance with the authority of John Spincer, it was the same as though be had written it him self. and therefore directed an acquittal. Mr. Sergeant BOMPAS then applied to the Learned ' Judge for a copy of the record, so as to enable the prisoner to take proceedings against the prosecutor for a malicious prosecution, stating at the same time, that had the trial proceeded, he was in a situation to prove that the prose cution bad sprung from a quarrel between the prosecutor and the prisoner. Mr. MISSING opposed the application, but The Learned JUDGE said he thought it a proper case for the prisoner to have a copy of the indictment, inasmuch as it appeared on the depositions that Mr. Mott, at the time he took, the bill, wee acquainted with the hand writing both of Spincer and of the prisoner's son ; added to which, the prosecutor had kept the bill in his possession upwards of live months before he instituted the prosecu tion. His Lordship therefore granted the application. NISI Pares COURT, JULY 16. KNIGHT V. COUPLAND AND ANOTHER. Se many challenges were made to the Jury in this case, that only five were in the box, when the panel was exhausted. The parties then were compelled to chal lenge " for cause," and after great delay and difficulty a Jury was sworn. This was an action for a libel published in the Hamp shire Advertiser, a Conservative newspaper, of which the defendants were the publishers and proprietors. There were four complaints—first, that the plaintiff, being a Magistrate of Winchester under the Municipal Corpora tion Act, had been guilty of gross impartiality in the re moval of the Town-clerk of that borough, and in the appointment of another party to that office. It was as cribed that this was done from political motives. In the second charge one of the Magistrates was mentioned by name, and the others were designated as his " tail." They were called ignorant upstarts; and to this was added, " We laid before the public, a few weeks since, some pretty 1 good proof of the justice which may be expected at the hands of the contemptible ignoramus and his tail ;" and a copy of a letter which had been written to Lord John Russell by Mr. Selby, one of the editors of the paper, was I published, in which he compl a i ne d o f t h e con d uct o f t h e Magistrates, and among other things said, that " he pre sumed his Lordship would recommend the removal of these Magistrates from the commission, whose actions had proved them totally unworthy of the trust which they bad prosti tuted, and the station which they had disgraced." The third alleged libel was in an argumentative strain, to the effect that persons in office who had so conducted them selves ought to be shunned by society. The fourth libel charged was an attack upen the Government in appointing these Magistrates ; and it asked the question, whether, if any known Conservative was brought before them, he would feel sure of impartial justice ? Mr. Justice COLERIDGE, in summing up the case to the Jury, observed that they must deliver a distinct verdict on each of the four counts in the declaration. The Jury having deliberated for a short time, returned a verdict for the plaintiff on the first count—damages, Is.; and a verdict for the defendants on the other three counts, i on the ground that they were no t lib e l s . I Actions were brought by four other Magistrates against these defendants for similar actions. One was tried last week, and a verdict given for the defendants, and the other cases were made remands. NORTHERN CIRC Ul T.—YORK, Juar IG. PEASE V. EASTWOOD. The action was brought for a trespass alleged to have been committed on the plaintiff's close, and for taking cer tain dead grouse from his gamekeeper at Melton, in the West Riding. The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff as to the taki.ig, of the gamr.—Damages is. OXFORD CIRCUIT.—ti MCESTEII, JULY 16. The criminal business was finished about four o'clock. There were no cases worthy any particular remark._ In the Civil Court two cases'o;.!v remain for trial. The case of " the Qaeen v. Meredith "'has occupied the Court for several hours, and is not likely to bo over before night. TIIE QUEEN V. JOHN BOOKER. The- prisoner WisS found guilty of cutting and stabbing in the belly or.e Richard Rad Ford. The Learned BARON, after commerting with great seve rity on the unuvin!y and assassin-like practice of stabbing, whiel was becoming' so comman, sentenced the priscner to be transported for 15 years. THE QUEEN V WILLIAM LEWIS. The riso - er was charged with committing an assault on Henry Fuley. Upon being put to the bar he conducted himself in such an extravagant style as to induce the Court to interfere. In answer to a question from the Learned Judge, he said, " I have appeared in higher courts tt,an this. I had the honour of appearing at the Secretary of State's Office in 1829, and there laying claim to the throne of this realm, of ,o,ich I am the rightful sovereign," The Juocc—lii'd you obtain redress ? Defendant--O:1 ye 3, a littla. Afar much trouble they tcok me bt:forc S r R. Wrnie, and that comforted me. The Learned I:aitax ordered a city jury to be empanel led to try ichether cr not the do . endant was sane. Defendant said—ln 1816 I was the third person in the Triniy, but I afterwards found that I had been deceived. On the s:h of July, 1839, I was christened, baptized, and crowned, and again I was in - Tired that I was the third per son spoken of in the Trinity. A boy brought me the holy water. I did then sign myse:f with the sign of the cross, and christened myself King of the World. The Jury found him insane, and he was sentenced to be confined during her Majesty's pleasure. NORFOLK ClRCUlT.—licerr.vsibtx, Juzr 16. The business of this circuit commenced this day ; and if the state of it in both Courts may be taken as a Car test, the inhabitants of this county arc at once peaceable, and unlitigious, and honest. But it is to be feared that the light state of tho calendar, which shows only ten persons far trial. is attributable merely to the fact of the quarter sessions for the county having been so recently holden, at which 50 persons were tried; and to the operation of the Act authorizing the trial by sheriffs of actions under 201., is to be referred the circumstance of there being but two causes for trial. In the Crown Co ur t, Mr. Justice VAUGHAN disposed of a case of fowl stealing, one for robbing the prosecutor of his shoes as he lay asleep by the way-side, and one for stealing hay. It is superfluous to add, that no feature of any interest to the public was present e d d uring either of these trials. On the civil side, Mr. Justic e B r , BANQUET was occupied during the afternoon in deciding an e jectment brought by a landlord to recover possessi on of afa rrn , which the very lively questions were, wheth er t h e defendant's was a " La dy-day tenancy," or a " Michaelmas hold' and whether due notice to quit had been given. NORTH IVA L ES.-- Wzr..eirooz, Jur., • THE MONTGOMERYSHI RE CHARTISTS. It The North Welsh Circuit commenced yesterda y with th e Montgomeryshire Ass . zes, held i n t hi s town before the jinn Sir John Patteson, Knight, a n d Ai r. David Hamer, High Sheriff. The Learned JUDGE has fixed a period of no less than ten days for the insestigation, and in his charge to the Grand Jury went into great length upon the law of the realm as relating to the crime of which they were accused. The excitement in this part of the Principality is very great as to the result of the trials, and anxiety is exhibited in every quarter. having retired to their labours, an d The Grand Jury shortly brought in a number of true bills against parties for training and drilling at Newtown, The Court was occupied during the whole of the day in separately trying individuals charged with training, &c. The facts of the training being proved they were found guilty, but sentence was deferred. Lewis Humphreys and John Lewis, were indicted for having with menaces demanded a certain gun—second count, for stealing, addressed the jury. The prisoners stood charged with having-, by menaces and .~...-,. threats, obtained a gun from the prosocutor. This was one of the cases arising from the inflammatory speeches of political unionists travelling through the kingdom. Mr. YARDLEY, for the prisoners, objected that the Learned Counsel had no right to refer to other individuals who might have to stand charged at those same Assizes with other of fences, as it might operate prejudicially on the minds of the jury. The Court intimated that the Attorney-General should confine himself within the legitimate scope of the case. The ATTORNEY. GENERAL proceeded. He did not wish other cases to be prejudiced by his observations, and pro eeded to detail the facts appearing in the evidence. The prisoners went to the prosecutor and demanded a gun—if it were obtained against the owner's consent, or under circumstances of terror, and the prisoners appropriated it to their own use, it was a felony. John Dawes, farmer, examined by Mr. Groves. —I live near Llanidloes. On the 16th of April I remember some people coming to my house. There might be eleven or twelve persons. I was not certain of any of them. They bad guns with them. Four or five. I did not count them. They did not knock at the door. They asked if the man of the house was in. I can't say whether my little boy might not have opened the door. My wife said I was at home. They asked—Would I be good enough to lend them my gun " Lend you my gun," I said, " that you might shoot me afterwards I" They said they would not shoot decent people. One of them said, " is this the gun ?" and pointed to one over the the mantle-piece. One of them went and laid hold of it. My wife asked when they would bring it back. They said the gun would be found at the Angel, at the top of the town when the row would be over. They did take the gun. I was not willing to the taking. I was afraid of them. They stayed in my house about three minutes. Mr. JERVIS submitted to the Court that he purposed to ask the witness if they had made similar demands in the same neighbourhood; and referred to the case of the King v. Whitworth, in Carrington's Reports, cited in Archbold ; and he wished to ask a general question, if guns had been demanded in the neighbourhood. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed that such evidence had been given in the case of the Luddites. The Counsel for the prisoner—lt is proposed to ask what an indefinite mob had been doing in the neighbour hood, of whom the prisoners might know nothing. The COURT said the case cited did not bear analogy with the pi esent one. In case they could produce evidence to connect the prisoners with any such transactions, it was competent to call the witness again. The witness was cross-examined by Mr. YARDLEY, and nothing material stated. The prisoner had not applied at the Angel for the gun. Edward Jarman was called to corroborate the testimony of the prosecutor. He identified the prisoners as two of the persons. Knew them. There were feuds existing between the Llanidloes and Liangerry people. Has never come into collision with the Chartists. He did not attempt to prevent the t3king of the gun. John Dawes, the prosecutor, did not give leave. Catherine Williams called, and examined by Mr. HILL— I live at Bretbdin, four or five miles from Llandiloes. I remember on Friday, April 16, seeing men coming to our house, about ten or eleven. I did not count them. I know the two prisoners. Did not know the other pri soners. They asked for a gun. The Counsel for the defence objected to the question, and submitted to the Court that the rules of evidence were opposed to asking questions as to the conduct of the pri. soners at other place?. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that it was eligible to inquire what had been done at other places, to show the motive ; the thing was public and notorious, and must necessarily come to the knowledge of the prosecutor. Mr. JARVIS said two questions arose; first, what operated on the mind of the party at the time ; and second, the object. Where people go round the country demanding gans, it showed a common design. By these means the conduct of the prosecutor was accounted for in not resisting, and went to show the felonious extent on the other hand. Mr. YARDLEY—If the prisoners went to one house to commit a felony, it did not follow they would repeat the crime at another. What they did at the house of this witness was no proof of what they intended to do at another. Mr. JERVIS referred to the case of the King v. Ellis, a case of larceny ; it was the case of a shopman taking money from the till ; evidence of other takings was ad mitted, though not the subject of any charge. The COURT could not distinguish this case from that of " The King v. Whitworth." There the case was the advising to give something away, and the question was whether it was bona fide advice, or whether given with the intent of robbery. It was possible what transpired at the house of this woman might come to the knowledge of the prosecutor. I admit her evidence may ascertain whether the asking for the loan was real, or only a pretence. The examination of the witness was resumed—They asked if I would come to the house. They wanted a gun. I said there was no gun. They said they had heard from the neighbours that there was a gun in the house. The witness proceeded to say that the prisoners scorched her gown. They said they had guns in another place. There was a shooting match in the neighbourhood for the benefit of some poor man. Ido not know at what they shot. Anne Williams examined by Mr. JERVIL—She went to corroborate the testimony of the preceding witness. Saw the parties in the house. J.;hn Owen was then called.—He proved that he saw on the day in question a party, with the two prisoners, passing ahng the road, with guns. This was between six and seven in the evening. On his cross. examination the witness said he lived by Mr. Wythen Jones' kennel. Mr. YARDLEY addressed the Jury at some length, and said that the owner did not express dissent—that they must come to the conclusion that the taking was with the intent, and that they did afterwards appropriate the gun to their own use. The gun might have been left at the place ap pointed for the owner. _ His LORDSHIP summed up at great length. The ques tion was whether the permission was voluntary or under the irflvence of fear, either at the time or afterwards, and whether the prisoners bad appropriated the guns to their own use. If at the time of the taking the intent was to steal, the subsequent restoring could not purge the felony ,ince committed. It was for them to determine as to the irJtcnt and the appropriation. Verdict—Not Guilty. THE LLANIDLORS RIOTERS. The trial of these misguided men, charged with rioting and demolishing houses at Llanidloed, is expected to come on on Wednesday. A number of true bills was found against them this day. POWELL, THE WELCH CHARTIST LEADER. True bills have been fuund against two individuals ; one for sedition, and the other for inciting the people to riot. The trial is expected to take place during the latter part of the week. CALLING OCT THE YEOMANRY. The Shropshire regiments of yeomanry cavalry were this day called out for service in consequence of the fires and disturbances at Birmingham, to which place they were ordered to repair. The Montgomeryshire regiments are also ordered to hold themselves in readiness. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. QUEEN- SQUARE. ROBBERY AT THE PENITENTIARY. —Henry Wayte, who has been engaged as head Cook at the Penitentiary Prison fur a number of years, was yesterday finally examined upon the folk wing charge : The Rev. David Nibil, Governor of the Penitentiary, and minister there, said the prisoner was engaged as head cook, but did not sleep in the prison. On Saturday even inq-, in consequence of previous information be had re ceived, he watched for the coming out of the prisoner, which he did about seven o'clock, and witness then taxed him with having something belonging to the prison about his person. The prisoner seemed much confused, and, fol lowingwitness to the Patrols' room, produced a parcel containing :Was. of beef, two half-pound loaves, and a small quantity of cheese. The only words the prisoner said afterwards were, that his wife was waiting for him outside. Mr. GREGORIE asked the prisoner if he wished to make any defence ? The prisoner said no, but he hoped he should be dealt with leniently. The Magistrate, after reading the prisoner a short lec ture, Committed him for trial. OUTRAGE.—lnformation has been forwarded to the police stations that, a "party of " gentlemen," driving' four-in-hand, endeavoured to upset, or place in great dan ger, the phaeton of a gentleman who was conveying some of his friends from Blackheath to London. On their first attempt to do injury the four-in-hand " gentlemen " con tented themselves with galloping very close to the phaeton, and shouting like madmen. They afterwards stopped, and when the vehicle had passed again overtook the party in the phaeton, trying to drive against it, but fortunately did nut, succeed then, as the phaeton was drawn on the path way, and the four-in-hand company were nearly upset by the declivity. The driver of the four-in-hand afterwards contrived, by laming through back thoroughfares, to get again► behind the phaeton, when, dashing violently against it, at the same time turning the leaders to the pathway, so as to prevent all possibility of escape, hesucceeded in turning the lighter vehicle entirely round and overthrowing it, the driver of the phaeton being thrown underneath, and the rest of the party, including two ladies, being more or less injured. This disgraceful occurrence took place close to Weymouth-street, near the Elephant and Castle, at about twelve o'clock at night. The party are believed to be the same that have " distinguished " themselves lately by breaking lamps and windows in the Kent-road and its vicinity. S U DDEN DEA TH .— An in quest was h e l d on We d nes d a y, before Mr. Wakley, M . P, at the D loy y Arms, Marlborough-road, Chelsea, on t h e b ody of John Robin son, a Chelsea pensioner, aged sixty-one, who died sud denly on Monday morning. It appeared from the evidence of a woman with whom deceased lodged that be enjoyed good health, though he was a hard drinker. He ma d e a hearty dinner of roast beef and pudding on Sunday, and then went to Church, where he fainted, and was brought home ill by a comrade. He was put to bed and a person left to watch him, who reported at three o'clock i n t h e morning that he was dead. A pensioner named Paddy Quin lay wide awake by the side of dec eased, but' death," he said, "h a d b een so f req uent a visitor to hi s old com rades that o f l a t e h e p a id no attention to his visits." De ceased Lad served in the 80th Foot for 39 years, Verdict " Natural death." BEWARE OF BLUE BAGS.—A few days a ge two persons, respectably attired, and with blue bagsintheir hands, app arently containing some articles of merchandise, arrived as t rave ll ers at the Cross Keys, Friar-street, where from their respectable appearance, they received the utmost attention, and were ushered into the best bed.room as their sleeping apartment. Having rested for the night and breakfasted the next morning, the gentlemen departed; but on examining a chest of drawers which had been left in the bed-room unlocked, shortly afterwards, it was found thai two excellent shawls, a silk gown piece, and several other articles, with a few shillings in silver, had been abstracted Worces therefro m, tershire Chronicle. and no doubt carefully sec ure d i n the blue bags. THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY JULY 19, 1839. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, JULY 18. The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour. Mr. Campbell, from the East India House, presented copies of coresponderice relating to the subject of steam communication with India. TREATMENT OF THE CHARTISTS. Mr. LEADER rose to present a petition from Wm. Lovett and John Collins who stated, thet they were, on the 6th instant, arrested at Birmingham, and brought before the Bench of Magistrates; that at half-past eleven o'clock, on the morning of the 7th, they were removed to the county gaol of Warwick, that they were finally committed ; peraonal bail to the amount of 5001. having been demanded, and two sceurities each in the sum of 2501. The petitioners com plained of the exorbitant amount of bail demanded, seeing that, as they were working men, it would be impossible for them to procure the bail among men in their own sphere of life. They stated, that when removed to the County gaol they were stripped stark naked in the presence of two turnkeys, and examined all over to disco ver if there were any marks on their bodies, an indignity which they emphatically remonstrated against; that they were taken into a room in which there were no less than eight prisoners, some of whom were in a filthy state ; that they were compelled to strip themselves naked, and to bathe in the same cistern of water with those men, and to dry themselves with the same towel, and that a common felon was ordered to cut the hair off Lovett. The petitioners further stated that their shirts having been taken from them, and their initials stamped thereon, they were put into a room in which were twenty-two other persons, one of whom was infected with the itch ; that they were com pelled to fall into ranks in the open yard with other prisoners to receive their food and to be examined by the Doctor, to see if they had taken the itch ; that they were exhibited to persons who came to the gaol from curiosity ; that they were confined to the common gaol al lowance, a small loaf which they believed did not weigh more than one pound and a half, one pint of oatmeal gruel, without salt, and two ounces of cheese each day, except Sundays and Wednesdays, when they were served with one pint of, what was called, beef soup, but in which there was not the appearance of any thing like weat, except some slimy, stringy particles, which offended them so much, that they were obliged to forego eating it ; that they were permitted, with the untried prisoners, to expend threepence a day, with which they procured eggs and bacon, but that they were not allowed to have their eggs and bacon cooked, and were obliged to cat them raw ; that during eleven hours out of the twenty-four they were locked up in a vaulted cell with a brick floor, at the door of which cell they were obliged to leave their boots; that they had to lie on an iron bedstead, with a mattress and two blankets, but without sheets; that they were compelled to make their own beds in a particular manner, under penalty of solitary confinement ; that they had each morning to fold up their mattrass to the exclusion of the air, so that when unfolded the smell was offensive to an extent not to be conceived ; that they were not allowed to see any person except in the presence of the gaoler, and that a wicket-gate, with spikes on the top of it, was between them and their friends; that their watches and other articles they had in their pockets were taken from them ; that they were not allowed the use of a knife, fork, plate, or any vessel except a small wooden tub and a spoon; that they were debarred the free use of pen, ink, and paper, and that they were not allowed to write to any person, however necessary it might be, except in a particular room, where there were other prisoners, and that they were compelled to leave their letters open to be examined before dispatched for the post. (Hear, hear.) The petitioners begged to be understood as making no complaint of the personal conduct of Mr. Atkin, the gaoler; but of having been thus treated as common felons, having been treated with the utmost indignity, and limited in the quantity and quality of their food, they prayed— Mr. FRE SHFIELD rose to order. There could be no objection to the House being made acquainted with the facts of the case, but the petition ought not to be read at length. The rule on the presentation ofpetitions ought to be general. Mr. LEADER said it was a great pity the Hon. Gen tleman had not interrupted him before, because he had now finished reading the petition.—( Hear, hear.) The reason he did not make a statement of the petition in compliance with the rules of the House was simply this—that the petition was only five minutes ago put into his hand, and he had not had time to put himself in possession of the facts.---( Hear, bear.) He was compelled therefore to read the petition, and be trusted the House would make an exception in a case of this sort, where really great hardship had b-en inflicted—where redress ought to be immediately given, and where if these things had been done according to law, not a moment ought to be lost in altering that law.—( Cries of Order, order, and Chair. ) The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member was then speaking on the merits of the petition, and therefore quite out of order. —(Hear, hear, hear.) The Hon. Member ^ had been out of order in reading the petition. The petition might have been read by the clerk at the table, but the Hon. Member must be aware that the rules of the House prevented him from going into it at that length. Mr. LEADER was aware of the rule, and was quite ready to submit to it ; but he should not be infringing the rules of the House if he was to move that the petition be taken into consideration, and if seconded, which it would be, he might then speak as long as he pleased. It would, therefore, have been better if be had been al lowed to go through the petition. He had only to add, that the petitioners prayed that the House might take the petition into consideration, and the treatment that had been inflicted upon them, such as no Englishman ought to be subject to while under confinement pending the pro duction of bail and previous to conviction of crimp. In that ' prayer he (Mr. Leader) agreed, and he thought no one could say there was anything improper in the prayer of the petition. On the contrary, the House would be neglecting its duty if it did not take measures to remedy such a law, if in reality such a law was in existence. He moved that the petition be printed with the Votes, and gave notice that on the first Order Day he should move that it be taken into consideration. Mr. FOX MA ULE said, as this petition involved some serious charges, he thought the Hon. Member for West minster would have done better had he kept it in his pos session for a day, in order to make himself thoroughly ac quainted with the charges, and to give notice to the Hon. Member for Warwickshire, who was closely connecied w'th it. He must say that, after the treatment of Dr. Taylor in gaol, he was surprised to hear the allegations in the pe tition. He, however, bad no objection to its being printed. Mr. LEADER said be had made no charge against any man or set of men. He had merely stated the prayer of the petition, and there was now ample notice to the Hon. Member for Warwickshire. As to the truth of the alle gations, he knew Dr. Taylor, and he also knew Mr. Lovett, and ho would say that a more honourable man did not exist than Mr. Lovett. He would answer for him on his own personal knowledge. The conversation then dropped. Mr. LEADER presented a petition from the parish of St. Clement Dance, against the Collection of Rates Bill. Nfr. JOHN O'CONNELL presented several petitions from places in the county of Kerry in. favour of the Irish Municipal Reform Bill. Mr. L OCK H ART prevented petitions from the county of Argyle in favour of Church extension in Scotland. Mr. B. SMITH presented a petition from Norwich in favour of the Government plan of education. Mr. W. ELLICE prefelit,d a petition from the Chairman of the Board of Guardians of the Leicester Union against the Poor-law Commission Continuance Bill. Sir GEORGE GREY presented a petition from the Stationers of Devonport, in favour of a uniform penny postage, and against the adoption of stamped covers. Mr. BARNARD presented a petition from Deptford against the Collection of Rates Bill. - Mr. F. MAULE presented a petition from Glasgow relative to the presentations to livings in the Church of Scotland. Mr. TURNER presented a petition from the Stationers of Truro, iu Cornwall, in favour of penny postage, and against the adoption of stamped envelopes. Col. SALWEY presented a petition to the same effect from the Stationers of Ludlow. Sir T. ACL AND presented a petition from Devon against certain clauses relative to nut-door relief in the Poor-law Amendment Bill. Also a petition from stage coach proprietors of Somerset, complaining of inequalities in the taxes imposed on conveyance by coach, and by steam travelling. Mr. DI VETT presented a petition from Stationers of Exeter, expressing their gratification at the adoption of the principle of a penny post, but also expressing a fear lest it might injure their interests. Colonel WOOD presented a petition from the Agent of a certain Company for procuring a species of stone from the banks of the Shannon, stating that this stone was of durability and beauty, equal to any other, kut much cheaper, and praying that the House would (Erect the attention of their architect to it. The Hon. Member suggested that the petition should be referred to the Commissioners for the New Houses of Parliament. Mr. O'BRIEN could bear his testimony to the valu able qualities of this stone, and wished to ask the Chan cellor of the Exchequer a question on the subject, but the Right Hon. Gentleman was not in the House. Lord POWERSCOURT presented a petition from the stationers of Bath, praying that their interests might be protected in the new system of penny postage. Mr. DENISON presented a petition from the stage. coach proprietors of Surrey, complaining of excessive and unequal taxation. Sir B. HALL prosented a petition from Marylebone, in favour of a penny postage. Mr. CAYL EY presented a petition from the West Riding of Yorkshire, against the administration of the New Poor-law (we believe). Mr. DARBY presented a petition from stage-coach proprietors of Sussex, praying for equalization of those taxes which pressed upon travelling. Mr, BAINES presented a petition from Yorkshire in favour of a penny postage. Captain PECHELL presented a petition from Brigh ton against the Collection of Rates' Bill. Mr. LEADER wished to give notice that he would call the attention of the House to the petition of William Lovett and J. Collins on Monday, on the first order. Lord J. RUSSELL said no motion could come on then, upon an order, unless an order for Committee of Supply, if the motion did not refer to the order. Mr. LEADER thought the Hon. Baronet (Sir E. Wilmot) had settled with the Under Secretary for the Home Department, that the petition should come on upon Monday. Mr. FOX MAULE had merely understood that such a petition was to be presented, and had suggested that it should be taken into consideration on an early day. Sir EARDLEY WJLM OT said there had no understanding between the Right Hon. Gentleman and himself, but he was desirous that an early day should be named, as such charges ought to be inquired into. NEW POOR LAW ACT. Mr. YORKE moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the allegations of a petition, p resented the other day by the Hon. Member for Oldham, casting i m p u t a ti ons on the character of the Earl of Hardwick and the Board of Guardians of the Thrapston Union. He would only relate the situation in which that Board was placed. The House would scarcely believe that the Ho nourable Member for Oldham had given no notice to the parties concerned, of his intention to present this petition, and that they had, consequently, no opportunity afforded them of denying the allegations. He would ask that Hon. Member if the petition had been examined by him previous to presentation, xsith a view to investigate the truth of its allegations— if it had been sent to him by the person from whom it purported to come, as there was attached to the petition only the mark of that individual, and that mark unattested. He would further ask him if he had communicated the contents of that peti tion to the Board of Guardians of the Thrapston Union, or to the Earl of Hardwick, and if he had intended to follow it up by any specific motion.—(Cheers.) Mr. FIELDEN said the petition had been sent to him some mouths ago, by a clergyman resident in the parish. He had looked it over, and seeing nothing improper in it, he had thought it his duty to place it before the House. He had not explained the subject of it on the presentation, as that would be against the rules of the House; but he would now inform the Housethat he had yesterday morning received a communication from the individual from whom he had received the petition, stating that the man bad since been committed to prison as a rogue and vagabond, but that he could bring forward eighteen responsible witnesses to trove that he was neither the one nor the other, and e f e ollow su in bjed g ec u t p . He (Mr. Fielden) the persecuti o n to w hich h th e at h t a n d is was alr merely following already been did not intend. to follow up this subject by , any motion. Had a Committee been appointed to inves tigate the working of the Poor-law, he would have laid that petition before it, but he knew how difficult it was to get the grievances of any poor man investigated in that House. He might as well state that the Rev. Mr. Ma. berley. (" Hear, hear," from Mr. Yorke)—was the indi vidual who had sent the petition to him. Mr. YORKE said that as the Honourable Gentle man did not intend to follow this matt er u p, h e hoped the House would grant him a Committee to investigate the allegations in this petition, for he was sure that there never was a case so completely demonstrative of the manner in which cases against the Poor-law Act were got up. He did not ask this on behalf of the Earl of Hardwick, but on public grounds, in order to show the manner in which these cases were got up. He did not wish to be on the Committee himself, nor did he wish to have the appointment of it, but he could assure the House, from his own knowledge of the facts, that had the Hon. Member for Oldham made any inquiries into the case, he would hardly have taken upon himself the responsibility of presenting that petition. He would give notice that on Tuesday next he would move for the appointment of a Committee. Mr. FIELDEN hoped the Noble Lord should agree to have the case inquired into, and if it should be proved that the parties had been charged unfairly, no one would regret more than himself that the petition had been placed in his hands, but having been confided to him, he had no alternative but to present it. He hoped the Noble Lord would put him on the Committee, in order that he' might investigate the circum stances, and if he should find he had been misled he should be happy to state so to the House. Mr. G ULBURN moved for copies of certain corre spondence which passed between the Marquis of Normanby and the Agent for Jamaica.—Ordered. Mr. BR 0 ADLE Y asked if the Warehousing Bill was to be proceeded with to-night? Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it would be brought for. ward early to-morrow. LOWER CANADA GOVERNMENT BILL. Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the third reading of this Bill. Mr. HUTT wished to say a few words before the Bill was read a third time. Although he did not sup port with his vote the resolution proposed by the Hon. Member for Leeds with respect to this measure, he thought that any person who looked at the present state of Canada would be struck with the effects of bad Govern ment in that Colony. It was only held in allegiance with Great Britain by 30,000 soldiers, and emigration to that country was rapidly diminishing in consequence of emi grants proceeding to other colonies, where they could find that protection for themselves and their property which they could not find in Canada.—( Hear, hear.) He lamented the determination of the present Govern ment to put off any legislation for the general Government of Canada to another Session, because he was afraid that such a step might be followed by another insur rection in that colony. There was one subject which he wished to draw to the attention of the Noble Lord. He thought that some measure ought to be adopted for regulating the disposal of land, and promoting free emigration to the Colony. He considered it expedient that the Noble Lord should inform the House whether it was the intention of the Government, at an early period in the next Session, to bring the subject forward. All the materials for legislating with respect to Canada had been placed within the reach of the Government by the Hon. Member for Liskeard, and he thought, therefore, that the House was entitled to have some explanation from the Noble Lord as to the course he intended to pursue. He trusted that the Noble Lord would give some explanation, and he would not, at the present moment, offer any resistance to the thi r d rea di ng. Mr. LEADER could not agree with his Hon. Friend as to the propriety of not offering any opposition to the third reading of the Bill. He objected to the Bill for several reasons. In the first place, he looked upon it as a continuation of the Coercion Bill of last year, secondly it was not the measure which the Government ought to have introduced for the regulation of the affairs of Canada, because the measure that was required was one that would give a permanent regulation to the affairs of that country. He objected to the Bill, because it contained a clause so highly objectionable, that any Bill containing such a clause ought not to meet with the sanction of Parliament. He alluded to the clause giving to the Government the power of permanent taxation against the wish of the people of the Province.—( Hear, hear.) In the present case there were four parties, Lord Durham and those who agreed with him, and the Government, and the people of England and of Canada. In his opinion the two former had grossly neglected their duty towards the two latter. The conduct of Lurd Durham was to him quite incomprehensible. Why had he not, according to his promise, done something in ano ther place 7—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had made promises, and pompous declarations of disclosures, which he had never made. The Noble Lord had stated in Canada, that he would exert himself to the utmost on his arrival in this country on behalf of. the Canadian people, and he would defy Hon. Members to point out what he had done. He must say that the people of Canada, if he was to judge from what had already been effected, bad nothing to expect from the Noble Lord or those who agreed with him. Far more culpable, however, was the conduct of her Majesty's Government. They had had many promises of legislative measures, yet nothing had been done. If the consequences were not so serious it would be laughable to see such a moun tain in labour, for all their promises had ended in that miserable abortion of a Bill for continuing the Coercion Bill. The delay had already cost this country upwards of a million sterling. The further delay proposed by the present Bill, would cost the country another million; perhaps the expense might reach two or three millions—( Hear, hear)—an expense which could not well be borne in the present state of the finances. The great sufferers, ho;vever, were the people of Canada. They were suffaring from a total depression of trade and an uncertainty of life and limb. An extract, which he then held in his hands, was taken from a Toronto paper of the 17th April, from which it appeared that then, upwards of three months ago, the people of Canada were ex pecting that the Great Western would take out the Bill which they expected to be founded upon the Report of Lord Durham; so confident were they, that the editor promised in case of the arrival of the steamer to publish the expected news in a second edition. How miserably disappointed then must they have been. What was the state of the Canadas at the present moment ? There was a complete stagnation of trade—there was a total cessation of emigration to the colonies, and the Canadians, the subjects of her Majesty, were fast crossing into the United States where they had security of life and property—no less than 700 Canadians had crossed within ten days—driven from their homes by the neglect of the Government to give them security. All parties agreed that delay was the cause of much mischief, yet the Government allowed the whole Session to pass over without doing anything, so inflicting that very mischief upon the people of Canada for another year. The people of Canada would feel them selves not onlyaggrieved but insulted in the delay which took place in giving them a permanent system of Government. The Government had endeavored to get through the Ses sion without doing anything they ought to have done, or at least with doing as little as possible. The first three weeks of the Session the Government said—" We are preparing Bills—we have this and that under consideration; don't trouble us now; don't put any questions to us; don't annoy us." Members had inno cently waited all this time expecting measures would be brought forward, but now they were told, at the end of tha Session, it was too late, Ministers had had other things to attend to, and thus the real business of the country was slurred over and shuffled off from one Session to the other, and the real interests of the people utterly neglected. He had purposely refrained from attacking the Govern ment, or even urgi ng t h e G overnmen t to do anything i n respect of Can a d a , b ecause he h a d b e li e ved it was th e i r intention to do the best they could to settle the questions that agitated that country. He had received several com. munications from persons in Canada, but had not answered one of them, because he had been afraid of raising hopes that might be disappointed, and because he was afraid of causing any demonstration in that province which might subject the people to additional severities, and call on them the punishments of courts-martial. But he now re gretted he had been silent; he was afraid he bad neglected his duty towards those unhappy Canadians, in not having brought their grievances before the House; and he re gretted having placed even the little confidence he had in the Government, and having trusted them so much. —. (Hear.) There c ou ld b e b ut one op i n i on in this country and the colonies as t o t h e con d uct o f the Government in regard to Canada ; th at op i n i on mus t be, that they had grossly neglected their duty, and if any mischief should arise during the coming winter, the responsibility of all that mischief would rest on their beads,—(Hear.) He trusted gentlemen opposite would agree with him in op paing the third reading of this Bill, and he begged to remind them there still remained in it clauses against which they had divided. As it would be useless for him (Mr. L.) then to go into a lengthened statement of the grievances of the Canadians, of the evils likely to result from delay, and of the great r es p o nsibility the Government had incurred by its conduct, he would sit down by stating his determination to oppose the Bill, and he would divide the House upon it. Mr. O'CONNELL was not one of those who thought the Government could have done much more in the affairs of Canada than, they had done, unless they had been pre pared to restore the Constitution of Lower Canada.— ( Hear.) He must express his regret that the quarrel in Canada had taken a religious turn—that the people were separated, not on account of political diffe rencea, but that there was fomented and encouraged by the present Government a spirit of religious dissent. He would pppeal to the Hon. Mernb,,r, the Under Se cretary for the Colonies, whether the officers in command in Upper Canada had not testified in the strongest terms to the loyalty, to the active support given to the Govern ment by the Irish and Scotch Roman Catholics.—( Hear, hear, from Mr. Labouchere, ) If so, ought they to be rewarded by increasing the number of Orange lodges? There were now 254 Orange lodges, which had their open processions, and all the insults which they had been in the habit of inflicting on the Roman Catholics were almost daily repeated. The masters of these lodges were persons who held offices under the Government— ( Hear, hear)—and were encouraged by the Government, which thus made itself a pasty to the dissensions of which he complained. Some active steps ought to be taken for the purpose of discountenancing these proceedings, and unless that were done the most serious calamities would follow, and the greatest of all would be the stoppage of emigration there, for none of the Roman Catholics would emigrate to a country where they experienced such treat ment. Mr. L ABOUC HER E wou'.d not have troubled the Hou,e, but for whac had just fallen from the Learned Member for Dublin. He entirely agreed that nothing could be more lamentable than that a spirit of religious animosity should spring up in the Canadas, a sprit from which they had hitherto been almost quite free. And he could assure the House that nothing was further from the views of the Government, than giving any kind of encouragement to Orange Lodges, or any other exclusive religious Associations. Up to a very recent pe riod lie had nut been aware that the evil bad attracted any attention in the colony; and he had considered that it would be much better to allow it to die a natural death, than to stimulate, and increase it, perhaps, by treating it in an inquisitorial manner. But his attention had lately been called to papers from which it appeared that the Orange Lodges had greatly multiplied in Canada. This had much surprised him, and he thought that no time should be lost in requiring from the Governors of the Colony all the information upon the subject which they were able to afford.—( Hear, hear.) This, however, he must venture to say, that he was quite sure neither Sir G. Arthur nor Si: J. Colborne would give the remotest en couragement to any system of religious exclusiveness. He had great satisfaction in stating, that both from Sir G. Arthur and Sir J. Colborne he had received the strongest statements of the loyalty which, with scarcely an excep• tion, had been displayed by the Roman Catholics of Ca nada during the late unfortunate events in that prov ince.— ( Hear, hear.) In answer to the quesiion put by the lion. Member for Hull, whether the Government in tended to encourage emigration to the colony, he could assure the Hon. Member that there was no subject con nected with Canada to which their attention was more earnestly directed, satisfied as they were, that nothing would more contribute to the internal tranquillity of the colony, and to the preservation of its connection with the mother country, than the emigration of British subjects ; and be could assure the Hon. and Learned Member that their services were held in grateful recollection. Mr. O'CONNELL said he never meant to insinuate that the Orange Lodges were encouraged by the Govern ment at home ; but what ho meant, and what he would repeat was, that the Masters of the Orange Lodges were in office, forming a part of the local Government, and sup ported and protected by it. Mr. HUME said his Hon. and Learned Friend did not find fault with the Government at home, but he could have no hesitation in charging them with gross negligence. He had brought the question repeatedly before the House, and he had asked the Hon. Member for the Colonies, whether the Address which that House bad presented to his Ma jesty, and the answer which had been received thereto, declaratory of the intention of his Majesty to put down the Orange Lodges, had been sent out to Canada for the in struction of the Government there. The Hon. Gentle- Mere in reply, had stated that no copy of the Address had been sent out. He had then called his attention to the Address from the Clouse of Assembly to the Go vernor of Lower Canada, and had asked what was the answer of Sir Francis Head to that Address. Sir Francis Head had stated that he should take no mea sures whatever in consequence of that Address, and was it not a gross neglect on the part of the Government when they saw the Governor of Upper Canada neglecting to enforce the resolution of that House, not to send out an order to him requiring him to do so ? It was notorious that du ring his tour round the province, Sir F. Head had been surrounded by Orange lodge people, and that he had shown Orangemen every countenance. It was a culpa ble neglect on the part of the Government when they saw the conduct of Sir Francis Head, and knew what were the intentions of that House, that they had adopted no means to carry those measures into effect. He had asked three or four times concerning this matter and no nefce had been taken of it. Why did they not lay on the table of that House any despatch which they bad sent to Sir Francis Head ? He had stated some weeks ago there had been a procession of Orangemen in that Co lony which had been countenanced by th e l ea di ng Mem ber's of the Assembly and the Government, who ought, instead of supporting these things, to have endeavoured to h ive put a stop to them. He was pleased to hear what had fallen from the Right Hon. Secretary, because it was the first time they had been assured that the Government would discountenance these proceedings. But he should like to see what sort of order would be sent out. The head of the Orange Lodges was Ogle Bower,, who had b.2en sent out from Ireland, and he had stated at the time the Committee sat, that the number of Orangemen in Upper Canada was between ten and eleven thousand. They had at this moment 254 lodges, and in the month of June last the number of Orangemen amounted to 20,320. Therefore, since the House had passed a resolution for putting them down, they had in creased in Upper Canada to nearly double. Had not the attention of the Government been called to the Orange lodges by the Earl of Durham ? Why had they neglected his remonstrance.' The conduct uf the GOvernmont to wards the colonies, demonstrated nothing but neglect and incapacity.—( Hear, hear ) When, two years ago, the Noble Lord brought forward his resolutions, interfering with the constitutions of the colony, and robbing the Colonial Treasury of 200,000/., he had warned the Noble Lord and the House, not to pursue such a reckless course of proceeding. What had been the result? The rebellion of the year following. And, on that occasion, he had again warned the Noble Lord and the House, but the same recklessness was again exhibited. It would have been much better for the Noble Lord to have administered jus tice, rather than coercion. lie could not tell why the Noble Lord, as his Hon. Friend (Mr. Leader) had said, had not forced on a discussion ; but it was evident there had been an uewillingness on the part of the Government to create any discussion in that House. The Noble Lord at last had said that in consequence of a despatch he had received, it was not his intention to press the measure to the union of the two Provinces. Now he (Mr. H.) regretted the Noble Lord had postponed the Bill on the imperfect and partial information he had received, because he ( Mr. H.) could inform the Noble Lord that a public meeting of a regiment of militia, after parade, had be e n held on the 14th of June this year in Upper Canada, who resolved to petition her Majesty to adopt Earl Durham's Report as the basis of the future Government of Upper Canada. They said that Lord Durham had suggested the only remedy for the evils existing in that country, namely, introducing that responsibility which formed the leading feature of the British Constitution, and rendered it the admiration of the world. The complaint in Upper and Lower Canada for the last ten years had been the want of responsibility. The Commission.:rs had explained that to the Colonial Government, and yet nothing had been done. The Noble Lord took the representation of a few Members as the expression of the opinion of the province, and the Government, by hearing only one side, had allowed them selves to be blinded as to the real state of the province. He therefore thought the House had a right to complain of the conduct of the Government. With the exception of one or two paragraphs in the Report of Lord Durham, he did not disagree with a single expression, and every report from Upper Canada was confirmative that Lord Durham's Report contained the only principles on which the Government of the country ought to be settled. He aereed with what had fallen from his Hon. Friend the Nlember for Wcstminter, and should support the amend went. Sir G. GREY said the Hon. Member had accuse.! the Colonial Department of being wholly inactive, and said that no despatch had been addressed t) Sir F. Head. A despatch was sent, and it had been twice laid on the table of the 1 - 1011:30.-( Cheers.) This was not the first in stance in which the Hon. Member had brought charges against the Gov ernment , an d called for evidence to rebut tlic charge when that evidence was already printed. The despatch was addressed to Sir F. Head, stating that Lord Glenelg deprecated the policy which had been pursued on the subject of Orange lodges. --( Hear. ) Mr. HUME said there was a despatch sending out an order on the first evidence, but there had been no condem riatory letter. Mr. C. BULLER thought the Government might perhaps have used more vigorous measures for the sup pression of the Orange lodges, but he believed that there was no ground for supposing that persons high in office in Canada took part in the processions —for there was only one officer of any rank belonging to the Orangemen, viz., the Adjutant-General of the Militia, and he had with drawn when requested by the Government.—( H ear , h ear. ) The Canadian Orangemen differed, however, considerably from their Irish brethren ; they were opposed to all intole rance, and the health of the Catholic Bishop was usually given at their dinners.--(Hear, hear.) With regard to Lord Durham, he (Mr. C. Buller) would not defend him now , as th e Noble Earl would soon have an opportunity of explaining his own conduct in the House of Lords,— Refere.,ce had been made to a Report of the Commissioners of Inquiry into the Crown Lands, to which his name was appended; but he must relieve himself from the eulogium w hi c h th e lion. Member for Hull had pronounced upon it, seeing that h 3 had nothing whatever to do with that Re port, except signing his name to it.—(A laugh.) The merit of that document, valuable as it was, must be awarded to his brother Commissioner, Mr. Hanson, who had re ceived great assistance from Mr. Wakefield,—the originator of teat scheme of colonization which the Noble Secretary at War had lately deservedly eulogized. Mr. C. LANGDALE read a letter from a friend of his, residing in Scotland, who had relatives in Canada, and who had informed him that the Orange processions were very fr equent an d exc i t i ng, and that in Richmond (we believe) shots were fired at Catholic houses. Mr. LABOUCHERE Legged to have the letter, and he would cause an inquiry to be instituted. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided. The numbers were_ Ayes 1 1 0 Noes 10 Majority for the third reading —loo The Bill was then read a third time - third time and passed. REGISTERS OF BIRTHS, &c BILL. Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the third reading of his Bill. Mr. JAMES STEWART moved certain clauses be added for the purpose of allowing Quakers to keep their 05,n Registers. The lion. Member observed that the Registers of the Quakers had existed for the last ,bree hundred years, and had been kept in a complete ma n ner. They had adopted a system not only satisfactory to them selves, but a system which bad been -recognised by Parlia- ment ; and in fact their officer was recognised by the Bistbs, Deaths, and Marriages Act. Lord JOHN RUSSELL objected to the clauses. The general purport and policy of the 13:11 was, that the regis ters of Dissenters should be placed in a general office, where they might be consulted by any persons, but these clauses proposed that the registers of one particular sect, the Society of Friends, should be separated from all the others, and placed in the depository of their own offices. If that was acceded to, all the other Protestant Dis senters would have just ground for claiming the same privilege. Mr. BAINES said that, although at first disposed to support his Hon. Friend (Mr. Stewart). yet he thought dome was such force in the observations of the Noble Lord, that he would advise his Hon. Friend to withdraw the clauses. Sir CHARLES STYLE then moved that the follow. ing clause be added :—" And whereas divers registers or records cf births or baptisms, marriages, deaths, or burials, to be deposited in the General Register Office by virtue of this Act, contain also entries appertaining to other matters, and it is expedient in such cases, for the better preserva tion and more evident authenticity of the whole, that the several parts thereof should not be separated from each other : Be it enacted, That every book containing any resister or record to be deposited in the General Register Office by virtue of this Act, shall be kept entire in the General Register Office, and every person shall be en titled, at the times and subject to the regulations made end appointed as aforesaid for other searches in the said registers or records, to search any part of such book on payment of the sum of one shilling, and to have a certified extract of any entry- in such book, not being the entry of a birth, baptism, naming, dedication, burial, or marriage, on payment of the sum of two shillings and sixpence, and of the additional sum of threepence for every seventy-two words contained in such extract, and every such extract may be produced and used as evidence in all Courts and places, in like manner and subject to the same provisions as certified extracts of entries of births, deaths, or marriages : Provided always, that this enactment shall not give any greater validity as evidence to any such certified extract than now belongs by law to the original entry in the book in which the sonic is made." Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that there were great objections to the clause as framed by the Hon. Gentle s:lan. With respect to that part of the clause which stated that it was desirable the books should be kept entire, it was impossible to accede to that inasmuch as many parts of the book had been separated from the others. It would be absurd, therefore, to enact that the book skould be kept entire, the mutilation having already taken place. With respect to the other parts of the clause, before he pronounced any judgment upon them, he should like to know what the opinion of his Learned Friend the Attor ney-General was with respect to them. The ATT 0 RN E Y- GENERAL considered the clause totally unnecessary, because there could be no doubt where entries had been made there would be no objection to a search being instituted. He trusted therefore that the Hon. Baronet would withdraw the clause as unnecessary. After a few observations from Mr. HUME, the Clause was withdrawn. The Bill was then read a third time and passed. SUMMARY JURISDICTION BILL. Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the Order of the Day for the committal of this Bill. Lord G. SOMERSET objected to the Bill being pro. ceeded with further at the present late period of the Ses sion, es it was quite clear a Bill affecting the whole Ma gistracy of England could not be forced through that House at the present time. He wished to know what clause it was the intention of the Attorney-General to strike out, as upon that depended the course he shoul adopt relative to the Bill going into Committee. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was his inten tion to strike out the 32d clause. Sir E. KNATC H BULL would ask the Noble Lord whether in such a House, and at the present period of the Session, it was advisable to proceed with so important a Bill? A great number of Members who acted in the Commission of the Peace, were unavoidably absent from London, who, if they had been in town, would have taken part in the discussion of the Bill. Ile hoped, therefore, the Noble Lord would postpone the Bill to another Session. Lord J. RUSSELL said the subject of the present Bill was one in which some amendment of the law was required. It was very easy for Hon. Members to say why should the Bill be proceeded with at so late a period of the Session— but he would ask whether there had been an opportunity of proceeding with it sooner. In former Sessions, when he had been anxious to press forward Bills at an early period, he had been met by Honourable Members, asking why they should be pressed on before the different estimates. As to what the Hon. Baronet had said about Members being absent, that was their own fault, and was no ground for postponing a measure of great importance upon which there was no need for party discussion or vexatious oppeeition. He trusted, therefore, that the House would proceed with the Bill, and not treat it as a measure that was altogether con temptible. Colonel WOOD did not think Hon. Members on that side of the House, considering that it was then the 18th o f July, ought to be repr o ach e d with not attending in their places. He would, therefore, suggest that the Poor-law Continuation Bill should have precedence of the Summarc Jurisdiction Bill, and that the Bastardy clauses should by taken into consideration in the Committee on the Poor law Cottinuation Bill. Lord JOHN RUSSELL should oppose the clause unless it was proposed to go into the whole of the amend ments, which was at the present time impossible. He should therefore move that the Summary Jurisdiction Bill be proceeded with, and he thought that the clause would he with greater propriety introduced into that Bill, as it proposed to give additional powers to the Magistrates in Petty Sessions. Mr. MILES agreed with the Noble Lord that the clause would be introduced with greater propriety into the Summary Jurisdiction Bill; but while he said this he wished the Noble Lord would give effect to the recom mendations of the Committee on this subject, and provide some cheap remedy for cases of seduction and of breach of promise of marriage. He agreed with the Noble Lord as to the propriety of transferring the jurisdiction in these cases from Quarter Sessions to Petty Sessions ; but he did not agree with the Noble Lord in objecting to take that report into consideration, and deferring it for another year. If the question were not brought forward by the Governs ment next Session, lie should feel it his duty to call the attention of the House to the whole subject. The pre sent Bill had many advantages. It consolidated all the laws in existence at present relating to these subjects, and gave additional powers to the Magistrates which it was requisite they should possess. But he hoped the advanced period of the Session, and the smallness of the House, would impress on the Noble Lord the propriety of with drawing the Bill for the present Session ; and if he would do so, he (Mr. Miles) should be ready to give the Noble Lord every assistance in bringing in the Bill next Session, as he did not lock upon it as a party measure, nor was it so regarded by the Hous e . Sir THOS. FR EMA NTL E would join- in urging on the Noble Lord the propriety of postponing this Bill to the next "cssion. Almost all those interested in this measure had supposed that it had been abandoned, and had consequently abstained from instructing their repre sentatives on the subject. Sir EA RDLEY WILMOTT hoped the Noble Lord would persev re with his Bill during the present Session. It was not like a measure which had never before been discussed in that House. A Committee, of which the Noble Lord had been Chairman, had recommended a similar measure ten years ago, and a Summary Conviction Bill had been introduced by the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamveortb, in the Session following. Ile himself had introduced a similar measure in 1832 ; there fore this was not a new measure, unknown to the country and the House. The Bill did not give Magistrates the power of convicting for felonies, it merely changed certain felonies into wilful trespasses. It was most important, as it gave a power of bringing offenders to trial immediately after the commi-sion of the off meta thus preventing the imprison ment of youthful offenders before trial, and saving then' from the contamination of a long confinement in gaol. He trusted the Bill would be carried this Session. Mr. SANFORD thought this measure most important, as tending to save young persons from the contamination of a long confinement in prison. It was also valuable, as tending to introduce a general system, and i Wishing fees to Magis!rates' clerks, paying them by a fixed salary. Mr. D A RBY said the Noble Lord had omitted to state why ti is Bill was brought on instead of the Poor-law Con tinuation Bill, which he bad understood was to be brought on after the third reading of the Canada Bill. With re spect to the bastardy clauses, all the Noble Lord had done was to transfer an incomprehensible clause from one Bill to another. This Bill was very different from the mea sure brought forward ten years ago, and he hoped the Noble Lord would not persist in going on with this Bill. Mr. LID DELL urged the postponement, on the ground of the impossibility of the measure undergoing proper dis cussion at thin late period of the Session. Lord JOHN RUSSELL explained. With regard to bringing forward this Bill to-night he had understood that it was on the paper for Friday, when he announced his in tention of bringing on the Poor-law Continuation Bill. lie had given the Hon. Member for Somersetshire his choice of two days, and he had understood he had fixed for Friday, but now found it was Thursday that the Hon. Gentleman had appointed. With regard to bringing for ward measures of this nature, respecting the Magistrates of Counties, he always found himself placed in this duff culty. If he brought them forward early in the Session he was always told not to press them, to give time for them to be transmitted into the country to be considered, and when, in accordance with these recommendations, he postponed the consideration of the measure to a later period of the Session, he was told it was too late to press the Bill forward. Perhaps these Hon. Gentlemen would be so good as to state to him the precise time at which it was proper to bring forward these measures. He should cer tainly press the Bill ; and if it should be postponed, he would not pledge himself to take charge of it next Session. Mr. AG LIONB Y was anxious the measure should be passed this Session, although it would give rise to discus sion in Committee, yet he did not see why it should not proceed in a manner satisfactory to the House and to the country. It was a measure calculated to do good, and for the bringing forward of which the Government was en titled to the gratitude of the country. Mr. HAWES hoped the Noble Lord would make an effort to carry the Bill this Session. It had been too long delayed already. He would not deny that it gave Magis trates the power:of adjudicating in cases of petty felony. He considered the Bill would prove a most useful public measure, as it would tend to consolidate the laws relating to petty offences to a great extent. He hoped the Noble Lord would persevere with the Bill, and that Hon. Gen_ tlemen opposite, competent as they were to renderassisty once to measures of this sort, would benefit the public b aiding the pa,sieg of the Bill. Mr. E STCOURT hoped the Noble Lord would no endeavour to carry a measure of this extensive nature through Parliament at so late a period of the Session. This Bill, so far as it related to the proceedings of the l‘lagistrates, was rather a novel measure, and one that had not been brought sufficiently under the attention of Parliament. It would be more expedient to pass a law EVENING EDITION. with reference to summary jurisdictions before a Bill of this sort was passed, the mats ri,d o , ject of which was to regulate proceedings before Justices of the Peace. The greatest argument urged in favour of the Bill was, that the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tam worth had ten years ago introduced a Bill into the House, forsooth, but which he (Mr. Estcourt) believed did not proceed further than one stage.—( Hear, hear.) It might be very important, there should be some provision with reference to summary jurisdiction, but he did not think it was right to introduce at so late a period of the Session a Bill authorising the trial of felonious offences in any other way than by trial by jury. He thought it was an endeavour, by o side wind, to abolish trial by jury in certain cases, and he protested against proceeding wi,b the Bill in such a thin House. Mr. TURNER thought the thinness of the House was one reason why they should proceed with the Bill, be. cause the fewer the number present the more business was lone. He hoped they would at once proceed with this Bill, which would bring cheap and speedy justice home to the door of every man. After a few observations from Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET and Mr. TATTON EGERTON, The House went into Committee. Clauses 1,3, 5, and 6, were agreed to with a few verb;il amendments. Clauses 2 and 4 were postponed. Clause 7 was postponed. On clause 8 bring proposed, Mr. J. PAL 11 ER moved that all informations should be reduced to writing. Mr. HAWES objected to the proposition as it would give rise to technical objections and increase litigation. Mr. Wakley, Mr. Clay, Lord G. Somerset, and Mr. Miles supported the proposition of the Hon. Member for Berkshire. Mr. PRY M E supported the proposition of the lion, Member for Berkshire. Mr. WAKLE Y said that what he wished was that Ma gistrates should take down in writing what was the cause of complaint, so as to be enabled to produce such docu ment fur his own justification should he be called upon to do io. Mr. HA WES asked, would the Hon. Member for Fins bury object to the introduction of words enacting that no information shall be quashed for informality. Mr. WA K L E Y— Certainly not. Mr. ESTCOURT thought the information to be taken in writing should 1:e in the nature of memorandum for the information of the Magistrates. Mr. AG LIONB Y said that there was a difference be tween the Hon. Members for Berkshire and for Oxford, and the Hon Member for Finsbury. The Hon. Member for Finsbury wished it should be taken for the justification of the Magistrates, and if so, it would be in the nature of a formal document, liable to be quashed for irregularity; and if it were in the nature of a memorandum merely for the information of the Magistrates, he did not think he ought to be compelled to produce it. It appeared to be the object of this Bill to distinguish two classes of offences, for which the party may be summoned, such summons being granted on information, not on oath, and which summons the party might refuse to obey; and another class of more serious offences, information against which must be laid on oath, and on which information the Magis tratcs were to issue a warrant. He gave no opinion on this sul'jt'ct, but he thought it should be decided what course should be pursued before the Committee divided. Mr. WA KLEY said that none but a barrister could have felt any difficulty on this subject. They were in the habit of looking out for perplexities, and their aid was much more useful out of the House than in it. He could not conceive, looking at the matter in a common-sense point of view, how any difficulty could arise. He did not wish the information to be technically a formal one, because he did not wish to make work for the barristers who had too much work already. What he desired was that Magistrates should not grant summonses improperly,and that the subject should be properly protected. He merely wished that the Magis. trate should take down what would be sufficient for his purpose, and that in the event of any inquiry tak ng place, he should be able to produce it as his justification. He had no desire that it should be encumbered with techni calities, but that it should merely be sufficient to show that the Magistrates had not improperly discharged their duty. He was glad the Noble Lord did not object to the propo sition, which he was convinced would work well. Mr. G ISBORNE did not think the difficulty could be got over so easily, and that some clause would be necessary to introduce regularity. Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET thought the chute should be altered to as to produce uniformity of practico. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought all informa tions ought to be taken in writing as a justification to the Nligistrates and a protection to the accused. He thought all objections might be obviated by introducing a clause, enacting that no objections should be taken, nor any infor mation vitiated on account of informality, and he would undertake to introduce such a clause on the bringing up the Report. Mr. HALVES thought the proposition of the Attorney. General would be a great improvement to the Bill. Mr. AGLIONBY wished to know, as the Attorney. General was one of the introducers of the Bill, how it was that the clause had not been introduced into the Bill originally ? After a few observations from Mr. WA KLE Y, The proviso was agreed to and added to the clause. Se veral verbal amendments were made. The clause, as amended, after some desultory conver sation, was ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13, were agreed to with ver bal amendments. Clause 14 was agreed to with a few verbal amendments. Clauses 15 and 16 were then agreed to, after a short conversation, and the introduction of one or two verbal amendments. Clauses 17 and 18 were agreed to. On clause 19 being proposed, Sir EARDLEY WILNIOT thought that this clause would hardly merit the case to which he had alluded of the Sheriff of Warwick having to bring prisoners through a part of the county of Worcester to Birmingham for trial. He would proposs the addition of certain words to the clause which would, he thought, put this matter out of all doubt. After a few words from Mr. Goulburn and from the Attorney and Solicitor-Generals, the clause, as amended, %las agreed to. Clause 20 was agreed to. Clauses 21, 22, and 23 were postponed. Clause 24 was agreed to with a few verbal amend ments. The House then resumed ; the Chairman reported pro- gress, and obtained leave to sit again to-morrow, the Committee on the Poor•law Commissioners Continuance Bill being postponed to Saturday. An HoN. MINIBILK said that he understood the Factories Bill was appointed for that day. Mr. FOX MA ULF: said that he had so many clauses to add to that Bill that it would be utterly impossible to proceed with it on that day. On the motion for the second reading of the New South Wales Bill, Mr. WAK LE Y said it would be most convenient to Hon. Members if the Noble Lord at the head of the Home Department would state what measures it was his inten tion to go on with, and those that he did not. He did not believe that it would be in the power of the Government to carry through half the measures that had been brought forward. He hoped that on Monday next the Noble Lord would be enabled to state what Bills he should go on with, and what lie intended to abandon. The Bill was then read a second time. UNLAWFUL OATHS. The Unlawful Oaths (Ireland) Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. TIMBER SHIPS. The Timber Ships' Bill went through Committee, and the Report was ordered to be received to-morrow. ASSESSED TAXES COMPOSITION. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER brought up the Report on the Assessed Taxes Com position Bill, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. SLAVE TRADE (PORTUGAL) BILL. The Report on this Bill was received and the Bill or. dered to be read a third time on Monday. EXCISE LICENSES. The Report of the Committee on Excise Licenses (Sale of Spirit Licenses) was received, and leave given to bring in a Bill. ADMIRALTY COURT. The Report of the Committee on the Admiralty Court (advance' of mgrier)was re ce i ve d . CONSTABULARY FORCE (IRELAND) BILL. The second reading of the Constabulary Force (Ire land) Bill waft, at the suggestion of Mr. Goulburn, post poned till tomorrow. The Highway (No. 2.) Bill was read a second time, and o:dered to he committed on Saturday. Lord NIORPETH obtained leave to bring in a Bill to make further provisions relating to the Police in the dis trict of Dublin Metropolis. Mr. PIGOTT obtained leave to bring in Bills for the better prevention and punishment of assaults in Ireland : for the better prevention of the Salo of Spirits by unli censed persons in Ireland : for the better pre. serration of sheep, and the more speedy detection of sheep stealers in Ireland. And a Bill to amend an Act passed in the third and fourth years of the reign of his late Majesty King William the Fourth, intituled, "An Act for consolidating and amending the Laws relative to Jurors and Juries in Ireland," and another Act passed for amending said Act, in the fou r th an d fir th years of his said late Majesty's reign. The Bills were then severally brought in, read a first, and ordered to be read a second time. BANK OF IRELAND. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER post poned the motion on the subject of the Bank of Ireland, which stood for Monday until Wednesday, in consequence of the Postage Bill coming on on Monday. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at One o'Clock. HO USECT""IP"----F LORDS, Juzr 18. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at Five o'Clock. A Message from the Commons brought up the City Police Improvement Bill and some other Bills. The Marquis of Bute, Lord Ashburton, Lord S. agrave, Earl Stanhope, and other Noble Lords presented petitions in favour of a penny postage. The Soap Duties Aet was read a second time. Lord LYND HURS T presented a petition signed by upwards of 800 bankers, merchants, and traders of Glasgow, complaining of the Russian blockade in the Black Sea, by which their important trade with Circassia, in particular, was completely cut off, and praying the House to take such measures on the subject as might be necessary. Earl STANHOPE presented a petition, signed by seventy-two British subjects, late of Melleraie, in France, but now of Mount Melleraie, in Ireland, complaining of having been "dragged out ot their domicile, evicted out of their property, incarcerated, and transported," and praying for the production of the documents, an d f or the adoption of measure s to obtain compensation for indemnity and damages. The Noble Earl wished to kno w w h et h er there would be any o bjection to the production of the documents the pe titioners prayed for. Lord MELBOURNE said he believed that the peti- I . z