The Sun. — London, England, 1845-07-18 00:00:00

UNC II4. le" a y it be to iliould be vote d to CUP ;ed to the I C ci o tio '` rt ; tY i n 3 g° eat con3Plini Log. there' e ! , " . ,, e ur t br°k ;lE r -r 1 °' % ir!' the — ° •i i A t ! as ePen':oo" )f t ie n and bag cn.oil rills, fence s ' ; 0 0' a and Ilia — c hine , an d the w et , feel, a nd e elss scarifleros tur nip trough s ' Ao os# ? els e a n ", 4-. ot beet: tole ill, t'r . t thr / ng ye ars, wit iin proriniroeelt s4l l o l(o'4 as ;11 10 well as atiot Cr' at intere o bi os en gras se . George GI Ci .ee't ,; 1 5 p Mr. W 0 0 ' hire; Alr• j b op., rk, tT c ' ornpton• F i Nsii l SO T ; debuts ,l. . 4 ce ss the l'a v veti l l .d so des °. h e Fer oote stu d e nt r oA cl: , a voice t evide o -s r o, Le and she be e he — r 11 3 71 that esoe will con y cl oc oot!, utinz,,. r y ow be, 'O, B. it' Dux° abOn t t° . 09 16 ,te Cons ta in WV y M or ice—a -%C down the 000 ni . to , t s i fsi te d , in ay 7 w o o d has b eePFt r , ,„ c liot to c „ S..in2 in% 0 0 cross A koo c :dridg 100 4 ' i c c co o :, !rill on - De had J u ' l fort P . t , wheels `f° bse;:balia.tre°l'l' edi csl t h0 .. 0 elptlae;ed ds nl e ' a ll to bla IMPERIAL PA. A ROUSE OF LORDS, July 17. 'The Lordships met at Five o'clock. The Constables Public Works (Ireland) Bill, the Deg ste aling Bill, and the Draina:7e by Tenants for Lite Bill, were severally read a third time and passed. On the m o ti on of Lord CAMPBELL , the Defamation and .Libel Act Amend men t Bill was rea d a t hi r d t i me an d passed. a Lor g d BROUGHAM p resen t e d a pe titi on f rom L or d S o ndes ,ill, the the Oxford, Woreever, and Wolverhampton Railway DUBLIN AND G ALWAY RAILWAY. B _, l he Earl of BESBOROUGH brought up the report of the ti c :et Committee appointed to inquire into certain aeg,a _liaitsiseehtoich had been made against the Dublin and Galway vis a waY Compa n y, Th e Committee had only thought it ad go into the allegation respecting the forgery of four !lames to the subsolintion-deed of the Company, and they as ;rained that the Company had been in the habit of making pp at tnents TA' shares without obtaining any references as to the ti; s p e etability or status of the applicants. They also lipped th • en. report, and the petition containing the allegations, be referred to the Committee which was now 'adag Upon the BM. It was not his intention to Tse the second reading of the Bill, which was appointed for these evening or to raise any discussion at present respecting f ut .! allegations, as ample opportunity would be afforded, on a ...re occasion, for that purpose. B , O L n o s rd '-'ROUGHAM thought it much better that no discus ' af hould arise on the subject at present. and o ter a short consultation the Bill was read a second time T. rdered to be committed. T ur n e. T •nclostare of Lands Bill, the Loan Societies Bill, the tod? P :ite Acts Continuance Bill, the Highway Rates Bill, at, 'he Unlawful Oaths Bill, were severally read a first time, lordered to be printed. d T he M arqu i s of CLANRICARDE wished to put a quest i on ane of th e Mi n i sters of the Crown in reference to the con _cteitri f o ' a magistrate and d eputy . li eutenant of the county of ro. tie The Duke o f WELLINGTON — Y ou s h ou ld h ave g i ven no - Your question. L, 4 ne Mar qu i s of CLANRICARDE sa i d he woul d put hi s estion then tomorrow. It would relate to the conduet of a ow s , -Wa tson, a magistrate and a deputy-lieutenant of the - "Y of Leitrim, who had taken an active part in the Orange co up "la gs and processions which had lately taken place in that t ,. LANDLORDS AND TENANTS (IRELAND) BILL. t o „ e Nlarquis of LONDONDERRY, who hadnot th- good th e `aee to be present on Tuesday evening when the Noble Lord ecretary for the Colonies st'ated his intentions with respect I°.otrhrie Landlords and Tenants' Bill, would be glad if the Noble int w ould state clearly and ttistinctly whether Government I:Med proceeding with the measure in the preset session. baVeinNoble Marquis then presented a numb-r o• petitions from litrudinu_isst tphlaeces in Antrim, Belfast. Londonderry, and Down, Bill, signed by landowners and others, and can fneu,hY imploring the N. ble Lord to withdraw the Bill. o a t u STANLEY regretted that the Noble Marquis was Bt li the House when he made a statement wilh respect to the bi d _ I!. was not his intention to ask the House to pass the 4D,.!,nlng the present session. C .:O GNIZANCES FOR COSTS OF BILLS BILL Vih °l ' d B ROUGHAM slid. as it had not yet been determined bell ether the order with regard to costs in rail say Bills should fleeted by a Bill or not he should I.ostpone the second nfi of this Bill until to-morrow. The Noble Lord ex taaeti'js' nis regret that a Bill (the name of which he did not , 1 1 ) ° a) had been read a third ti me before five o'clock, during Mi yi s enor , from the House. By it a poor clergyman, who had Of ',b ri g of 701. a year, and who kept a school within forty yards * N e r oute of the railway, would he nearly ruined, a: no one k tio then send their children to his scheol. What compen e.rould the Railway Company give him for so great a loss? REDESDALE cited the case of a person who det t re nded 1,0001. upon a building, which wouldbe greatly Qt a.ted by a railway passing within ICO yards of it. t o m" . .„RE GLASGOW JUNCTION RAILWAY. atk e d,"ALHOUSIE presented a petition, numerous'y kot e — rs 'irorn Glasgow, against this line, on account of its pro- AU i ntending to carry it along the Quays. TUAL SURRENDER OF CRIMINALS BILL. billa Earl o f ABERDEEN move d t h e t hi r d rea di ng of this ,a a W hieh he s a id was t o f ac lit: to the mutual delivering up of 11; 114 ls bet ween F rance an d t h e U n it e d S ta t es. ‘ The ßill was read a third time and passed. ttet l : third reading of the Public Works (Ireland) Bill was proposed and carried, and the House ajourned. Tee ROUSE OF CO(ILTIONS, .July 17. sae 1.1 Tes also met at Twelve o'clock. es e ,r highway Ra es Bil l l l eS eti "e also the Militia Ba o, w +s as s r , e is a r d en a s t io h n ird time and passed ; V re r Bill, the Turnpike Acts Bill, and the Unlawful f L u n l a O n a S th o ; ca.,ud) Bill. Tis L t S IASTICAL PATRONAGE (IRELAND) the Bill was ordered to be te%;,4e report was brought up, and BILL. ' a third time to-morrow. reading of this Bill. oved the third . m INCLOSRE BILL. enport • eerThle tirlo C f O L A I I N I C I( O )N LN S 4c be el SIBTHORP protested against hste a th ß a r t ll m o a f r t k h e i , s i i its pro._ greaa,.°eirtg proceeded with with the a Nllse n „ Re knew it was useless to contend against a le g a a s i t ns h t ly th e e h d e e e t r e k r p m ret i .. - „e of the Government, but it h m e gh the House was fully a - 4 414 (1 4 that portion of the day 114 '4 l itcl not when the Memb vi er e s th v e er ß e i s l u l, re au to d befew's oee; ". R. YORKE supported Ainer/ useful measure. believed it to 144asi . /.I A , II.MAN CRAWFORD op i p u o d s e ( e d d, th t e he ß se ill e a o s m az e i i n uo - sr eof the rights of the poor. !11..en inclosed and the value of t u h;e d m ha fo r r e m b e e d ett in s t Je st' setefit of the poor, there . o n m a e fund e a t oi it to increase 15 .14, 7 t fr it, .and some utility mig w h o t . have fo t l h lo e w p e r d o , re b r u ty , o f het, ryas evidently attemptan .e ation, or for iropriated for recre of the tee, ,there was no evidene out of the 10,000,600 o Ill s , l land any of it would be api tber l is e uts for the benefit of the or . poor. th ee " Was the very poorest made the people spoo r hou should who ee resorted considered t e peor°ll3lllnons. It was not theh tion of thee t e0 wet4441, 0 011 11 a s f tv o e r u s t, u r p b o e r t t . that h t these ea tottl l at because those who ad et ro m ot o h n er meansresorted to the ch h a e rd o e b u je s_ cti w on ha t t a .if su turned i t into potato-gardens--what t il e:t o o - t , foi, - 'lle case ? It was better for t u te d g e sp p i o r t i a t t o o- f g t a u r e de p n e s er to u, a b r.i e f 4 0 ,4 1 than that the independence Ntsh,, h be broken (town. He shoul a d o e f on a te fu n u d d th fo a r t t t h h e e l r a e n h d e s ie i r oe at all, should become the seurc d e to I : ,; el ent of the poor, for he believe he ahoejeeted from their allotments without,recompense; them audt i t wil would behardfnr tha t istlid, therefore, divide the House on the motion being pu iti "Is Bill do pass. stood so high, both ie anger for Rochdale (Mr. S. .Cr i awf7 s r A le '. 14. n• DENISON said that the d e ) haracter of the Hon. for this Hill. He him 1., 'nit of the House, for km( co p s consideration or the peor, sel f e w as anxious to secure lets ote trl,nteeived that it was th i e - wages ana means ofAesma ployl4), Iseneficial . in inci•easit?g e eon ~ of the highest utility and likely to chairman of quarter-sessions, eisai.teut, and in enproving tri . i 1 ti or of the poor. he f i a,ate, and occasionaliy as ss e had . many opportun ery persons N no lived on the edges of corm mons were the v b Ines of ascertaining that those pe evil, and he should emuthese/. t hat it would tend to save these/. ° NI give it his warmest support, and he thanked the Go ,rit.inesit fir its introduction. h p d saved him the . l' • r s ',Earl of LI COLN said that t . he s esich of his . Hon. te,,,..• 4 ` 4 the Member for West Yorkshire , ence . Nt - Is' it Y of entering into any elaborate d . ( a f ' h statement of his Il so "e vras anxious' to say one wore . , upon l 1 gee been hurriedly iltlshedaild Gallant Friend f the Bill. t he ei "' r ough the House. * been several be t attl°oB made in it—(" ehtr reuse for three yeses. There had certainlyfrom it 7l t ie th ß s pl B ,4 l l lad in fact been bsfore hear," Col. SibtherP) -- h e • liem 8111 n its present state ' discus. hours li Q j! threee mouths. There had been sixteen debate on its 4 ill - . Hear, had been under notice for Itsrthees ° Mralttee, and one .. Hon. Member discus f°ffile. With regard to the objection of the . „chi,. „„., -eas to the allotments ti el ebelal that was lele e • - " , for the advantage of the . : po b e N r, those who llrek,•"Y first consideration entertainc u l . its provisions. e od pared the Bill, and adopted . was n t naees as to the observation respectt i n t. g the remuneration for ti nor" aed growing crops, the prepared, and now Pos e 3 and after the Bill had been nin re i a s d sin a n third time, he pro kaele . ntroduce a rider, which hehad a ll owed hand . He trusted, to Dacs "14hi theeefore, that the Bill would 4tthe lII' • ' * third time, e d . • Was then read a and the rider was 1114,..thee motion that the Bill do pass, feel it his duty treesi 'RARMAN CRAWFORD said there was no distinct 'vrelp,,•°ll 10r allotments, and he should therefore A, S t - rd his o pposition ' to the Bill, by . House ‘u'idaneßere were then ordered to withdraw, and dividing the the House '' e ,' woen there appeared -48 "'the e motion - 0 A gainst it The ~111 . Majority " thers passed. BILL. ssOeth DRAINAGE OF LANDS . ee thi Rothe DRAINAGE that the House reso .1111 Rill, l i lt s'°°,l SIBTHORP stated that he had more objection to lye itself into Committee briogi o . an the former, andhe . -"1 11 ' 1- LThe it oh was exeeedinely ill-timed. t object `t• it, s s i! r i of LINCOLN' •as assured that the Gallant Mem -4 it, °- "'coin had not read the Bill or he would no Th e , diskre.."ouse then went into Committee on verbal amendments, and th"et clauses were agreed to with a few at Twelve. the Bill. The IsejssiAreleort was ordered to be read to-mo All' -TIG A SYLUMS AND PAUPER rro LUNATICS u the ee BILL. 1, - ;','• H. tn j og p b ,°n that this Bill be teed a third time,. . g the asy r-ce a. s'erskELEY moved to insert the foltowin proviso, - net s o W ss agreed to . hoe s , tle elaree i oa " P-ovided always that in ca b e e a work. N e i, fit t s hall be law itil for the said Secretary of State, de.q—uate o ' r unfit as aforesaid shall if he shall Lela ee l% es ° vete ' °Pon the application in writing of the guardians or ~ et the u s e • di ti u m, o r of th ion or parts ad- Isisj°,4 building: major of them, to direct suchfore h to whom such workhouse shall pa h rt dditional asylum k eer' a :° be e rected or err such d additional the said guardians " aover kuti el l " every sue h P w n or i kh e ouse y which shall be so a n d r ded to, or Prt ;iti ve .4 r Y such additional ast lum which shall be erected dtebe a t atiat,:' as last aforesaid * shall be and be thew as as for such count ' y or borough, a Act ; and it h,`, In and shall be subject to the provisions of this se e C" d be lawful for the guereians or overseer r s e to whom and shall be in ‘tiseor:eetlon shall be given, and they hereby a such sum or a4l l f 41 t° a pply, or to as ens, raise, and tr ° l ll a°,,TioneY as may be necessary fur the levy purposesnes as are t o le n h y c l f unds, fir by such powers, ways a . nd p oore r an/ belonging or given to or vested in su In c e h guardians aforesaid era specially • g l 'ite 11 • or the ra y , or . In etee wa J, In relation to the purchase or hiring. "'. h eh wardens or overseers of the noskh_Purehase, building, hiring, enlarging, or maintaining of heulges.” 1 3 th 111 Was then read a third time. Sir e 'stollen that the Bill d o pass, '4IIIehj`INIES GRAHAM moved to withdraw the 6th clause, era% aexempted the poi elous parishes of Marylebone, Sc, ran it. Zl,Bt- George, horn the eperetion of the Bill. of th e eia "ARLES NAPIEIt objected to the withdra ti w e a u ? se t It ith slit"- There was no rr.:•!roiWi`an Member in the I ,he i h e exception of himself, and he certainly must . say that ' leleatertio the clause, if it was now to be withdrawn, goose had mach like an intention to deceive them, for no th e et uad b een given to any of the metropolitan Members of Is.‘ll%,.elnion on the part of the ' Government to withdraw the Si e versooe GRAHAM defended the course pursued by the Go tomtit and insi,ted on the rejection of the clause. e t the- ASHLEY said when be consented to the introduction sieeredelause, he stated that its provisions must be well con !llse% ' „and the propriety of its remaining in the Bill could be u tven t se k u, ort the third reading. For his own part, he was 1 11,.. au ,, 1 e to the clause. eoeseje;.lENLY s'lpported the withdrawal of the clause, ti n on- I N that as it at present stood it would operate entirely L ord 7slde. ttlesl:l-INCAN said if this clause was to be retained . he the Apove the adjournment of the House. His Hon. Friend to th 'other for Montrose had entirely withdrawn his opposition 1.., 0 4 Bill or the ground of the introduction of the clause. s tr o , e Ji b I:t.SEILEY had stated to the Hon. Member for Mon 'tniii .44 on the third reading of the Bill the propriety of.re %elf t t Z the clause would be discussed ; that he thought him_ f ed rere.svere great objections to it, and that probably on the e 4r reading iWould be necessary to withdraw it. or let: ARRTON trusted the Noble Lord the Member . 0 ,.• - ci ,Zroupr in his motion. . . the kIiatL'UNCAN said he would not persevere in moving •-"ellt, TRE, SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY MO3NING„ItTLY is 1845. make the declaration previously to taking office. Mr. Salo mon's did perform the office of sheriff of Middlsex, and in so cr,ditable a manner, that he had earned the 'respect and esteem of his fellow citizens. He was subsequently elected to the office of alderman, at the choice of the citizens of London. Then this impediment of taking the declaration out of the statute took effect. and refusing to take the declaration, Mr. Salomons coald not act in the office of alderman. That fact, alone, was almost sufficient to justify the Bill before the House. He would refer to the history of that declaration. In the year 1828, the Noble Lord brought in a Bill for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Act. He had failed in carrying that measure, and he (Sir Robert Peel) lent his co operation towards carrying the Bill. He suggested that the form of declaration should be altered. The form introduced by the Noble Lord was different from the one he had proposed, and required that every person elected to any office in a municipal corporation was required to make the declaration within a calendar month next before his admission to the office. The form was as follows:—" I, A B, do solemnly declare I will never exercise any power which I may have by virtue of the office I hold, to alter or weaken the Protestant Catholic religion within this realm, or to endanger it in any way." The Noble Lord saw no difficulty whatever in the way of religious g rounds, and consented to the introduction of this declaration. That declaration contained nothing which could throw the slightest difficulty in the way of the Jew filling a corporate effice, but the House of Lords inserted words into the declaration, which constituted an impediment. In lieu of the simple declaration, the House of Lords altered it to the fol lowing words :—" I, A B, do solemnly, sincerely, in the pre sence of God, protest, testi"y and declare, upon the true faith of a Christian," &c., and it was these words which constituted the impediment to the Jew accepting a corporate office. But the House of Lords, by the present Bill, had voluntarily removed that impediment, and he therefore thought, under the circumstances, that House could not well refuse to pass the measure. The Moravians, Separatists, and Quakers had declined to take offices of honour and emolument from conscientious objections to take the prescribed oaths. He proposed to give to the Jews the same immunities, and to admit them to the benefits of the Municipal Bill. He hoped he had said enough to convince the House of the justice and expediency of the Bill.—( Hear, hear.) The Court of Queen's Bench had decided that it was not necessary to take the declaration first, and in Birmingham, Stockport, and Ports mouth that decision was acted upon, and Jews were admitted to municipal offices.—( Hear, hear.) They were at present entitled to act as county magistrates, and as sheriffs of counties and cities, and he believed that if a Jew were to refuse to act as sheriff he would be subject to a heavy penalty.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the House would not object to grant this privilege to so great and respectable a body of their fellow subjects.—( Hear, hear. )—He would refer to the names of Goldsmid, Salomons, and Alontefiore.—( Hear, hear.) He had been assured by the most eminent gentlemen in the body, that they were satisfied with the Bill, although they did not think it debarred them from prosecuting their claims to other privileges. The Right Hon. Baronet concluded by urging the House to pass the Bill. Sir R. H. INGLIS said the speech which the Right Hon. Baronet had delivered was not more inconclusive than the gene rality of the speeches delivered by him. He was anxious to pay a just tribute of respect to the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London, and his Right Hon. Friend the Member for the city of Edinburgh (Mr. Macaulay) for the part they had taken on the subject. They worthily ranked with him (Sir R. Peel) in any competition of talent in that House. The measure was first introduced by his late lamented friend, Sir Robert Grant—( Hear, hear)—but was subsequently taken in hand by the Government. The Right Hon. Baronet had made a great historical and legal error with re spect to the disabilities under which he said the Jews laboured. An Act for their relief was passed in 1828. Until that Act was passed, no one professing the Jewish religion was admitted to any municipal office whatever, in any city or borough of England, because no one of that faith could be admitted to any public office, unless he took the oath, which was only administered in extreme eases, but which obliged him to recognise some Christian symbol. He, there fore, held that the disabilities under which it was said they laboured were not created by that Act. The law with respect to Jews was not in an uncertain state, as the Right Hon. Ba roust had said, as it had been clearly decided by the Court of Queen's Bench, which must be received as the law, until the judgment was reversed by the House of Lords. He called upon the Attorney-General to explain to the House in what way the law was uncertain. Sir R. Grant's Bill was for the purpose of relieving British-born subjects professing the Jewish religion, whilst the Bill before the House was not limited to Sir Moses Montefiore or Mr. Salomons ' but to every one of that faith. The Bill, as it now stood, was for the naturalisation of a whole nation, for it contained nothing which would prevent a German Jew from entering the city of London, and holding any muni cipal office which he might be appointed to. Believing, then, as he did, that, by the common law, to say nothing of the statute law, no Jcw could take a municipal office in this city, because he could not subscribe the oaths required of him, and believing that the declaration of the House of Lords, to which he had already referred, was wise and requisite, he did not see anything in the present condition of the Jews which re quired this special exception in their favour. The Jews did not describe themselves as a sect or a creed, but as a nation ; and as a nation they were to be selected for these exemptions. which were denied to every other nation. The petitions which had been presented in favour of the Bill were signed by few, and the House must remember that in the early part of the session petitions were signed by a much larger number, distinctly stating that the Jews would not be satified with the present measure. A question of " right," however, whether signed by many or few he would not resist. It was because this was a measure of " favour" and not of right that he op posed it. A celebrated writer, Dr. Arnold, had stated that the Jews were voluntary strangers in this country, and had no more right to interfere in the management of, or to seek citi zenship in it, than a lodger had to interfere in the management of his landlord's house. This was a Christian country, and he for one would not consent, for this handful of men, that he should admit that Christianity did not form an essential and integral part of the administration and government of the nation. It was no reason that some of them had hitherto been allowed to violate the law with impunity, that they should be hereafter exempted from it. In France, Jews were admissible, but never admitted—though al Jew might be a sheriff, a deputy, or a judge, there was no instance of one ever holding one of those offices. But the precedents or practices of other countries ought not to be precedents for the guidance of this : for, though in the offices to be held, cases might be analogous, yet they were not analogous in this, for the Govern ments to which he referred, were either despotic, or had exhibited symptoms of conduct which, he trusted, would not be adopted in England. If this Bill was passed, what security had they that the Jews would not object to our laws [with regard to the keeping of the Sabbath. At present, they could not complain, but if they permitted them to hold high municipal offices, was it not likely that they would refuse to enforce our laws upon that subject. For all these reasons, he should move that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Mr. PLUMPTRE said that a respectable individual who had been named more than once was at that moment high sheriff of the county which he had the honour to represent. He had nothing to say against that individual. But in this country we either were Christians or not, and if we were Christians we were about to admit to office those who derided the name of that Being in whom, as Christians, we trust, and in whom we glory. He desired to exalt the name of that Being, and he thought they were about to invite a desecration of that Holy name. He was quite sure with the Honourable Member for the University cf Oxford that this measure would prove any thing but satisfactory to the country. He was convinced that this was not a measure of opinion, or to be classed with the measures which had been lately passed. It was one that was disreputable to the House and the Government. He feltassured that every man who felt any real respect for the Great, Head of the Church he belonged to could vote for it, for it was one which desecrated the honour of that great and glorious Being on whose merits he depended for eternal happiness. If this Bill were passed, there would be great reason to fear that that great and glorious Being would cast this nation out of his fa vour. Without the favour of Almighty God he would a sk where was the security for the prosperity of this great nation? God forbid that this Bill should pass, but, if it did pass, they would neglect the obligations which laid upon them as reason able men, and still more as Christian men. He was aware that theological questions could not be entertained in that House, on any other than political grounds, but he could not help think ing that as Christian men, the Members of that House could not discuss the question without a reference to the opinions of the great body of the Christian inhabitants in this country. He feared that his remarks would receive but little consideration , yet, in his view, the matter was of such importance that he could not refrain from seconding the motion. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the Honourable Gentle man who had just sat down put the question on grounds which it was difficult to notice, but impossible to avoid. The Hon. Gentleman had stated that if this Bill were passed there was a danger of a loss of the favour of the Most High. In the course of his observations he had allowed that the remarks of the Honourable Member for Oxford had shown that the office of magistrates was filled by Jews. He had himself stated, that in his own county the office of high sheriff was held by a Jew. These offices were of the utmost importance, and if the Hon. Gentleman did hold these opinions, he ought to have brought in a Bill to prevent Jews from holding any offices whatever. But if such a Bill had been passed, he would have asserted that offices were only to be held by members of the Church of England. That was going on the narrowest grounds of in tolerance ; grouuds, to which, as a Member of that House, he could never consent.—( Hear, hear.) The House of Lords, by the decision of 1828, had declared that Jews might be safely admitted to the offices to which this Bill gave them a right. By the solemn decision in 1845 of the same House that declaration had been confirmed. And so far from losing the blessing of the Most High, by admitting the Jews to these offices, they were doing away with religious rancour and dif ference, and if this were promoting the cause of charity, it was the most essential means of securing the blessing of God. So long as Jews fulfilled every duty of British subjects, they were entitled to the same honours and advantages as other subjects. The Hon. Member for Oxford had stated that the Jews felt that they were a nation; but it should be recollected, that so long as those Jews were contributors to the revenue, they were members of the community of this country. The Right Hon. Gentleman reminded him of a remark of one whom he would not say was the fairest evidence, Dugald Stewart. Dugald Stewart had compared the University of Oxford to a ship moored in a running stream, and by which the rapidity of the stream was to be measured. The Hon. Gentleman was moored in the stream, and so he was letting opportunities pass by. The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Newark, whose assistance was not rendered in this debate, had declared, in one of those speeches in favour of posi tions which he was so well able to maintain, that no line of demarcation could be drawn between the admission of Jews to seats in Parliament and the highest offices ; and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in his speech in reply to his Hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Macaulay), had asserted that Jews could not be excluded from seats in Parliament, any more than any other sect.—(Cheers. ) He was not one of those who were so credulous as to suppose that the Jews will not aim at higher privileges than were be stowed by this Bill. He presented a petition some time ago from a Jewish community, in which it was stated that they would be glad to have this measure, but that they would not give up one jot of their claims to higher privileges. He (Lord John Russell) agreed with them and with the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Newark, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the only principle upon which they agreed to this Bill was, that it would lead to the admission of Jews to higher privileges. He believed that the religious belief of a Jew would not interfere with the discharge of his duty. His Hon. Friend opposite brought forward rather a singular autho rity—not for him (Lord J. Russell) or any Hon. Gentleman on his side of the House to quote—but a singular authority for him (Sir R. Inglis), Dr. Arnold. Everybody knew that Dr. Arnold had an opinion which he thought a benevolent, pro visionary, theory, that they could unite in one religious and political community, that they could have a State with a large comprehension of religious differences, which would be animated by one generous religious belief ; but for that purpose he pro posed that all Christians, Roman Catholics, and Dissenters of every kind, should be admitted into his nation of equality, which he proposed should supersede their present imperfect in stitutions. Did his Hen. Friend imagine that there could be no kind of sympathy created between Jews and Christians ? Why did he take the benefit of Dr. Arnold's opinion with regard to the Jews only? Let him go the whole way, or let him not quote Dr. Arnold. He would not have it quoted solely for the Jews. For these reasons he (Lord John Russell) would give his hearty assent to the present Bill, though at the same time he found fault with it because it was not comprehensive enough. He held it as a step to further measures that would tend to extend the charitable feelings by which the members of this community ought to be united, and he would heartily give his vote, not only to this measure, but to any other measure which the Chancellor of the Exchequer introduced, by which the Jews would b- admitted to all civil offices.—( Cheers. ) Mr. TRELAWNEY made a few observations in favour of the Bill, which were scarcely audible in the gallery. Mr. M. MILNES condemned the continuation of the preju dice that at present existed against the Jews. He knew the effect which it had in Prussia, where the animosity existing towards them was only to be equalled by the animosity existing between the blacks and whites in the United States He thought that they ought to extend the privileges and the rights of the Jewish creed as far as possible, without injury to the State, and he would, accordingly, vote for the mea.ure. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion Against it Majority in favour of the motion —Bo The Bill was then read a second time and ordered to be committed. POOR-LAW AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL. Upon the motion that the House do go into Committee on the Poor-law Amendment (Scotland) Bill, Mr. LOCKHART said he hoped this Bill would not be pro ceeded with. He was very anxious that it should be postponed for a few days, say a fortnight, as the people of Scotland were under the imp ress i on t h at the Bill would not b e at all suited to the country. He could assure the House that in many parts of Scotland there were a great number of Irish and English located, who had found their way into those places, and had obtained a location that they were not entitled to, and therefore It would not be fair that the parishes in which those people resided should be taxed for their support. Altogether the Bill, in its present state, differed so much from its original form that time ought to be given to consider it. After a few further observations, which were totally inaudible in the gallery, the Hon. Member concluded by saying that though he had at S rst intended to move t h e postponement of the House going into Committee on this Bill for a fortnight, yet, upon a more mature consideration of the question, he would withdraw the motion. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD defended the Irish la bourers resident in England, and contended that they would never have come to that country but they were wanted as artisans and labourers. Sir J. GRAHAM said he would reserve any observations he had to make upon this discussion until the House went into Committee on the Bill. After a few words from Mr. P. M. STEWART, the House went into Committee on the Bill. Sir J. GRAHAM said he was a party to recommending the introduction of the clause in this Bill in reference to the settle ment question. In respect to vagrants he begged to say that no alteration whatever had been made in the existing law in regard to them, and therefore his Hon. Friend near him had been mistaken in saying that the Bill would have an injurious effect in reference to vagrants. And then, as to the period of settlement, that had been extended from three to five years. Mr. P. M. STEWART said he objected to the adoption of such a principle, as he considered that any Member had an in disputable right to speak to the question, and oppose it if he chose, prior to the Speaker leaving the chair. The House having gone into Committee, Sir J. GRAHAM, on the 73rd clause being put by the Chair man, said that as he had been a party to the recommendation of that clause in the Bill which referred to the right of settle ment, he should support it in its present stage, as well as en a former occasion he did its introduction. With respect to va grants, he begged to say that no alteration whatever had been made since the measure was first presented to the House, and therefore the complaint made by his Hon. Friend the Member for Lanarkshire (Mr. Lockhart) was unfounded and uncalled for. His Hon. Friend was also mistaken in his statements re specting the hardship, implied by the change which the pro posed law of settlement effected over the former, the fact being, that the present provision would extend the claim to settlement from three to five years. Mr. P. M. STEWART said he could not help thinking that the Scotch Members had been treated very uncourteously. Almost every one of them had urged the postponement of the measure, at least until another session. All their requests had, however, been treated with disregard, till at length a motion was suddenly brought forward by an Hon. Member, who had previously supported the Bill, to retard it for a fortnight. if the Hon. Member for Lanarkshire had pressed his motion, he should have opposed it, as it was not upon an un important provision, nor for such an insignificant delay that a stand should have been made by those who failed to oppose the obnoxious principles of the Bill. Mr. HENLEY wished to osk his Learned Friend the Ad. vocate- General a question respecting the provision of the 73d clause—viz., What was the meaning of the medical certificate there mentioned, and whether the Sessions Court of Scotland was the soul and conscience of the Scotch doctors? The ADVOCATE-GENERAL replied that the provision bad reference to the issue of the medican certificate alone, and was not to be found in any other part of the Bill, or applicable to any other subject. Sir E. COLBROOKE thought that either the law of set tlement in England, or that now proposed for Scotland, must be erroneous, as the Government measure was totally different from the existing law in this country. The Scotch, as native occupiers, but above all as rate-payers, and the Irish and English settlers, had equally a right to complain of the in justice comprehended and threatened in the measure, and for his part he regarded all its provisions unfavourably. Sir GEORGE CLERK controverted the statement that the people of Scotland were opposed to this measure. On the contrary, it was his firm belief, that they were universally in favour of it, and regarded it as it really was, a Bill calculated to be of great benefit to every class of the community. Mr. DUNCAN would have supported the Member for Lanark, had he pressed his motion to a division, in order to give the people of Scotland an opportunity of forming and expressing an opinion on the measure, but as his Hon. Friend had declined to take that course, he had only to support a clause which he regarded as useful and beneficial. Mr. Darby supported, and Mr. P. M. Stewart and Sir W. Somerville opposed it. Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that, after what fell from the Lord Advocate, he would not press that part of his amendment which related to the province in which the party was born, but he would move the remaining part, " that no person shall be so removed, if by sea, save in a vessel affording sufficient cover ing and protection." . . . Lord DUNCAN was very glad to see the way in which the discussion had proceeded. He hoped that the inhabitants of the three kingdoms would be treated on a perfect equality. The clause, as amended, was then agreed to. Clause 74 was then proposed. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD objected to the clause altogether. They had no such power in Ireland as that which was empowered by this clause. And he did not see why it should be given in Scotland and England, when it was with held in Ireland. As the feeling of the House, however, appeared to be against him he would not press it to a division. The remaining clauses of the Bill were then agreed to. On the motion of the LORD ADVOCATE, the following ad ditional clauses were inserted in the Bill—" That in estimating the annual value of lands and heritages, the same shall be taken to be the rent at which, one year with another, such lands and heritages might, in their actual state, be reasonably expected to let, from year to year, under deduction of the probable annual average cost of the repair, insurance, and other expenses, if any, necessary to maintain such heritages in their actual state, and all rates. taxes, and public charges payable in respect of the same. Provided that no mine or quarry shall be assessed unless it has been worked during some part of the year preceding tha day on which the assessment may be ordered to be levied. That no person shall be liable to be assessed in any parish or combination, on his means and substance, unless the estimated annual value thereof in whole shall exceed 301. That clergy men shall be liable to be assessed for the poor in respect of their stipends. That in all cases in which, by the provisions of this Act, notice or intimation is required to be given with out prescribing the particular form of the notice, or the manner in which the same is to be given, it shall be lawful for the Board of Supervision, from time to time, to fix the form of such notice or intimation, and the manner in which the same is to be given." Mr. SMOLLETT moved the insertion of the following clause after. clause 36—" That where the one-half of any assessment is imposed on the owners, and the other half en the tenants or occup ants of lands and heritages, it shall be lawful ftir the Parochial Board, with the concurrence of the Board of Supervision, to determine and direct that the lands and heritages may be distinguished into two or more separate classes, according to the Pu r p oses f or w hi c h suc h l an d s are use d and occupied, and to fi x such rate of assessment upon the tenants or occupants o f each class respectively, as to such boards may seem just a n d equitable. The clause went through the different stages, and was agreed to without opposition. Lord DUNCAN proposed that the board of supervision should have power to unite two parishes, whenever such parishes should think it expedient to Le combined for the mere effectual management of the poor. The clause was agreed to. Lord DUNCAN inquired whether the revenues arising from harbours were to he assessed to the poor-rates? The LORD-ADVOCATE said he had not yet perused the Harbour Act, and was not prepared to give an answer. Clause 16 was then agreed to with amendments. The further consideration of the Bill was postponed till twelve to-day, the Chairman was ordered to report progress, and the House resumed. BILLS OF EXCHANGE. In the absence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir J. GRAHAM moved the third reading of the Bills of Ex change Bill. Mr. MILNER GIBSON said that in 1839 an alteration of the usury laws took place, which exempted all bills of exchange not having twelve months to run, and all sums of money not exceeding 101. from the effect of the usury laws. His object was to repeal the restriction which was contained in the Act of 1839. It was necessary for the public adva nta g e that n o restriction should b e placed on the pow er of borrowing money on landed property. The opinion of Sir Samuel Ro mill y was, th at laws against usury were very injurious to the landed interest, because it compelled land owners to borrow money from illegal sources. Sir Edward Sugden said he considered those l aws h ad been decidedly inimical to the public interest. He was quite s ure that the continuance of the Bill any longer, instead of being a pro tection, would operate most injuriously to the landed interest. In times when money was scarce many valuable and important improvements in land w ould be lost to t hese proprietors if this restriction on the interest of money was preserved. He thought money should be fr ee, and that no restrictio n should be imposed on the rate of interest that should be charged. He moved that the clause be added to the 1111. Mr. WILLIAMS objected to the clause. He thought a re striction on usurers was a necessary and salutary arrangement. many instances poor Were the not r estricted by law, in tradesmen and and small shopkeepers would be victimised by un principled moneylenders , leading to bankr uptcy and ruin. Usurious interest had been the . curse of all t h e nations of the world. It was denounced in Scripture. — (lroni c al cr i es o f Hear, hear.") Perhaps that was no authority with Hon. Gentlemen, but it was with him. He knew of instances in which needy tradesmen had been mulcted by money -lenders of 60 per cent. for the use Pars, and He objected to the Bill being extended to five years, hoped that the Right Hon. Gentleman would limit the Bill to one year. If he did not, he (Mr. Williams) should certa'nly move that it d o not pass. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER differed with both Gentlem en who had s p oke n , and a dh ere d it was before the to the Bill as House. With out expressing any opinion as to the advantages or dis advantages of abolishing altogether a fixed rate of legal inte rest ; for the reasons which I have stated to this Howe I hope the House will agree with me in thinkin g it wise to agree to enough to prevent any doubt as to t h e provisions of the Bill for the limited period I hav e mentioned. The period was long continuance of the Act. Ho would not enter into the ques tion whether or not landed proprietors should not borrow mo ney on the same terms as on other property which was not real. He would not discuss the question as to the propriety or impropriety of continuing the usury laws. H e thought that question was settle d. He did not believe that the argu ment of the Hon. Memb er for Coventr y hail any wei g ht, nor that the House attached an y im p ortance to it ; at all events , it had no bearing on this case. A high rate of interest had been deprecated, but th e annals of this count y would furnish numerous instances where men had been saved from ruin by having the opportunity of obtaining money ev en at a high rate of interest, and being th us enabled to keep up their credit. Mr. F. BARING had no wish to endanger th e Bill , but he thought that the suggestion of his Hon. Friend deserved at tention. He thought there ought to be a revision of the Bill in a future session, and that a Committee should be appointed to inquire into the effect of the usury laws on the landed inte rest, and he hoped that, if that assurance were given, his Hon. Friend would withdraw his motion. The Chancellor of the Exchequer did not seem to know what the state of the law was. If this Bill did not pass,• the Usury Act would apply to 7 all bills of snore than three or six months date, so that, al- ! though the Bank Charter Act was only a temporary one in its general provisions, it was in effect a per manent one in r_•spect to this particular.—( Hear. ) The Honourable Gentleman quoted from the evidence given before several Committees to show that the repeal of the usury laws had had a most beneficial effect. He did not understand, therefore, why the Chancellor of the Exchequer hesitated to make this a permanent measure. They had had the best evi dence that it worked well for eleven years. He could not under stand why men should be prevented from dealing with their money as with any other property. He regretted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer thought it necessary to render the Act merely one of continuation. If his Honourable Friend would not consent to withdraw his motion upon the expectation of a Committee next year, he would vote with him. Sir R. PEEL would have no objection to the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the operation of the law as regarded the land. He did not know but it might appear that the land itself would be benefited by being placed in the same condition as other property. In the meantime, he thought that there could be no objections to the continuance of this Bill for five years. Mr. WARBURTON said that his Hon. Friend had reason to be satisfied with the result of his motion, as it elicited from all aides such satisfactory testimony. There could be no doubt of the good working of the Act. Mr. V. SMITH said, as the Right Hon. Baronet intended to appoint a Committee on the subject during the next session of Parliament, he should only hope that it might meet the general wish. He hoped the Hon. Member for Coventry (Mr. Williams) would be upon it. Mr. HUTT was satisfied with the explanation which the Government had given to the House, and congratulated the Hon Member for Manchester on the success of his motion. Mr. MUNTZ hoped to see the usury laws abolished. Mr. GIBSON then withdrew his motion. After a few words from Mr. WILLIAMS, the Bill was read a third time and passed. THE JURORS' BOOKS (IRELAND) BILL. This Bill was read a second time. NAVAL MEDICAL SUPPLEMENTAL FUND SOCIETY BILL. On the order of the day for the second reading of this Bill, Mr. WARBURTON complained of the manner in which the funds had been managed, and suggested that' the Bill should be referred to a Committee up stairs for inquiry, with a view to a redress of this grievance. If this were acceded to he should not oppose the second reading. After a few words from Mr. CORRY, who acceded to the suggestions of the Hon. Member for Kendal, the Bill was or dered to be read a second time. The Physic and Surgery Bill, and the College of Physicians and Surgeons Bill were by Sir JANIES GRAHAM deferred till to-morrow. The second reading of the Stock in Trade Bill was postponed till Thursday. THE GRAND JURY PRESENTMENTS (DUBLIN) BILL. The House then went into Committee on the above Bill. The whole of the clauses were agreed to, and the House having resumed, the Chairman reported accordingly. The report was ordered to be received to-morrow. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. ROTHWELL PRISON BILL. The report on this Bill was brought up, and ordered to be engrossed. BONDED CORN BILL. The House then went into Committee on this Bill. On the first clause being put, Mr. M. GIBSON remarked that the object of the Bill was to continue an Act which enabled the owners of foreign vessels to victual their ships out of bond, or free of duty, and as the ex tension of railways was likely to diminish the coasting trade very seriously, he trusted Government would take into their consideration the propriety of extending the same privilege to coasting traders. The whole of the clauses were agreed to, and the House having resumed, the report was ordered to be brought up to-morrow. THE EXCISE DUTIES BILL (CHANNEL ISLANDS.) The House then went into Committee upon this Bill. The clauses were gone through. The House resumed, and the report was ordered to be brought up to-morrow (this day). The Unclaimed Rock and Dividends Bill was then read a third time and passed. The Criminal Jurisdiction of Assistant Barristers Bill (Ire land) was read a third time and passed. The Bail in Error Bill was then read a third time. On the order of the day for the third reading of the Lunatic Asylum Bill, Sir R. FERGUSON objected to the mode of inspection, and suggested that some improvement ought to be made in this particular. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied, and the Bill was read a third time and passed. The report on the Drainage ( Ireland) Bill was brought up and received. TAXING MASTER COURT OF CHANCERY (IRE LAND) BILL. On the order of the day for' the second reading of this Bill, Sir R. FERGUSON suggested that the Bill should be de ferred to give time for inquiry into its merits. Mr. T. B. C. SMITH said that he bad been requested by the trustees in Ireland to introduce the Bill, for such was the accumulation of business in the Court of Chancery there, that this Bill was absolutely necessary to enable them to get through it. He could not, therefore, think of deferring it until an other session. The Bill was then read a second time. The Masters and Workmen's Bill went through Committee. On the motion that the Merchant Seamen's Bill be read a third time, Sir C. NAPIER objected to the Bill, because he did not consider that it contained one single provision against the per nicious and nefarious practice of the crimps. The Gallant Officer concluded by urging on the Government the propriety of postponing the measure. Sir G. COCKBURN denied that the Bill was inefficient to prevent the iniquities of the crimps. It had been introduced after mature deliberation, with the express purpose of remov ing them, but as the gallant officer appeared disposed to im pede it as virulently as he could, under the pretence of bene fitting the sailor, he (Sir G. Cockburn) was almost tempte3 to throw it up altogether. Sir C. NAPIER threatened to count the House if the Bill were persevered in, when On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER, the third reading of the Bill was adjourned till to-morrow (this day). The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter-past One o'clock. Sir C. NAPIER 4aid ho would divide the House on the roctic), - i that the Bill do rasi. Strairs were ord.red to withdraw, but no tot.k took pl.lec, and the Bill paged. CAMBRIDGE ELECTION. The SOLICITOit-GEN o,:k the oaths and his seat for Cambt idge 'FISHERIES (IRELAND) i ILL. Sir THONI A S 1 , 11 EAI A TL E moved the order of the thy for the House 2oirig into Committee on . the Fisheries (Ireland) Bill. The diffio - ent clauses were agreed to after a short discussion, and the rei.ort was ordered to he received to- morrow at twelve. The sitting at lia:f-p.,st :our wa, suspended till five o'clock The Trouie resumed at Five o'clock. DUDDESION AND NECIIELLS IMPROVEMENT BILL Sir T. TROUIPIIDGE brought up the report on thin GRAVESEND AND ROCHESTER RAILWAY BILL. On the mmioo of Mr. KENIBLE, the Gravesend and Rochester Railway 'fill vta.7: read a third time and passed. LUNATICS ;ALL. —SMOKE PROHIBITION BILL. Mr. C:t PPS presented a petition from London against the Lunatics all; also a petition from the sugar refiners of the metropolis against the Smoke Prohibition Bill. COMPENSATION. Mr. 'VILLIER S presented a petition from Captain Charles Stewart, of Nova Scotia, claiming compensation for services rendered on board an E tat Indian transport ship, by which above 300 persi - ins' lives were saved. The petitioner had applied to several Governments, but they regretted that they had no funds at disposal to be applied in such a case. He now prayed the Government to consider the matter contained in his petition. GRIEVANCES IN NEW SOUTH WALES. Mr. DUNCAN presented a petition, signed by 115 stock hollers in the town and township of Boyd, in New South Wales, complaining of the misappropriation of the funds raised by a tax of 3d. per head on cattle, and claiming redress. SC "OOL OF DESIGN, SO lIERSE P-HOUSE. Mr. WILMA NIS presented a petition from the senior stu dents in the School of Design, Somerset-house, complaining of gross mismanagement in the funds of that school. As he meant, on Monday next, to found a motion on the petition, he now moved that it be printed.—Agreed to. BANGOR AND ST. ASAPH. . Sir R. H. INGLIS presented a petition from some place in Wal s attainst tb union of the sees of Bangor and St. Asaph. TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY. he AT MIN EY-GENERAL gave notice that tn. morrow he should move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law respecting the testamentary dispo.,ition of property in the public funds, and also to authorise the repayment of stock by power of at torhey RAILWAY MONOPOLY. Mr. M. GIBSON said It had be. , n mentioned that there was a cluse in the Manch-ster and Liverpool Railway Bill, which it IA as desirable to remove. He begged to say that he thought the clause vas wholly unprecedented, inasmuch as it gave all rail.vays the power of selling themselves to this Company, which would create a monopoly. He wished to know if the Government was prepared to propose a Bill which would re move this objectionable power, which had been foisted into Acts of Parliament. Sir GEORGE CLERK said the subject was one of great importance. The clan , e was certainly of a very extraordinary nature, and did, as the Him. Gentleman said, enable the railway in - quettion to obtain a monopoly of every railway in the c .uniry. The clause passed without opposition, thongh entirely contrary to the report of the Board of Trade, which entirely discountenanced such railway monopoly, as being injurious to the interests of the public. He was now prepared to tiring in a Bill for this object, that, in stead of thos, powers which railway companies now possessed, they should not be allowed to lease, unless the Act specified the particular line to which they should be entitled to lease. Mr. BROTH ERTON hoped the standing orders would be susprn lcd to enable that Bill to pass this session. Mr. RAHN RD expressed his approbation of the Bill. TEN ANTS' COMPENSATION BiLP. (IRELAND.) In answer to a que lion from Mr. S. CRAWFORD, Sir R. PEEL said that it could not be expected now that the Bill could pasi so as to receive the royal assent this session. FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT. Mr. M. MILNES asked for certain returns respecting the Foreign Jurisdiction Sir It. PEEL said, that the same question had been asked earlier in the sessions, and he then answered, that as only a portion of the returns had been made it would be better to wait till they had all been received. As yet they had not re ceived them all, and he suggested that it would be as well to wait till they were ready, when he would have no objection to their return. THE WEST INDIES. Mr. HALVES a-ked for certain returns relative to the West Indies, the exact nature of which did not reach the gallery. Mr. HOPE said he had no objection to produce the report, which contained a very elaborate statistical statement, but, with respect to the evidence, it was so very voluminous, that he had an objection to its production. The lion. Mcmber, however, was at perfect liberty to search over the evidence and documents for any information he might require. THE TREATY WITH SPAIN. Lord J. RUSSELL inquired if any answer had been received from the Duke of Sotomayor, in answer to the letter of Lord Aberdeen, on the subject of the Spanish duties; and whether there would be any objection to lay any answer on the table that mi-iht be received. Sir ROBERT PEEL said as yet no answer had been re ceived from the Duke of Sotomayor in reference to the letter of the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. He could not undertake to say what would be done by the Spanish Minister, but he (Sir R. Peel) apprehended, in the event of an answer being given, there would be no difficulty•in laying it on the table. NEW ZEALAND. Sir R. INGLIS said he had a question to ask, in reference to a subject of general interest. It was in reference to N Zealand. He wished to know whether any arrangement had been made by the Noble and Learned Member for Liskeard ( Mr. C. Buller), in respect of his motion for to-morrow even ing, with the other six lion. Gentlemen who had motions on the paper ? The Hon. and Learned Gentleman's motion was on New Zealand, and there were six other Gentlemen whose mo tions had precedence. Mr. J. A. SMITH suggested Monday for the motion on New Zealand. Sir 11. PEEL said he was willing to set aside Monday for the discussion in question ; as for the other six Gentlemen, he would leave them to settle the order of their motions among themselves. The orders of the dzy were then gone into. SMOKE PROHIBITION BILL, The further consideration of the Smoke Prohibition Bill was post ponvd till to- ine:rrow. DEATH BY ACCIDENT COMPENSATION BILL. This Bill was read a second time. CORONER'S (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. Sergeant MURPHY hoped this' Bill would not he pressed on, as he believed there would be a great deal of opposi tion to it. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said it would not come on until after the other orders of the day. After a few words, it was agreed upon to postpone the Bill till Friday. NEW ZEALAND. Mr. J. ABEL SMITH wi.hed to give notice for the Honourable Member for Liskeard that he would, on Monday, move the following resolution :—" That this House deplores the prospect of affairs in New Zealand, and that that pros pect is much aggravated by the want of any evidence of change in that policy which brought about the disastrous re sults that occurred there. JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL. Sir R. PEEL said he had been requested to prevent a peti tion in favour of a Bill, the second reading of which he was about to move. 'I he petition was signed by Sir Moses Montefiore, by two of the Mcssrs. Rothschilds, Mr. 1). Salo mons, and others; they did not address the House in their in. dividual capacity, but as members of a committee from a depu tation of the British Jews on behalf of selves and convo cation. They stated that they were gratified to find that a Bill had been sent down from the House of Lords, admitting the Jews to municipal offices, and praying that that Bill might be passed into a law.—( Herr, hear. ) The petition was ordered to lie on the table. NEW ZEALAND. Mr. AGLIONBY— Sir, I wish to put a question to the Hon. the Under Secretary for the Colonies, a plain, distinct, question, which requires a plain answer. With reference to the painful disasters that have recently occurred in New Zealand, I want to ask the Hon. Gentleman whether that disaster did not occur in the northern part of the island, 400 miles distant from the settlement of the New Zealand Corns pany, and whether that portion of the island is not under the su pervision of the Church Company? Mr HOPE said, that with respect to the supervision of the Church Missionary Society, the Bay of Islands was that on which they had been originally settled, but it became the resort of whalers and runaway convicts, and thus the Bay became the worst portion of the whole island. Mr. AGLIONBY said that the Hon. Gentleman had for gotten to answer one part of his question, that which asked him if he was aware that the New Zealand Company had no settlement in the Bay of Islands. But he cared not whether the Hon. the Under Secretary answered the question or not, for the fact was so. THE JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL. Mr. BARING presented a petition from Portsmouth in fa vour of the Jewish Disabilities Bill. Sir R. PEEL said that he was about to call the attention of the House to a Bill which had been sent to that House from the other branch of the Legislature, and which had for its object the removal of all the obstacles to the admission of Jews to municipal corporations. The Bill had received the almost unanimous support of their Lordships' House, and he trusted that he would be enabled so to state the objects of the measure to the House as to induce Honourable Members to give it in an equal degree their support and concurrence. The object of the Bill, as he had already stated, was to remove all impediments of all kinds to the admission of Jews to offices of trust or emolument connected with municipal corporations. And first he would state to the House what the impediments to the admission of Jews were. Those impediments existed in consequence of the enactment passed in the year 1820, for the purpose of repealing the former Acts, and substituting in their room a declaration, to be made in lieu of the sacramental test. With regard, then, to the qualification necessary to give appointment to municipal offices, they were, as the law at present stood, called on to make this declaration. With regard to the declaration which had been substituted for the sacramental tests, serious doubts were entertained as to the construction which should be put upon it, and he believed that it was held by the Court of Queen's Bench that it did not make it compulsory on Jews to take the oaths of office. But on an a pplication to the judges of the Exchequer Chamber that decis sion was reversed, and the declaration must be made previous or subsequent to their admission to office. It rested therefore with the coporate bodies whether this is made before or after the election. He thought that in several places—in Ports mouth for instance, there was a Jew who filled one of the prin cipal corporate offices without making the declaration. This, however, was covered by the Annual Indemnity Bill. In South am ~ton there was, he believed, a case of a similar kind. The object of the present Bill was to introduce an uniform regulation with respect to the admission of Jews to corporate and other offices. In re spect to the ffiee of county magistrate, and deputy-lieutenant, there was no practical difficulty in the case of a Jew filling either of those offices. During the last three or four years several individuals of that persuasion—Mr. Rossiter, Sir Moses Montefiore—.had filled those situations. He had also known, in the case of the magistracy, that in the county of Devon there were several persons of that religion filling the office of magistrate, and the law saw no practical difficulty in the way of appointment. In the case of the office of high sheriff, also, a Jew was eligible by law. Nay, further, the Jew was com pelled to serve tl e office of sheriff.—( Hear.) The Jew was unable to shield himself from performing the onerous and frequently expensive office of sheriff. The Privy Council cer tified tl e return to the Queen, and her Majesty generally ra tified tl:e appointment cf the gentleman who stood first on the list to the office of sheriff. Her Majesty's prerogative had been exercised in favour of the Jew to the office of sheriff of a county, and his attempt to excuse himself from the office had been overruled. There existed no doubt that the Jew was eligible to fulfil the office of sheriff for a county or a city. Mr. Salomons had been elected to perform the office of sheriff for Middlesex. The doubt arose, whether or not the declara tion must not be taken either previously to or upon the accept ance of office. In the year 1835, Parliament altered the law in that respect, and expressly exempted the office of sheriff from the provisions of the Act of 1828, and permitted him to exercise the office of sheriff without requiring him to PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS. NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE BILL OFFICE. WEDNESDAY, JULY 16. _ _ South Eastern Railway (Branch to Deal, and Extension of the South Eastern. Canterbury, Ramsgate and Margate Railway),—Report, Friday, July, IS. South Eastern Railway (Widening and Extension of the London and Greenwich •Railway),—Third reading, Friday, July 18. Brighton, Lewes, and Hastings Railway (Hastings. Rye, and Ashford Extension),—Report to be considered, Friday, July 18. Lynn and Dereham Railway,—Lords' amendments to be considered, Thursday, July 17. _ _ East Dereham and Norwich Railway,—Report, Friday, July 18. TREATIES WITH SPAIN. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—JULY 15. PAIRS. Archdall, Captain French, F. Bateson, Captain Rawdon, Colonel Balfour, J. M. Ellice, E., jun. Berkeley, Hon. G. Howard, Captain Bell, M. Standish, C. Bentinck, Lord G. Etwa.ll, R. Elakemore, R. Phillpotts, J. Burroughs H. N. Ord, W. Brownrigg, J. S. Elphinstone, H. Bruges, W. L. Hobhouse, Sir J. Carew, W. H. P. Clements, Lord Charteris, F. Worsley, Lord Chapman, A. Humphery, Alderman Copeland, Alderman Matheson, J. Campbell, Sir H. Bannerman. A. Cochrane, A. B. O'Brien, C. Coote, Sir Charles Redington, T. N. Courtenay, Lord Seymour, Lord Cole, Hon. H. Hallyburtou, Lord F. G. Darby, George Curteis, H. Douro, Marquis Byng, George Denison, E. B. Fox, Colonel Drummond, H. Train, G. Dodd, George Clive, E B. Emlyn, Lord Munts, G. F. Estcourt, T. G. Ward, H. J. Grimsditch, T. Philips, Mark Grimston, Lord Duncombe, T. Gore, Ormsby, jun. Bellew, R. M. Harris, Captain Troubridge, Sir T. Heathcote, Sir W. Ramsbottom, J. Hamilton, W. Buller, C. Hepburn, Sir T. Gisborne, T. Houldsworth, T. Collett, John Henniker, Lord Morison, General Holmes, Hon. W. A. Rice, E. R. Hodgson, R.l White, Samuel Hope, Sir John Napier, Sir C. llornby, John Ferguson, Colonel Irving, John Pendarves, E. W. Knight, F. W. Busfeild, W. Knight, H. G. Cayley, E. S. Knightley, Sir C. Archbold, R. Lyall, George Philips, G. R. I,efroy, A. Blake, M. Lindsay, H. H. Bell, J. Maxwell, Hon. J. Loch, J. Maunsell, T. P. Cavendish, Hon. G. Marton, George Milnes, R. M. Listowel, Lord Mackinnon, W. H. Crawford, W. S. Morgan, Charles Dundas, W. Northland, Viscount Ricardo, L. Oswald, Alexander Dalrymple, Captain Patten, J. W. Stewart, P. M. Sanderson, R. Scrope, P. Somerton, Lord Anson, Colonel Stanley, E. Murray, A. Thompson, Alderman O'Conor Don Trotter, John Christie, W. D. Vesey, Hon. T. Wall, C. B. Vivian, J. E. Grey, Sir G. Villiers, Lord Byng, G. S. FLANDERS MALL. BRUSSELS, JULY 14.—A letter from Bielefeli, near Dusseldorf, says, " All the workmen employed in the viaduct Schilderche struck yesterday; the same is the case on the whole line. They demand an increase of I fr. 50c. on their wages. This morning (the 11 th) they have committed serious excesses. The officers and the police have been ill-treated by them:; 2,000 workmen are encamped on the road, and are demolishing the works which are begun ; the drums are beating here and a battalion of Fusileers of the garrison is going to SchildErche with their arms loaded. Further particulars to- morrow." We have received a letter from the banks of the Rhine, which states that Prussia intends to employ its whole influence in the Congress at Carlsruhe, to support its actual tariff of Customs in the States of the Zollverein, under which tariff those states have ac quired an extension of their manufactures and a degree of prospe rity which none of them knew previously to the formation of the Zollverein. It is expected that Prussia will be out-voted in the Congress on the question of cotton thread. It is not very certain that it will succeed against the demands of many places which live by spinning thread by hand against the new petition of that spun by machinery in England. There is no reason to be surprised that no foreign diplomatic agent appears at Carlsruhe, for the conferences are secret, arid suspicion would attach to any step from without which should seem to be designed to influence the delegates of any of the confe derate States. TIIE HOOD TESTIMONIAL.—The Liverpool sub • scriptions for the destitute widow and children of the late lamented Thomas Hood, amounted, on Saturday evening, to 1171. 1, 1, t AY C 031311 'I (VESTERDAY.) HOUSE OF LORDS. THE oa - zrortn,:voncEs-rEn, AND WOLVEI3,- lIIIINICPTOW 12.13ITAVAY. The Committee on this Lill met to-day at Eleven o'Clock, Lord Auckland in the chair, when the case for the opposition was re sumed. In reference to a charge of fraud brought against certain parties connected with the Great Western scheme for introducing clauses after the withdrawal of the opposition in the Commons on the sub ject of tops, different to what originally appeared in the Bill, and which had been referred to in some conversation that took place yesterday, The CHAIRMAN intimated that the Committee bad decided that they would allow of evidence as to the alleged alterations in the toll clauses, and the manner in which those alterations would in• fluence the traffic of the railway, and the trade of the district, but they would not admit evidence as to the manner in which the clauses had been introduced into the Bi 1 in the Committee of the House of Commons. Mr. Sparrow, an extensive iron master, was called and examined b.; Mr. Sergeant WRANGIIAM.—The substance of his evidence was, that the iron masters of the district had been very much deceived. When the Thu was first introduced, the tol:s were then to be Id. per ton per mile, but after the preamble had been proved, an alte ration was surreptitiously introduced, changing it to 1 id. per ton per mile. This alteration would have a very serious effect in the mineral traffic of the district. He decidedly preferred the narrow to the broad gauge, as altogether better adopted to a mineral traffic. Mr. Philli24 Williams, iron master, corroborated the evidence of the previous witness. Lord REDESDALE objected to the Great Western scheme, as it went through a fox hunting country, which it would very much inconvenience, and that it did considerable injury to his property. lie had suggested another line by which all the difficulties he com plained of could be avoided. Mr. G. Griffiths, agent to the Messrs. Sturge, of Birmingham; Mr. Evers, irenmaster, of Cragley ; and Mr. King, of Amber_ court, near Stourbridge, were briefly examined as to the inferiority of the Oxford scheme over the Tring one to accommodate their respective localities. Mr. Greares, of Stratford-upon-Avon, deposed to the agricul tural traffic of the town and neighbourhood. He decidedly pre ferred the Tring scheme over the other. Mr. Cayles, of Banbury, was examined as to the trade and traffic of Banbury. He gave the statistics of the coals, corn, cattle, pigs, sheep, and groceries sold or consumed in that town and vicinity, the items of which we gave in the witness's examina tion before the Commons' Committee. Mr. Wall, of Worcester, was examined as to the accom:nodation that city would derive from either of the lines. He considered, upon the whole, the London and Birmingham scheme was superior to the other. This was not the opinion of the majority of the in. habitants, though it was that of a respectable minority. Mr. Berrowes, ironmaster, of Dudley, deposed to the illeol3. ve..ience of the break of gauge. He once Bent his goods to Bristol by the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway, but the delay and injury arising from transhipment at Gloucester had been so great, that he had been obliged to resort to his old mode of carriage —the canal. Mr. Waddington, deputy chairman of the Manchester and Birming ham Company, was examined at some length on the break of gauge and the transhipment of goods. He gave several instances which had come under his notice of the great delay, inconvenience, and expense that had arisen at Gloucester in the change of goods. He did not think any form of machine could remove the difficulty. The Committee then adjourned till to-morrow at eleven o'clock. wimmrxELD, Z'ONTEFIZACT, AND GOOLE LINE. The Committee re-assembled this:morning at eleven o'clock, and further evidence on the merits of the line was tendered by the promoters. Mr. Thompson, from the office of Sir John M`Neil, was called, and examined by Mr. WimirNs—He had had considerable ex perience in railways, and was at present engineer.in.chief to about seven lines in England, Scotland, and Ireland. He had carefully examined the ground over which this line was intended to be car ried, and he was decidedly of opinion that it was the best that could be selected. The working gradients were unexceptionable, for with 1 in 150, a straight line between the termini at Goole and Wake field would only be shorter than the proposed scheme by three. quarters of a mile. The schemes advocated by the adverse party were comparatively valueless, because they effected no communica tion with Pontefract. Mr. Fowler, C.E., and Mr. Thomas Stephenson, C.E., were gatisfied that the estimates for the construction of the line were sufficient. Mr. Thornton, contractor, was willing to execute a bond for the construction of the work at the estimates. Mr. Gibbs and Mr. Cubitt gave evidence corroborative •f the other engineers. Mr. Henry Hunt had taken the value of land required for the railway, and the intersectional damage for 11T, miles of the line, beginning at Wakefield, and his estimate was 29,000/. Mr. Durham had surveyed the remainder of the line, and his estimate amounted to 23,944/. Mr. Cottam, accountant, put in the traffic tables, which exhibited a revenue of 46,0181., and, deducting 40 per cent. for working expenses, left a clear profit to the promoters of i per cent. Dr. Buchanan, chairman of the Railway Company, Robert T. Milnes, Esq. (father of the Member for Pontefract), and Mr. Martin, land surveyor, were called to speak to the damage done to the residence of Mt. Smith (one of the opponents), which they valued at nothing. The latter witness declared that the railway could be only seen from the upper windows with a good telescope, and that only for a few yards. Mr. ALEXANDER then opened the case for the opposing pro ject, and contended that by the construction of twelve miles of railway from Brecon to Goole, at a cost of 105,000/., every ad vantage would be given to the district. The Learned Counsel then went with laborious minuteness into every part of the evidence adduced by the promoters, and promised that he should call counter evidence to show that the trade from Wakefield had been much exaggerated, and that Leeds, as an important town, was greatly superior. At the couclusion of his speech their Lordships adjourned. CORNWALL RAILWAY. Their Lordships met at eleven o'clock, the Earl of Ellenboreugh in the chair. The evidence of Mr. Thomas, the engineer, who gave testimony on the previous evening (mentioned in The Sun), was resumed. The evidence consisted of dry engineering details, which have been already given. Mr. Gurney, who wag examined yesterday, was re-called, and he stated that there were on the proposed Cornwall line 35 miles of railway having gradients more severe than I in 60. Mr. Gurney was cross-examined at considerable length, but nothing material was elicited. Mr. Randall, civil engineer, was next examined—Was engineer of the Birkenhead Docks, and constructed the bridge for the Hamoaze. Was of opinion that Captain Moersom's testimony re specting the time occupied in crossing the Hamoaze was not at all correct. Captain Moors= said it would occupy only a minute to shift the trains on the floating-bridge and shift them off again upon the rails on the other side. This he thought entirely fallacious. It must occupy from eight to twelve minutes. He did not air_ prove of this mode of crossing the Hamoaze at all, for he could not consider it at all practicable—he could not learn how it could be managed that the rails on the floating-bridge could in stormy weather be brought up to meet those upon the landing place, so that the - trains would run with facility and ease from the latter on the former, which was indispensable. His plan would be to construct a sort of dock on oach side of the Hamoaze, into which the floating-bridge might be brought ; by means of piles he would have a platform furmed over it, arid on this platform he would have the trains brought, so that they could by a mechanical contrivance be dropped down from the platform to the bridge. Mr. Bidder, engineer of several railways, gave evidence cor roborative of a great part of the above. Thought it would occupy half-an-hour in crossing the Hamoaze with the trains, with all the preparatory operations on both sides of the water. Never saw a line with such bad gradients as this. The ruling gradient on this line was the exception on other lines. A fifty -ton train could not be driven faster than fifteen miles an hour. The expense of working it would be double that of any other railroad. Mr. Locke, civil engineer, gave evidence adverse to the Corn wall line. Had never seen such a collection of bad gradients as that section presented. The curves were very acute, and the gra dients so steep in many places that ordinary railway speed could not be maintained without great danger. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH— Now, Mr. Locke, supposing the rate of speed to be thirty or thirty-five miles an hour, what gra dient do you consider should be exercised so as to prevent danger? Mr. Locke—l think when the gradient is more severe than 1 in 100 caution is necessary. Lord ELLENBOROUGH — And what curve is it that you think cau tion should be exercised at, supposing the rate of speed to be twenty.five or thirty miles ? Mr. Locke—Unless there be caution exercised, I think there is danger where the radius is less than a quarter of a mile. Mr. Robert Stephenson, engineer to the London and Birmingham Railway, corroborated the evidence given by Mr. Bidder. A line with such curves and gradients as those on the Cornwall line could not be worked with regularity or dispatch, even conveying but a light traffic. The expense in any case would be very great. The Committee adjourned at four o'clock till to.morrow morning THIS GLASGOW JUNCTION RAILWAY. The Committee assembled this morning at eleven o'clock, and proceeded to the consideration of the scheme which had been referred to them, the Earl of St. Germans in the chair. The Bill was opposed by the Harbour Trustees, Mr. Campbell, Lord of the Manor of a portion of Glasgow, and by the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. ANDEWS opened the case for the promoters. The object of the proposed line was to form a junction between the Edinburgh and Glasgow and the Glasgow and Ayr Railways. The length of the line was about a mile and a half, and proceeded for the greater length by means of a tunnel under the town of Glasgow, from the quay on the Clyde to the Edinburgh and Glasgow terminus. No injury would accrue to the house property, as: the tunnel was worked through freestone 50 feet beneath the level of the soil. The capital for carrying out the scheme was 150,0001., which would be amply sufficient for all the expenses, and would realise a very profitable return to the proprietors. There were no engineering difficulties to be encoun tered in the construction of the line with the exception of the tunnel, and tunnelling now-a-days had been brought to such great perfection, that engineers did not consider that it constituted any valid objection to the formation of a railway. Petitions from 19,000 of the inhabitants had been pre sented in favour of the line, and he felt satisfied he should be able to bring before the Committee such sufficient evidence as to the great benefit the line would confer on Glasgow and the country generally, that their Lordships would unhesitatingly re. commend its adoption. Mr. Phillips, magistrate and merchant of Leith, spoke as to:the traffic between Leith, Glasgow, and Greenock, and also as to pro visions coming from Belfast to Leith. The proposed junction would be of immense importance in facilitating the transmission of general traffic to its ultimate destination. Mr. Stoddart, late treasurer to the town-council of Edinburgh, deposed as to the effect of the tunnel going from the terminus of the Edinburgh and !Greenock Railway, and also as to the conve nience which the line of rails on the quay would afford for the transmission of traffic to the vessels in the harbour. Mr. Butrell, manufacturer at Dumfermline, proved the extent of the damask manufactures at Dumfermline, all of which would be transmitted for shipment by the proposed line. Mr. Archbold gave similar evidence as to the blanket and shawl manufactures. Mr. J. Wilson, of Dundyven, said that the iron trade in Scot.. land during the last fifteen or twenty years had been from 50,000 tons to 800,000 tons annually , bein g an increase of eightfold. There was also every prospect of its being still further increased. A con_ siderable traffic in coal also existed to Ireland and the West Indies. The proposed junction would be of great use in conveying iron and coal to the water side for exportation. Mr. Beaumont Neilson, civil engineer, and manager of the gas works at Glasgow, said he had seen the plans of the proposed junc tion railwa y, and considered that it would be convenient not only for the coal traffic to the harbour, but also for the general accom modation of the public ; and the laying down the rails on the quay was rather an advantage than otherwise. At the close of the examination of the last witness, the Com mittec adjourned till tomorrow at eleven. HOUSE OF COMMONS. GROUP X. DIRECT NORTHERN-- TARRINGDON STREET EXTENSION. The Committee ou these lines assembled today at Twelve o'clock, Viscount Sandon in the chair. The evidence to rebut the case of the Farringdon.street Extension was rezn. n ed by re ceiving that of Mr. Carpenter, who, under examinaticn by Mr. PAGET, s.:q , osed to being architect and surveyor, and having in that capacity ex. amlned and made plans of the proposed line, from Farringdon) street. lie thought several engineering difficu:ties presented themselves in the details of the project, and rendered it highly, objectionable. The evidence of this witness having closed the rebutting case of the London and York line, . _ Mr. WEBSTER, for the Farringdon-street Extension, called fresh evidence to support his project. Mr. Low, examined by Mr. WENSTER—IS Superintendent of Sewers; and after a careful inspection of the proposed line frost Farringdon-street, can state that its construction will not in the slightest degree injure the sewerage along which it passes. Mr. Reticle!, civil engineer, was recalled by the Committee to explain a discrepancy between his and Mr. Gibbs' estimates ; he adhered to his former evidence, to the accuracy of which he pledged himself. Mr. J. D. Paine, civil engineer, exaMined by Mr. NW, with a view to show a deviation from the datum time sufficient to gender their non-compliance with requirereents of the Act of Parliaenent fatal, mentioned errors in some places exceeding nine feet. Mr. WEas - rca urged that the alleged error existed at a distance of eighty-three feet from the extreme limits of the line, and there fore Mr. Nias had no locus slandi to oppose. The CIIAIRNIAN, after consultation with his coadjutors, decided that Mr. Nias must confine himself to the proof of error within the limits, and held that as to the particular point in question, the ob jection was valid. _ . _ ..... Mr. Biggs, a civil engineer, was then called, and confirmed the accuracy of Mr. Paine's evidence. Mr. A. Robinson, an architect and surveyor, under examination by Mr. NIAS, deposed to the injury which the line would entail on property in its vicinity, and in some points the value of land would be materially deteriorated. The evidence of this witness (the last to be examined by Mr. Nias) closed the proceedings of the day, and the Committee ad. journed shortly after Five o'clock. GROUP ZZ. MANCHESTER. AND ZZEDS. The Committee on this group, of which Mr. T. Duncombe is the chairman, met in No. ‘2 Committee-room this morning. Mr. ELLCOMBE briefly stated that the object of the Bill, which was unopposed, was to rai,e the sum of 350,000!., for improving the line, erecting warehouses, and for increasing their stock of carriages. _ . Hawkeshaw, the engineer cf the line, deposed to the neces. sity for increasing their capital for these objects. The fine had been in work for three or tour years, and the traffic had increased to such an extent as to render this increase of capital accessary. The Committee passed the preamble, and the clauses were agreed to. novroN AND LEIGH, XENYON AND LEIGH JUNCTION, LIVERPOOL AND MANCHES TER, AND GRAND JUNCTION RAILWAY COMPANIES' AMALGAMATION. Mr. TALooT stated that the object •f the Bill was to amalgamatO these lines. Mr. Booth, treasurer to the Leeds and Manchester Company, bore out the statements of the Learned Counsel. Mr. WitioNs then addressed the Committee on behalf of the merchants of Manchester, who petitioned against the amalgamation arid contended that it would create a monopoly too powerful to be competed with, and which could not fail to be injurious to the public, and called upon the Committee to reject the preamble. Mr. Birley, a merchant carrying on business at Manche ster, g ave evidence to the effect that no existing line would be able to corn. pete with it, and that it would be too long to be threatened by a new line. Mr. AUSTIN having replied, the room was cleared for a few cal notes. When the parties were admitted The CHAIRNIAN declared that it was the opinion of the Com mittee that the preamble of the Bill had been proved. The clauses with amendments were agreed to, end the Committee separated. CAMBRIDGE ELECTION. OFFICIAL DECLARATION OF THE POLL. WEDNESDAY„JULY 16.—This morning, at eleven o'clock, Mr. Bishop, the Mayor and Returning-efficer, proceeded to the Town-hall to open the will-books, and thence to the pub lic "hustings in Parker's-piece, whither Mr. Kelly was es corted by a very numerous assembly of his friends on horse and foot, with flying colours and bands of music. There were several carriages filled with ladies, and alto gether between 5,000 and 6,000 persons were gathered to gether on the spot. The MAYOR, addressing the electors, said it had become his duty to declare to them the state of the poll. He found that the number of votes polled were, for Mr. Kelly ... 746 Mr. Adair 72.9 Majority He therefore declared Fitzroy Kelly, Esq., her Majesty's So licitor. General, to have been duly elected to serve in Parlia ment for the borough of Cambridge. This announcement was received with deafening cheers. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL then came forward and said— Once more I appear before you to congratulate you on the success which your principles have achieved in the good tight which we have fought together. Once more have we achieved a victory.—(Cheers ) When last I met yoti here, and addressed you from these hustings, I called on you to tight the battle of the Constitution for yourselves and your country, and nobly and generously I must say have you fought that battle. At the same time I owe it to my own sense of what is fair and honourable, and to your own feel ings likewise, to do justice to my honourable opponent, by acknowledging frankly and fully the fair spirit in which he has opposed me throughout this contest.—(Hear, hear.) His character and his conduct have been such as to make me proud to call him friend.—(Cheers. ) We fought this battle fairly. In the absence of my lion. Friend I will say so ; but at the same time I will add, that we have taught him and his friends that wherever else their principles may prevail, that here in Cambridge they are sure of being feated. Although in this moment of triumph and mutual congratulation 1 cannot but repeat the regret which I feel that, although differing ffom them in no wise as to our general political principles, but solely on account. of my support to a certain measure brought into Parliament by the present Government, I have lost the support, on this occasion, of some former friends, and deeply do I regret that the views taken of this measure by them and others have alienated full many a honest Conservative vote to the great Conserva tive cause. Ido them the utmost justice of believing that they are conscientiously opposed to the Maynooth grant, because they believed it to involve a religious principle, to be objectionable on religious grounds, and to be subversive of the stability and power of the Established Church.—(Hear, hear.) I believe that they have entirely mistaken the object of this measure, and that they have misstated its conse quences. It is due to myself and to all those who have sup ported me in this contest, to state that we are satisfied this measure, which has caused unhappily such division amongst Conservatives, is not a religious but a political question, between the Government of the country and a large body of her Majesty's subjects. I would ask those who advocate free trade and Radicalism here, if free-trade prevailed, how could the national exigencies and engagements be met? How could the farmer get a remunerating price for his pro duce, and the labourer a remunerating price for his labour, if you reduce the value of the land by which they live, and throw the amount taken off into the hands of the manu facturers of the north of England ?—( hear, hear.) I appeal to the shopkeeders of the town of Cambridge, and I ask them to consider in what sort of a position they would find them selves if a measure were passed which would render, before long, the gentlemen of England unable to keep up their present high and honourable station, and their present liberal expenditure? And if free trade destroyed our Eng lish aristocracy, I ask you, gentlemen, what would become of the proud and ancient University which gives dignity to your town and adds greatly to its wealth and prosperity?— (Hear.) Once more, said the honourable gentleman, I thank you, and hid you for the present farewell.—(Cheers.) Captain PuncnAs, the chairman of the Solicitor-General's Committee proposed a vote of thanks to the Mayor, for the impartial manner in which he had discharged his duty throughout this election.—(A voice,—" Ay, it was a pur chased one !"—Laughter.) He would also take leave to say, that Mr. Adair, had conducted himself like a fine honourable, admirable English gentleman.—(Cheers.) Mr. Fisilmt seconded the motion, which was carried by acclamation, and briefly responded to by the Mayor, after which a procession was formed, which escorted the Solicitor- General out of the town and a short distance on the road to London, for which place the Hon. and Learned Gentleman immediately left Cambridge. The LEAGUE And the EMANCIPA TION OF INDUSTRY SOCIETY. TO THE COUNCIL OF THE ANTI-CORN LAW LEAGUZ. Office of the Society for the Emancipation of Industry, 15, Exeter Hall, July 15, 1845. Gentlemen,—liitherto I have not received any direct answer to my letters of the 3d and 28th of March last, nor have I heard from you any reason why it has been withheld. At length, however, I have had pointed out to me the following passage in your authorised lublication The League, of the sth of July, 1845 : " The Merchant's Son ' complains that the League have refused to enter into any discussion of the schemes of certain currency mongers ; we declined on the simple principle that their schemes, whether good or bad, are utterly indifferent to the great issue for which the League was constituted. The connexion between the currency question and free trade is not greater than between Tenterden Steeple and Goodwin Sands." It will be recollected by the public, if not by the Council of the League, that the questions put by the Committee of the Society for the Emancipation of In dustry pointed to an inconsistency in the public acts of members of the Council of the League ; and to the ope ration of a fixed price of gold as opposed to its market price in Bank of England paper—which fixed price, and not the corn 'law, will be found to have produced the pre sent depressed state of the industrious classes—an evil that any further reduction in the price of corn will only , aggravate, so long as that fixed price of gold exists. If free trade be " the great issue for which the League was constituted," why do its leaders support monopolies in money and banking ? , C a o s u n m c e i lm members the asprko f weshsettohe l r ay th c e lar eun o e n il a e cc f ou th n e t I am now requested by the Comtmtithteee that community to whose suppo r t o A f t t i h - e C i r orn p - r l i a n w e p l ie e s a , gu to e Anti-Corn-law League deliberately hold the opinion that the price of corn, or of any other commodity, and the currency in which that price is quoted, have no greater connexion than that " between Tenterden Steeple and Goodwin Sands ? " The Committee of the Society for the Emancipation of Industry, having in view the investigation of truth, and being in no way desirous of eliciting an incautious answer, beg to point out to the Council of the Anti.. Corn-law League that, should they reply that price, and the currency in which that price is quoted, have no re lation to each other, the public will probably have but little respect for their wisdom ; and, on the other hand, should the Council decline answering the question thus candidly put to them, the public will, in all probability, come to the conclusion, that either they are entirely ig norant of the subject upon which they assume to dic tate, or that they have some object in view which they dare not publicly avow. The reception which my former letter, sent to your office, has met with, compels me to adopt this course of addressing you through the public journals. I am, Gentlemen, your obedient servant, ALEX. WILSON, Hon. Secretary. - - - - - . Lord and Lady John Russell and family have left town for the season, for his Lordship's seat near Godalming. The Jesuits have established themselves and their schools, within the last few years, in and near the city of Dublin, in the following places, viz.—ln the magnificent house, late the residence of the Earl of Belvidere, in Great Denmark-street, fac.. ing Great George.street North, on the splendid chapel and ad. joining presbytery of St. Xavier, Upper Gardiner-street. In the school and adjoining monastery Margaret-place, North Circular Road ; and at Drumcondra House, purchased for a trifle ftom the new Corporation of Dublin, where they have a college for sionaries.—Cork Izawsiner. "lllit