The Sun. — London, England, 1847-06-19 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT ROUSE OF LORDS, June 18. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at Five o'clock. BILLS FROM TETE COMMONS. Several Bills were brought up and read a first time. COPYHOLD COMMISSION BILL. On the motion of Lord CAMPBELL this Bill was read a second time. TUIIS PIKES CONTINUANCE BILL. On the motion of the same NOBLE LORD this Bill was read a second time. GREAT BRITAIN STEAM-SHIP. The Earl of RODEN stated that the Great Britain steamship had been rim aground in the Bay of Dun drum, with'n s i g h t o f his 'own residence. Up to the prerelit time numerous unsuccessful efforts had been ma - ,!e, by means of breakwitter3, to preserve the vessel daring the storm, and through the exertions of Captain tlaxton, he hoped that that splendid vessel would be restored to its owners. He had been struck with the great services rendered by the use of faggots as a breakwater, and he wished to ask the Noble Lord at the head of the Admiralty whether any steps had been taken by ta3 Government with a view to ascertain ing the value of this kind of material as a breakwater? The Earl. tt AUCKLAND was understood to say that the Gyverninent had sent an officer to inspect the position of this vessel, and they had made an offer to the pro - pr:ietors of the use of a powerful steamer should it be mquired to aid in getting- the vessel off. BATHS AND .WASEHIOUSES. _ OY, the second reading of this ill being moved, 1.-rd MONTEAGLE wished to call the attention o, tlyeir Lordships to the importance of providing suitable :!commodation for the public in baths and washhouses. The Noble Lord also presented a petition suggesting the adoption of baths in evEry parish, and that they should be supported by rates. PEES AT ST. PAUL'S. Earl FITZIifLLIAII complained of the practice of e'iargin fees for viewing the cathedral of St. Paul's. He attended there yesterday, and a charge of 2d. was made upon him for inspecting the structure. He thought it was ttiO, time that the system was put an end to. MESSAGE FROM rim COMMONS. nestenp;ers from the Commons brought in several Bill's, which were ordered to lie on the table. MASTERS IN CHANCERY BILL. On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, the Masters in Chancery Bill and the Masters in Chancery Affidavit Office Bill were read a third time and passed. JUVENILE OFFENDERS' BILL. The Earl of DEVON moved the Committee on this Bill, and briefly entered into its details. Lord BROUGHAM thought that something must be done to remedy the present defective state of the law with respect to the punishment of juvenile offenders. There were many cases in which the services of a jury might be dispensed with, pirticularly in dealing with very young persons. He entirely approved of that part of the Bill which made parents responsible for the good conduct of their children. Lord DENMAN had long thought it expedient and necessary for the ends of justice that all petty cases s'muld be submitted to a jury, because he never could think that an Englishman should be tried without a jury; still the evils inherent in the mode of trying juvenile and petty- ',offences were great ; for instance, persons were tried fur stealing such things as eggs, stows, and game. They were incarcerated for some time before their trial, and when at last the time arrived juries considered that the parties had been suffi ciently punished ; and even when they were found guilty, the ju•lge could only inflict a fine of one shilling in consequence of the mishment which the prisoner had received. The consequence was, that petty offences were cemmitte I with impunity, and the lower classes, who were the persons guilty of them, were demoralised. He was compelled, theref,re, however reluctantly, to say that the jury might be dispensed with in such cases where a good and responsible tribunal could be obtained. He did not see any reason why any question which in volved expense should not be submitted to the tribunal over which his Noble and Learned Friend presided. If this Bill were then to go forward, he thought that some clauses should be inserted with a view to rendering the puni-hment available for the purpose. Then, again, there was a clause that required that imprisonment for three months; now, it was very well known that short i:nprisoninents did no good whatever. They often made thieves for life, and he therefore thought that the pun ishment should be more particularly specified, and that, moreover. there ought to be a clause to oblige restim Lion ; for, although the law required that the property should be restinred, yet it might, in a , variety of cases, not be forthcoming; and if the accused possessed the means, he ought to be compelled to make good the amount to the person who had lost it. For instance, take a case of forgery, i n which the proceeds of the fraud had been transmitted to the colonies, where the receiver might set up for a gen tleman on the results of successful villany. Who was to compel the restoration of that of which the original holder had been unjustly deprived, unless there was some elauae to oblige its realisation out of the property of the offender? A restitution clause ought, therefore, to be inserted to obtain that object. Lord BROUGHAM begged then to suggest that a I clause should be inserted in the Bill by which the offen ders should be made responsible, under the Insolvent Debtors' Act, for the amount which had been fraudu lently abstracted, as well as liable to the adjudication of the Criminal Court. _ _ Lord CAMPBELL was rejoiced that the Noble Lord opposite, as well as his N-ble and Learned Friend the Chief Justice, concurred in the principle of the Bill. Doubtless it might be greatly amended in Committee, bat it was a great point to hav;-)mQ(U3 a progress thus far. The Marquis of WESTMINSTER said, that it was intention to move some amendments in Committee on the Bill, having for their object the necessity of provid ing some general system of classification among the juvenile prisoners. The Ifouse then went into Committee on the Bill. Lord DENMAN thought there should be no distinc tion in the Bill with regard to the age of the offenders, though there ought to be with regard to the offence. If, however, it was the opini,n of their Lordships that there should be no amendment of this kind, he would not press it. After a short discussion , in which Lord Campbell, Lord Portman, Lord Donman, and the Earl of Devon took part, the amendment was withdrawn. The several clauses of the Bill were then, with some verbal amendments, agreed to. Their Lordships resumed, and the Chairman brought up the leport. - SOAP ALLOWANCES BILL. This Bill passed through Committee. STAGE CARRIAGES DUTIES BILL. This Bill also passed through Committee. BURGH POLICE (SCOTLAND) BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. Their Lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 18. Tho SPEAKEn took the Chair at Four o'clock. NEW MEMBER. The Hon. Fre4erick Leveson Gower took the oaths , and his seat for Derby. The Hon. Gentleman was in tcodueed by Mr. Strutt and Mr. W. Entwisle. LIMERICK DOCKS AND HARBOUR BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. EAST LANCASIIIRE RAILWAY BILL. Thil Bill, for making deviations in the East lanca shire Railway and the Rawtemitall Canal branch, was read a third time and passed. MANCHESTER, SHP.:FFIELD, AND LINCOLN SHIRE RAILWAY (ASHTON CANAL PUR CHASE). This BEI was read a third time and passed. REPORTS. The reports on the following Bills were brought up sand orciercd to lie on the table : Cheiter and Holyhead Railway Extension. Crowland and Cowbit Washes, &e., Drainage. 'Manchester Corporation Waterworks (Power to sell to Manchester and Salford Waterworks). THIRD READINGS, The following Bills were read a third time and pas led :—' Mar, chester, Sheffield, and Li nco l ns hi re R a il way. Norte :ern ounties Union Railway Deviation. York 'and North Midland Railway (Knottingley Branch). Mid:: ard Railway (Extension of the Nottingham and LinCcAln Branch at Lincoln). Ilidlandt Railway (Masbrough and Normanton StatiOn Eal argetnent). Paislay, Barrhea.d, and 'lariat Railway. Lincoln Town ,Rating. Limerick Docks and Harbour. Leeds Central Railway Station. • Guild Extension and Portsmouth and Fareham Railway. Mast of Fife Railway (Markineh Deviation). Edinburgh and Northern Railway, St. Andrew's and Newburgh Harbour, Branches, and Road Crossings (Newport Railway Extension). 'CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS. • T.Le reports on the following Bills were further con aidere.l and agreed to:— Belfast Improvement Caledonjan Railway (Edinburgh Station and Branches to,. Gratltoia," and to the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway), Clarence Railway, and Leeds and Thirsk Railway Amal gamation. eastern Union Railviay (Branch from Manningtree to Harwich). Exeter and Exmouth Railway. • Great Northern Railway (Devlationabetween Grantham and York). Inge rness Harbour and Navigation. Inveriless .Municipal and Police, & c. Leeds aid Thirslc Ii iilway(Eaglescliffe and Stilli ngton Extenst.n). Leeds an d Thirsk Railway (Branch from 1/11nierby t o .Northallertoe, Szo.) Ined 'and Think llailway (Harrogate and Pateley Branch, &c.) :Leicester Waterworks. :London (City) lurprovemuts. liathmines Improvement. Tam Vale Railway and Duel: (Deviations and Bideford end Southtman Branches). I",,ric and North Midland Railway (Hull Station and Branuhes). STOCKPORT MANORIAL TOLLS AND BRIDGES. On the motion for the third reading of this Bill, Mr. B. ESCOTT opposed the third reading; on the ground that the Bill would interfere with th e interest' of the licensed victuallers, who had been refused a hearing before the Committee on the Bill. Mr. TATTON EGERTON supported the third read ing, alleging that the inhabitants of Stockport were particularly anxious tl}attho Bill should pass. Tho Bill was tl ea third time. THE SUN, CHESTER' AND HOLYIIEAD RAILWAY EX TENSION. _ _ Mr. WARD moved that the evidence taken before the Committee be printed before the Bill was further pro ceeded with.—Agreed to. REGULATION OF PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. GREENE said, that in the absence of the Hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume), he begged to move the order of the day for the adjourned debate on the question, that it is expedient that the constitution and practice of all Committees on private Bills, in future sessions of Parliament, should be assimilated as nearly as may be to those of Committees on railway Bills; and that it be an instruction to the Committee of Revision of Stand ing Orders, to make provision accordingly. In doing this he could not but regret that the duty had not fallen into more able hands. But as he had nine years ago entered fully into the subject, and as he had participated in the construction of one of the first reports that had ever been made, he was anxious to see the recommendation which had been then thrown out. The House some time afterwards adopted the principle of placing Members on the Committee who had no interest in the places to which private Bills had reference; but it had not been commonly adopted, and it was now neeossary that some further regulations should be made. He did not think that Hon. Members, who were locally interested in aneePrivate Bills which came before them in their Committees, should be allowed to vote upon the decision of such Bills ; and he certainly thought that some change was needed for in the constitution of the Committees of the House of Commons. Mr. BERNAL thought that the motion ought not to have been brought forward in the absence of the Hon. Member for Montrose, whose offspring this motion really was. He was convinced from the enormous increase of private business annually brought before the House that a time was not far distant when the House would completely throw overboard all the private business, and leave the adjudication of such subjects entirely in the hands of another tribunal. He would oppose the motion by every possible mode the rules of the House afforded. Sir R. H. INGLIS thought that the principle of con ducting the private business ought to partake more of the nature, and be influenced more by th e principles, f the public business of this House. In the management of railway Bills there was a great error committed in placing the business which affected a local district before a Committee of that House, the Members of which were completely ignorant of the local wants of that district. Why, in such a case the decision depended not so much on the merits of a case as on the alelities of the counsel. He thought that no reason had b'een assigned for reversing the decision which the House had come to on the 20th of January, and he should, therefore, give his opposition to the motion. Sir W. HEATHCOTE supported the motion, and considered that the Hon. Gentlemen who opposed it had not stated sufficient grounds for its rejection. They had stated in opposition to it that Members would he burdened with more work than at present; but the very contrary would be the case, be cause; under the new system, five would often be enabled to. perform the task now assigned to fifteen. The present system was bad, because it overworked Members—(Hear, hear)—but the plan proposed would make that labour less. As Chairman of the Committee of Selection, he had found great difficulty in the selection of Members, but he apprehended that the plan of his Honourable Friend would remove it. Tie considered that it was greatly necessary to alter some part of the present system, and he believed that if they adopted the plan proposed by the Hon. Member they would effectatreat public benefit. They would advance the dispatch of business, and he was quite sure, at all events, they would consult the convenience of the Members of the House. (The Hon. Member, owing to the noise in the House, was but indistinctly heard.) Mr. BROTHERTON hoped that the House would pause before it attempted to carry out this resolution. With regard to the constitution of Committees on former occasions, he remembered when 60 or 70 Members were entitled to sit upon the Committee, and were, without being interested in the question, induced to come and give their votes. He thought that in those Com mittees which sat to decide upon subjects of a local nature, that local Members ought to be allowed to sit upon them. He conceived that such a plan would be much better than the present one, by which twa or three Members were put upon a railway Com mittee when they were actually interested in the passing of the Bill before them. If they could not use direct influence, still they would have weight enough with the chairman to affect the Bill in its clauses. If the pro position was open to modification, he should give his support to it. Mr. BANKES said he was quite ready to view this question in respect to the parties more immediately con cerned. In that view he was obliged to support the Hon. Member for Salford. His experience lately on a Railway Committee, where the want of local information was severely felt, strengthened his conviction. He be lieved the system pursued, in respect to the rail ways was, perhaps the best that could be adopted with regard to them ; but only in regard to them for the qualification for this tribunal was . i gnorance . Mr. STRUTT begged to remind the House that they had 'already expressed An opinion on the very subject which was now under consideration. A motion on it was made by the Hon. Member for Dumfries, which, because it was somewhat prematurely brought on, was negatived by many in the House. No final decision, there fore, was given. In reference to what had fallen from the Hen. Memher about ignorance as a qualification, it was enoughtfox_himete say that; not ignorance but im 'l3Mialityjaiafthe-tittillification.val?ch was looked for in a Committee, as in a jury ; and he thought that was the more satisfactory principle on which to constitute a tribunal. Lord SANDON said he should like that the members of the Standing Orders Committee should come before the House instead of being contented with general in structions. All questions that were brought before the Committees were in some degree local ones, and when the House ordered no locairepresentative should sit upon that Committee, it practically denied the district to be affected by the Bill the means of making its opinions known to Parliament. He hoped the House would pause before they came to any decision upon the subject. He was of opinion that local Members should be placed on these Comtnittees. The rule might have been quite right to exclude them on railway Bills, but it did not follow that- they should be excluded frona Committees on Bills, which were merely local in their nature ; in -feet, he was of opinion that none but local Members - should be placed there, and he was per reedy convinced that strict justi c e h a d ever been done. —(Laughter.) At all events, place them on the Com mittee, do not give a vote if they felt so disposed, but at least allow them to be present and to be heard. Sir J. GRAHAM said that he disclaimed altogether the propriety of considering what might be the conveni ence of Members of that House with regard to sitting upon these Committees. He thought that when a Member undertook the representation of any place, he - undertook it under the implied, if not the expressed condition, that his convenience was to be sacrificed, and his time devoted to the public service. He could not say' that it was for the public good, with reference to what they were then discussing, that local Members should be excluded..,_,,lse,:- must say that he could not conceal his opinisin, that it was due to the interest of the people that, in the discussion of private business in that House. and which might in different localities- affect interests of vast importance, the representatives of those localities should not be alto gether excluded. He thought that what his Noble Friend said was _roost true with regard to the case of the Liverpool docks. That was from the Corporation of Liverpool, and from the Dock Company of Liver pool. The rival contending parties alone paid the wit nesses and incurred the expenses of fighting a Bill in which these corporate bodies might not alone be in. terested. The people at large might not have a pecu niary motive to appear by counsel, but they ought to have some means of having an interest in it by their Members, by whom they would be represented without expense. He thought that the question was one which materially affected the principle upon which the people were represented.—(Hear, hear.) Ho would hear it with very much regret that the House should have surrendered at any time any of these im portant functions, the discharge of which is the object of its existence. At the same time they ought to be pre pared to enter upon the consideration of the subject. In the Committee to which he had alluded the question was mooted and sustained even by an authority such as the Hon. Chairman of Committees, that the local interests should be carefully excluded. It was considered by the Committee, and they decided that the local interests should be represented, and that private 'Members should -be added. He (Sir James Grahatn) supported that decision. He thought their attendance was most important; it might be a question in considering this subject whether their attendance which at present was voluntary, ought not to be made" compulsory, and a large proportion of private Members added. The subject, however, deserved consideration, and the resolution especiallly which had been brought before the House, containi ng some words of a questionable and almost neutralising effect. The subject deserved the' consideration of the Government and of the new Parliament, when they should'come to deal with the standing orders in detail. But he was surprised that this resolution should have been brought forward now, at the last hours of an expiring Parliament. If it went to a vote, he must divide against it. Sir G. — GREY said that when. the motion was brought forward in the earlier part of the session, he objected to the alteration so recently made in the matter of railway business being again so soon changed, but since that period a Committee had reported upon the subject, and they almost unanimously supported the resolution proposed by the Hon. Member for Montrose. They did not mention any- system to be proposed in its stead, but they proposed to leave to the Committee of Standing Orders the details of the question. To this suggestion he would offer no objection. Mr. ESTCOVRT said that there was no dis inclination on the part of Honourable Members to andserebe should e oli thneot,Cotmhem.reititoerees:. expectof the House, - y reluctance would b e exhibited under th e that new an resolu tions. ' lle had planworked admir a bly si nce 1839 , and ho w as sure that the ext ens i on o f i t would not disapp o i r , t the tlermxpoetcataltyirs of the House. This wag the last tim e the honour to add ress that he would have ?Fe he retired into private lif e ; he saw the utmost neee not . ssz for thtehire public me, convenience l of the INlem aa j: but es,o also u ti t n h , e wh w which did .Alter a few words from Mr, XSTco n iirer . , not reach the gallery, Mr. LABOUCHERE said he must sarthat he could not agree with the Right Hon. Gentl eman the Member for Dorchester, in conceiving that any great constitu tional principle was. involved in the question brought before the House. The only q uestion _ fo r the House to consider was what was the best way of constituting t in _ partial tribunals for the trial of these private Bills. lie materially interested in this question had left the House without any attempt to enter upon its merits. He thought that he had clearly established the fact with which he started, viz., that the Junta had no positive or categorical declaration of war made to them. He wished to ask two questions from the Noble Lord, which, if answered, would perhaps satisfactorily end the discussion of the questiOn. He wished to know from the Noble Lord whether the Portuguese Govern ment had sent any ships to take back the Count Bowfin, and those who were sent away with him, or at least all those who were capable of being removed. He wished also to know whether the allied Powers had agreed to withdraw the forces which were advancing into Portugal, and if those forces bad received a command to return into Spain, and whether they were in a state of sufficient discipline to obey the command ? Lord PALMERSTON said that the Right Hon. Gentleman had asked these questions in the absence of his Right Hon. Friend, and the notice which he had given seemed to him (Lord Palmerston) to be rather a discussion upon the meaning of the words than any dis pute as to the facts. The Hon. Gentleman also entirely omitted the fact of an announcement being made to the Junta, and that announcement having been made, the question was, whether it was not sufficient to have convinced any reasonable man that there was danger in their vessels leaving the Douro. He (Lord Palmerston) entirely differed from the view taken by his Hon. Friend, and thought that the notice was quite sufficient. The Hon. Gentleman said that there was no declaration of war. A formal declaration of war from the three Powers to the Junta was not to be expected in the or dinary technicalities of diplomatic communications, The Hon. Gentleman forgot the letter of the 15th of May, in which it was stated that Colonel Wylde and the Marquis of Saldanha having gone to Oporto, in order to propose to the Junta certain articles upon the part of the Queen, received the refusal of the Junta, to agree to those articles, and they demanded the concession of further articles, which were utterly inadmis sible.—(Hear, hear.) Colonel Wylde then made a formal announcement to the Junta, in which be stated that he had no other alternative but to declare to them that the British Government, in concert with the allies of her Most Faithful Majesty, would thereupon take such steps as they thought most proper for affording effectual assistance to the Queen of Portugal, to re-establish tran quillity in her dominions. That was the declaration which was made ; it was a declaration announcing the fact that effectual steps would be taken to restore tran quillity in Portugal, and the Junta having refused to accept the conditions offered, the only effectual step which remained was the employment of force. The letter of the 25th of May referred to the seizure of the vessels ; it stated that Sir T. Maitland, knowing the probability of the ships of the Junta being stopped, in the event of their continuing to carry on warlike prepara tions, and perceiving that both the vessels had their steam on, and were over the bar, sent a message to the commanding- officer, in a friendly way, requesting that they would not proceed to sea, and stating that they had better re-enter the Douro, and remain there for a few days. The message, or communication, was not in writing, but in words, as it was merely a friendly mes sage, sent with the design of preventing disagreeable consequences. He thought that when the commander of a British ship stated to those who had the command of other ships, in the most friendly wav, that to avoid disagreeable consequences which might occur, that if they went out of the river, they would most probably be taken, that was an an nouncement that any man, of common understand ing, was merely, through courtesy, to suppose as likely to precede a hostile proceeding between the two parties. Supposing that any two gentlemen in private life were at issue upon any particular point, and the one said, "My dear Sir, if you do so and so, the great probability is that I shall knock you down, though in the most friendly manner, I give you this notice, in order to avoid disagreeable consequences." He (Lord Palmerston) thought that if the gentleman happened to be knocked down, he could not pretend to say that it was done without some preparation as to the conse quences which had ensued.—(Laughter.) With regard to the question of his Hon. Friend as to whether there had been any information received as to the Portuguese Government navigation ships bringing back the exiles of Torres Vedras, no such information had, as yet, been received. He (Lord Palmerston) supposed that, at the time when the last dispatches came off, they had, as yet, no means of sending for them. He had, however, great satisfaction in stating, that he had been informed that afternoon, by the Minister of. Portugal, that he had re ceived information Nom Paris, that upon the 10th of the month, the Portuguese Government had issued a full and : coiriplete,Amnesty, which was on'e"of the conditions stipulated for. (Hear, hear.) -Tha,V:had been issued at a time when the Queen's Goverstenent in Portugal had not received any communication as to the intended stipu lation, or of the intention of the Government of Lisbon. Mr. BORTIMICK—Have the prisoners left Fort St. Jullien. Lord PALMERSTON could not say. With regard to the Spanish troops, with respect to which the Hon. Gentleman had asked a question, they had no informa tion. He believed that none of them bad entered the territory of Portugal with the exception of a very small detachment who, in conjunction with the garrison of Valencia, went to remove the guerrillas in that neigh bourhood. Up to the time of the 10th of this month no account had been received of their having entered into the territories of Portugal. In a very few days from that time they would hear of the turn which things had taken at Oporto, and that of course would check their progress at once, and they would, in all probability, return to Spain. Mr. VILLIERS said, as the House had entered upon a subject somewhat perlonal in its character, he hoped he might be forgiven for entering upon a subject of a somewhat similar nature. Yesterday evening, on going into Committee, the Hon. Member for Weymouth had asserted that a statement was untrue and quite a mistake. He was anxious to clear up the matter, and therefore he would take that opportunity of explaining to the House. The circumstances arose out of the proceedings in the Committee upon the Andover Union, on which the Hon. Member for Weymouth had asked a question of Sir F. Lewis, as to whether, on his resigning office, he had not done so in regard to an arrangement with his son. On his stating that fact to the House last evening, the Honourable Member for Weymouth denied the 'fact. If, in answer to him, he (Mr. Villiers) bad expressed himself with more warmth than was becoming, he apologised to the House. —(Hear, hear.) He would refer to a letter, which he received from Sir F. Lewis himself, stating the fact that the question had been asked by the Hon. Member for Weymouth, and he also referred to the report in the Times, and the report of the Committee which was pre sented to the House. He thought that these authorities concurring in his statement were strong proofs of his accuracy in stating the fact. He had only to set him self right in saying that ho did not make any statement to the House on that occasion which was not strictly true ; and that he was sorry if he might have expressed himself somewhat warmly on the occasion. HEALTH OF TOWNS' BILL. On the order of the day for going into Committee on this Bill. Lord G. BENTINCK presented a petition from the Sewerage commissioners of King's Lynn against the Bill, especially complaining of the centralization prin ciple and the expensive machinery proposed by the Bill, and praying to be excluded from its effects. Petitions of a similar spirit and prayer were pre seated by Mr. SPOONER—From a parish in Birmingham. Mr. HORS VEAN—Two from associations in London. Mr. EWART—From Surrey. Mr. DIVETT_From Devon. Sir the working men of Devo n p ort in favour of the Bill, House to pass it into a law. Petitions of a similar nature were presented by Lord EBRINGTON—Eight from Marylebone. Mr. C. BLTL L ER—From Stafford. Lord MORPE PH—From a meeting of the working classes at Bradford, in Yorkshire, and from the clergy of Sutton. Colonel SIBTHORP said he rose to move that the House should resolve itself into Committee on this Bill that day six months. He objected to a the Bill because it created commissioners ; it thereby increased the pa tronage which the Government already possessed. The Bill proposed to give salaries to two of those commis sioners. If these individuals had not patriotism or feeling enough to disdain taking salary they were not worthy of the trust. Ho found that inspectors were also to be paid. That was another opportunity of cor ruption at elections ; such corruption as they saw practised every day. The Bill, too, proposed to invade the present municipal government of towns, which, to this day, had managed pretty well. That, to him, was a sufficient reason for opposing it. But why, he asked, was London —was the metropolis excluded—why St. e Governme Giles's, their i mmacu l ate St. Giles ' s—why was that ex cluded? He kne w many towns as pure , aye , purer than the metropolis—why n Government, r rose u n p w , as ntt it by to be left out? 0, the Corporati on , w h en municipal matters were meddled with by th the Lord Mayor a they said, " If you meddle with the city, if you interfere with us ; you shall never again come into our city ; you shall never sit at our bench, and eat our turtle— (Laughter) — an d d r i nk our c h a mpagne, and all those excellent things that make up a city feast. Why, one would expect a Government would be impartial, and above suspicion. For these reasons, besides others, ho moved that the Bill should be committed that day six months. ford that under the preient system the liaise endea voured entirely to separate from the consideration of these railway Bills any local interest, and he did not see why they should not pursue the same course with regard to other Bills that they pursued with re spect to railway Bills. He could only say that his opinion had become more and more strong in favour of having a similarity between the Committee on Railway and other Bills, as the public were much satisfied with the way in which these Railway Committees had dis charged their delicate functions. He did not think that Members representing a local interest should be excluded from the proceedings in the Committee, but he thought that they should not vote upon the question.—(Hear, hear.) He said he would give it his consideration, in order to the system being improved at a future time. Mr. SHAW said, from his experience, although there might be difficulties, the preponderance was certainly in favour of assimilating. He should, therefore, support the motion. Mr. EWART said that it was objected to the present system of conducting railway business, that the repre sentative of a local interest could not attend the Com mittee which had that interest under consideration, in the character of a judge, but he might certainly appear as a witness, and in that way attend to his duties, and to his clients, in an equal degree. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the resolution Against it Majority Lord H. VANE moved " That the Wear Valley, Bishop Auckland and Weardale, Weardale Extension, and Wear and Derwent Railways, and Shildon Tunnel Amalgamation Bill, be read the third time this day." The Bill was then read a third time and passed. CLARENCE RAILWAY AND LEEDS AND THIRSK AMALGAMATION. Lord 11. VANE moved the further consideration of the report on this Bill. Mr. HUDSON resisted the motion, on the ground that the Bill contained a clause empowering the amal gamated company to raise money upon bonds and gua rantees before the shares were fully paid up. The galleries were then cleared for a division but none took place, and the report was agreed to, and ordered to be engrossed. HUDDERSFIELD AND MANCHESTER RAIL WAY (DEVIATIONS AND ALTERATIONS.) This Bill was read a third time and passed. MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. Messengers from the Lords brought up several Bills which were read a first time. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it was not his intention to move the adjournment of the House over to-morrow, in order that the House might meet to-morrow to have several Bills sent up to the Lords. He had now to move the order of the day for going into Committee on the Health of Towns' Bill. He perceived that his Noble Friend, the Member for Bath, had given notice of an amendment, but he trusted that his Noble Friend, for the sake of facilitating the business of the House, would not persevere in it. Lord DUNCAN said no one was more anxious to promote sanatory measures than himself. lie had given notice of his amendment, because the Health of Towns' Bill did not embrace the window tax. He had, how ever, no intention to go fully into that subject, but he had given notice of his amendment, merely for the sake of having an opportunity to mention the remark able fact, that within the last three or four years the lower class of assessed houses were getting fewer and fewer. No less than 7,000 of them had fallen off since the tax was increased by Mr. Baring's Act. He had no desire to impede the Noble Lord, nor had he any wish, unnecessarily, to take up the time of the House, and he would theretore withdraw his motion.—(Hear, hear.) Lord G. BENTINCK said, going on with the business to-morrow would be a great inconvenience to many Hon. Gentlemen. Saturday had always been a holiday, and as no notice had been given that the House would meet to-morrow, no doubt many of them had made en gagements for to-morrow. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he did not propose to proceed to-morrow with any Bill that was likely to give rise to discussion. He simply proposed that the House should sit to enable certain Bills to be advanced that had come down from the Lords. Mr. ROEBUCK suggested that the Noble Lord might facilitate the advancement of publie business by retraining from wasting time upon Bills that were not likely to pass this session. —(Hear, hear.) The Rail way Bill, also, was another Bill which he thought there was no chance of passing this session, and at this period neither of them should have been brought forward to oc cupy the 'attention 'of Parliament: 'The: Poor-laws Amendment Bill, however, must be.cairied,:and. he was' of opinion that the Noble Lord should consider the time of the House, and only deal with those measures which he intended should be passed, and not take up their time unnecessarily. LUNATIC ASYLUM (No. 2) BILL. On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, this Bill was read a third time and passed. HEALTH OF TOWNS' BILL. Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in moving the order of the day for going into Committee on this Bill, said that he could not coincide in the observations which had been ;ust made by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath. He was of opinion that it would not be acting fairly, either to the Government or to the House, to presume that there was a host of objections to this Bill, when no notice whatever had been given of them, and to forthwith proceed on that presumption in the manner he suggested. The Hon. and Learned Gen tleman also said that the Poor-law Amendment Bill must be passed. There had been a great many objec tions to this Bill, but this ought not to deter them from proceeding with the measure, and endeavouring to pass it into a law. He should now, therefore, move that the House do go into Committee on the Health of Towns Bill, that he might have an opportunity of hearing what those formidable objections were which Hon. Members had to propose against it. Mr. ROEBUCK said that the Noble Lord had misunderstood him. He did not want the Noble Lord to withdraw this or any other Bill, but only not to occupy their time unnecessarily. or bring under their consideration Bills which he had no intention of passing into a law this session. The very circumstance of the Noble Lord saying that he wished to hear what formidable objections there were to the measure, showed that he had no intention of carrying it into a law this session. Mr. MACKINNON thought the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath was rather severe upon the Noble Lord, and that with regard to the Bill before the House, an ample opportunity should be given for discussing its merits. Mr. WAKLEY wished to know whether the House was to sit to-morrow to proceed with unopposed Bills ? Lord JOHN RUSSELL—BiIIs in their unopposed stages. Mr. WAKLEY said that he was unable to distin guish between those Bills which were opposed, and those which were unopposed. With regard to one Bill —the House of Commons Cost Taxation Bill—the re port on which stood for further consideration, it had not, as far as he. understood, been opposed in any shape it had yet gone through, but neither the Govern ment nor the House were aware whether that would be an unopposed Bill or not. He thought if the Govern ment would take a review of the various Bills before the House, and tell them on Monday what those were which they were going to abandon, and what they in tended to proceed with, it would be a great convenience to the-House, and of great advantage to the public. They would then see what business they had before them, and what the intentions of the Government were with 'respect to the Bills. He wished to ask the Hon. Member for Lancashire what his intentions were with regard to the measure to which he had referred, as a great number of solicitors were anxious to know whether it was to be proceeded with this session. He would be glad to know, therefore, whether it was in tended to be proceeded with before the evidence on which it professed to be founded was laid before the House. With regard to the Health of Towns' Bill, he felt in debted to the Government for bringing on the measure, as it was of great public importance, and he hoped no thing would induce them to abandon it. Mr. GitEENE said that, with regard to the question put to him by the Hon. Member for Finsbury, he did not wish to give an answer in the absence of the Hon. Member for Montrose, as it emanated from a Committee of which he was the chairman. On Thursday next, however, he would acquaint the Hon. Gentleman whe ther it should be proceeded with or not. After a few words from Mr. G. PALMER, Mr. HUDSON said that it was unfair to ask the House to sit to-morrow, as no notice had been given of that intention, and many Hon. Gentlemen had made en gagements which would necessarily prevent them from attending. Mr. DIVETT said that he considered that the pre sent was a most ill considered Bill, and he was of opi nion that it should be withdrawn from the House. Mr. PROTIIEROE said that he would consider it his duty to give it his most strenuous support through all its stages. His only complaint against the Noble Lord was that he did not include the city of Westminster in its provisions, for it wanted it as sadly as any other. Mr. BURKE was opposed to the Bill, and he called upon the landed interest to oppose it in every possible manner. They should do so on one principle, as the lists would subject the rural districts to the town corpo• rations. It was a notorious fact that the poor were now subsisting on either a voluntary rate or the benevolence of individual charity, and he would ask the Noble Lord was this a time when a new liability should be placed upon the landed proprietary ? Lord MORPETII—I do not rise to stop the discus sion on this question, but merely to state that it is by no means intended to include the rural districts within the jurisdiction of the corporations; it is true that there are provisions for widening the boundaries of towns, but there are none which would operate in the manner de scribed by the Hon. Gentleman. Mr. BROTHERTON said that he would support the Bill which was most beneficial, and he did trust that the Government would persevere with it against every op position. Mr. WILLIAMS was surprised at the course taken by certain country towns in reference to this Bill. He admitted he was also surprised that the metropolis, which needed the Bill as much as any other place, perhaps more should have been left out. Hoping that that would be remedied at another time, and considering that some objectionable parts of the Bill had been excluded, namely, the appointment of. the Commissioners by the Government, he would support the Bill in its progress through the House. Mr:INT E WDEGA.TE complained that certain words as " town" and " district" used frequently in the first clauses of the Bill, were indefinite and much too wide. No one knew to what property it was to be applied. The effect of it would be to subject districts to taxes which they did not now pay, and from which, when they did pay them, they would re ceive no benefit. Th e p eop l e wou ld b e su bjected to taxation for what immediately concerned others and others only, a proceeding which was quite opposed to the common law of the country. But it was not merely because of the injustice done to outlying districts that he objected to this Bill. He objected to it on the broad principle that local governments should be independent of any Government in that House. Ile objected to it as the Corporation of Birmingham objected to it. He objected to this policy because, step by step, they were d e parting from the principles of the British constitution. lie objected to the interference with the municipal corporations of the country; he objected to the doing away at "one fell - Mr. BORTHWICK supported the Bill, and took oc casion to defend himself from certain expressions of Mr. Macaulay on the debate with reference to Portugal. That Honourable Member said that his (Mr. Borthwick's) statements could never have been made by a person who was acquainted with the state of facts, or made conscientiously. The Hon. Member then read a letter from the brother of General Sa La Dandiera, which bore out the statement made to the House by him on that occasion. He therefore would repeat every. thing which he had then stated in] the fullest and most peremptory manner. It had been said that a friendly assurance had been given to the fleet that they were not to leave the Douro. Was that a friendly assurance?—was it a friendly assurance to tell a man that he would be shot if he attempted to leave his house? He would not enter any further upon that part of the question. He was "however, sorr y to see that all the Wilding men of the opposition who ought to be most .. ~ ~ LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JUNE 19, 1847. swoop" with refractOrT Town Councils; he objected to the giving of such extended powers to any Government Commissioners; and he objected the more, because they sought to introduce this Bill at so advanced a period of the session,—(llear, hear.) This was an attempt, under the guise of sanatory regulations, to break up the insti tutions of the country. These institutions might be good or bad; he objected, at all events, to their destroy ing these at the beck of Parliament. He felt very warmly on this subject, and he trusted the louse would not be induced to adopt a course of policy which, if con tinued, must irretrievably lead to mischief and confusion. Mr. ROEBUCK said he very much suspected some thing when an appeal was made to his popular feelings by Gentlemen on the opposite side. He was exceedingly jealous of such new born appeals ; it looked as if Hon. Members were bidding a high price for popularity. But this law was a most important one, and ought to he treated with that gravity it deserved. Th e H on . Gen tleman had object e d to the centralizing principle of this Bill, but, by centralization he (Mr. Roebuck) understood a body, or individual, accountable to Government for the carrying into effect the principles and provisions of any Bill. What did the Noble Lord who brought forward the Bill propose to do ? He saw a vast variety of inte rests laying scattered abroad, and waste, which, if ga thered together, might be rendered useful to the. publie good. The Noble Lord deserved the thanks of the country for his effort to render these interests useful. But there was one district which had not been con templated in the Noble Lord's Bill, which, more than any other, required the cleansing influence of this measure ; and if he wished to draw a circle around this district, he would place, as on the centre of it, his finger on St. Paul's Cathedral. Here, within a circle of 30 miles, he found upwards of 2,000,000. Bath was to be attacked, Chester was to be improved, and Birmingham was to be cleansed of all its abominations, however vile these might be, by the operation of this Bill. But when the Noble Lord came to London, although he found there a mass of monstrosities sufficient •to frighten Milton's Satan, the Noble Lord was not at liberty to touch London, and the evils of the district around St. Paul's flourished in as rank luxuriance as ever. Why was the corpora tion of London to be permitted to perpetuate every physical impurity within their jurisdiction? but above all, why did it strike terror into the heart of the Trea sury bench, when an Hon. Member of that House got up to complain of the injustice. They had Noble Lord after Noble Lord, and Learned Gentleman after Learned Gentleman, getting up in their places and protesting that the Corporation of London were a most praise worthy, upright, straightforward body, when in their very minds they believed them to be just the reverse. What influence was it then that enabled the City of London to be excluded from the operation of this Bill? (Heir, Hear.) Again, there was Westminster, Mary lebone, and Southwark ; why were these places to be exempted from experiencing the purifying influences of this Bill. Time was when the city of London was the centre of all that was great, and liberal, and good, but it did not stand now in that enviable po sition. It was now a mere mass of parties, who being closely bound together by their individual interests, had great influence and power in their possession ; but they wanted the generosity to use it with discretion and humanity. Mr. HORSMAN regretted that this question had been so delayed and procrastinated. A similar Bill to the one now under discussion had been long wanting, and Government ought to have run all risks to get it passed. It was not a question of come fort, but of protecting the lives of the people, for the reports and returns upon the table proved, that thousands upon thousands annually fell victims to the want of due and proper sanatory regula tions in Manchester and Liverpool. In no place were these regulations more required than within the bills of mortality. The burial-grounds within that boundary were terribly crowded, and yet day after day the number of graves was being added to. This question had now been before the House for the last seven years, and he thought the House and the public ought to be put in possession of the difficulties which prevented Govern ment from carrying it out. It had excited a good deal of interest throughout the country, and he thought the fact, that while an exceedingly large cumber of peti tions had been presented in its favour, but a very few indeed had been presented against it sufficiently proved, that the public felt that a time had arrived when a measure of this sort ought to be passed into a law.— (Hear.) That difficulties did stand in the way of carry ing this Bill he entertained no doubt whatever, but he felt sincerely, that if Government would proceed by slow asd 'sure to carry out the principles of. sanatory regulations they must ultimately succeed in carrying out the Measure to the fullest extent.—(Hear, hear.) He was, afraid the Noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests, in his endeavours to carry out his plan had not met with the sympathies of all his col leagues, but still do not let that make the Noble Lord despair of ultimately succeeding in his benevolent and charitable design. In the next Parliament he would venture to prophecy the opinions of the Noble Lord's friends upon this subject would have undergone a consi derable change, and therefore he urged upon the Noble Lord to carry out as much of his plan now, and leave the rest to be achieved in a future: session.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. BANKES thought that, after the large promises that were made, and expectations which were raised by this Bill, it was very unsatisfactory to find a measure proposed that was neither just nor general in its prin ciples, and was, also entirely different from such a mea sure as had been prayed for in the numerous petitions presented to the House on the subject. The Govern ment were bound, before they ventured to proceed fur ther with the Bill, to account for the omission of the metropolis from the provisions of the Act. Not one of the Members for the city of London had been present during the speech of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath—not e one of its aldermen were present on the occa sion; perhaps the absence of the latter Hon. Gentlemen might be ascribed to its being dinner hour.—(Laughter.) Taking St. Paul's church as the centre of a circle, it would be found that within its circumference upwards of 2,000,000 of inhabitants were congregated together, making the strongest possible case to induce the Go vernment to extend the provisions of the Bill to that im mense population. If the city of London and its Lord Mayor were to be exempt from the operation of the Bill, why was it that his Right Hon. Friend the Lord Mayor of York, and the city of York itself, were to be included under its provisions ? Was it to be said that the city of York required more purification than London ? It had been well said that the Bill was either a benefit or a charge ; and in either of these -points of view it was unfair to make a particular choice of London to the ex clusion of all the other towns and cities of England. The present Bill proposed to create a large number of commissioners, inspectors, and other officers, and it was a complete waste of time for the House to spend night after night in the discussion of this and similar measures proved a num ber of commissionships under the patronage of the Government. The exception of London was most decidedly unjust, and unless the House were assured that the city of London and the other metropolitan boroughs should be included in the Bill, he should feel it his duty to oppose the Bill to the utmost of his ability. 'Lord MORPETH thought that the Government had not been treated quite fairly in the attacks which had been made upon it by Hon. Members on both sides of the House with respect to this Bill. He was first attacked for including the metropolis, and then Jae was copiously attacked for omitting it.—(Hear.) The lion. Member for Dorsetshire asked him if he was not pledged to the exemption of the metropolis from the Bill ? Now, after what he had long since stated from his place in Parliament, he thought there could be no doubt on this point.—(Hear, hear.) He might then be asked why it was left out ?—(Hear, hear.) He had to say that it had been left out because—(The Noble Lord here made a short pause, which caused great laughter.)—He had only to appeal to the recollection of lion. Members themselves as to what had taken place in the House re specting it, and to the important and urgent measures re quired for the sister country, and which wholly absorbed the attention of the Government and the House, as his justification for the omission of the metropolis. Had the necessary time been at his disposal, he would not have thought of omitting it, but this not being the case, he was reluctantly obliged to defer the application of the measure to the metropolis for the present session.— (Laughter.) He said, therefore, that it was want of time to deal with a measure so complicated and so ex tensive which induced him to alter his determination, and to confine his attention for the present to that part of it which there was a probability of carrying into a law this session. The lion. Member for Bath taunted him with having cut his stick.—(Mr. Roebuck—" No, I did not.")—Well, the observation has been made by some lion. Gentleman, and the Member for Cockermouth had reproached him for not introducing a measure respecting intermural interment. He had only to say, that if he were able to accomplish what he proposed with regard to the present measure, though the metropolis was not included, he should consider that he had performed no mean achievement.—(Hear, hear.) lie felt, how ever, that he should not be influenced by the attacks that had been made upon him, and that he ought rather to invite reproaches than otherwise. as this would agitate the question, and induce him, or whoever might afterwards fill his situation, to follow the matter up, and complete what he had left undone.— (Hear, hear.) Those wh o represented that he had been induced to omit the metropolis from a regard to his own leisure and convenience —(Cries of " No, no ")—had little idea of the kind of life he had led since Easter— (Hear, hear)—or they would not entertain such an idea. However, he had one abiding resolve that he would con tinue to do what he could, when he could, and how he could, to promOte sanatory improvement. He could assure Hon. Members, that if they had the opportunity of see ing the number of letters which he had received upon the subject, and of the increasing extent of fever and dis ease—which was aggravated, if not caused by the ab sence of all sanatory regulations—th e absence of those provisions which it was the object of the present Bill to introduce—if they considered that the mortality which was the consequence, and which pervaded all classes of society, the wealthy and the indigent portion of society, he felt sure they would not be insensible to the great necessity which existed for a measure of sanatory regula tions. If they postponed all legislation on this subject, during the present session and postponed all plans and surveys, they should have to defer the measure for two years more, and do nothing to stay the evils which at present existed throughout the country. When he last addressed the House upon the subject, he referred to somo returns from the Registrar-General, to show the mortality which prevailed in some districts. The Noble Lord then read extracts from the last return. In the summer quarter of 1846 the mortality, it appeared, had been greater than it had been for any similar period during the previous six years. In the winter quarter, 56,105 persons had died in those districts, from which the returns had been made up. And it appeared that the annual mortality for England and Wales amounted to 120,000. The health of towns generally had been stationary, if not retrograding. Now, though London had been omitted from the Bill, he triftted the House woeld not omit the opportunity to ednpt means to red !ce the mortality of England to as great an extent as it was possible to effect. The peti tions from various places in England had been referred to, and the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire told them that these did not refer to the Bill as it at present stood, but to the original measure. He (Lord Morpeth)did not think that these petitions, coming as they did from different places in England, could refer to the Bill as it applied to London, but to themselves and to general advantage,— (Hear, hear)—and none of the provisions of the Bill, as far as it applied to the towns of England, were altered at all from the original Bill.—(Hear, hear.) These peti tions, therefore, could only refer to the present Bill. There were thirteen presented from corporations and public bodies, twenty-eight from clergymen, magistrates, &e.. forty-seven from the inhabitants of towns, thirty from medical men, fifty-six from operative and working classes, and thirteen from associations and societies, making altogether 187 in favour of the Bill. This was the number up to the end of May, but there had been a con siderable number since. There had been presented against the Bill two petitions from societies, six from water companies, seven from paving boards, and five from landowners—altogether against the Bill 22. The account, therefore, stood thus-220 petitions in favour of the Bill, and 22 against it. He trusted this preponde rance showed at least to what side public opinion in Eng land manifestly pointed. A resolution had been forwarded to him from the Health of Towns Association of the me tropolis, in favour of the Bill, and this association was composed of clergymen, members of the medical pro fession, and others well qualified to judge of the effects of sanatory regulations. He knew it was sometimes said that those who were foremost in supporting and giving opinions in favour of any great public question, were sometimes influenced by interested motives, but as this association was composed of members of the College of Physicians, and the College of Surgeons, &c., he thought -it would be admitted such an imputation would not be applied in the present case.—(Hear, hear.) He did not then propose to enter into the details of the clauses, but he trusted, when the time came for doing so he should be able to show that, though the Bill did merit a special central superintendence, it did not in any way seek to supersede or paralyse local agencies. That it was the great object now to employ local agencies, not to fetter them, but only to give to them assistance by the aid of central wisdom and experience. He trusted that it would also be shown that all the necessary functions for carrying on sanatory improvement were entertained in the Bill, associated with it a central body, because it was manifest that superintendence could only be satisfactorily entertained by one central superintendence and management—that with respect to waterwork companies, though he admitted that the Bill allowed a compulsory pur chase of them, satisfactory arrangements could be made. The insertion of such a power was he thought based on good reasons, but as it was a part which might be objected to in its details, and the way in which the purchase was to be regulated with a view to a proper considera tion of their claims, he should be ready in Committee to discuss all its provisions, to give due consideration to all special clauses and provisions, to see if they have been wisely and rightly proposed, to see if they could he properly amended. He hoped, therefore, that the House would not refuse the Government the pre liminary step of going into Committee upon it ; but that they would proceed to the consideration of it with an anxious hope to work out that good from it of which it might be rendered capable; and he would add, that he did feel an anxiety on the subject —an anxiety not grounded on any party considerations, still less on any personal considerations—an anxiety not derived from any fear of its results, either on the part of the Government with whom it had originated, or on the part of the Member of Parliament who had introduced it; but an anxiety grounded upon the affecting and appalling accounts which he daily received from all parts of the country, and which, he confessed, had had that effect upon his mind as almost to induce him to mix an actual entreaty with the appeal which he now made to the House, not to refuse to go into Committee, where any alterations could be made, and not to delay any longer the progress of the great work of sanatory reform. Mr. HORSMAN said if anything had fallen from him at all disrespectful to the Government, or to the Noble Lord, who had introduced the Bill, he had to ex press his regret. He thought, however, that he had treated the Bill simply as a Government measure, and as one which would affect a vast num ber of the people. If anything had fallen from him imputing blame to the Noble Lord, he could assure him that it gave him great pain. .Mr. MILES ',Opposed the further progress of' the Bill, and in the abstract agreed with the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Cockermouth (Mr. Horsman) that no one in that House wished to impute improper or unworthy motives to the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) Some time ago it was stated that the Government intended to in troduce a measure to improve the sanatory condition of all large towns; but no one ever thought that the po pulous city of London would be exempted from its ope ration, especially when so many eminent medical autho rities and others connected with the City had urged the necessity of such a measure. He asked the Government, in the name of humanity, how they could think of leaving out the city of London, with its 2,000,000 in habitants? Why, they were suffering from the want of water—from the want of proper drainage, and, in fact from the want of every necessary.—(Loud laughter.) No later than the 26th of last May, a deputation from the parish of Farringdon Without, headed by Dr. Lynch, waited upon the Lord Mayor, and pointed out to him the frightful sanatory condition of that ward, which they stated was one of the most neglected districts in this respect in the City. He did not complain of the general principle of the Bill ; but he complained of it because it was partial.—(Hear, hear.) Still, if they went into Committee upon it, it would have to be de bated clause by clause, because it contained many ob jectionable provisions. He believed that the intentions of the Noble Lord were most sincere and praiseworthy; but the Bill, as it at present stood, was deficient. He besought him to withdraw it for the present session, and bring it forward in an amended state during the en suing session, when he promised him his support. He should, unless the Noble Lord gave an assurance of this kind, feel it his duty to vote against going into Com mittee with the Bill. Lord LINCOLN was unwilling to delay the progress of the Bill by any observations not pertinent to the sub ject with which it was connected, but as he had been pointed at as the individual who had advised the Noble Lord to exempt the city of London from its provisions, he thought it right that he should enter into some ex planation. He advised the Noble Lord to exempt the city of London, because of the length of time which would be necessary to bring the cumbersome machinery which would be necessary into play, and from the facility with which it could be carried out in other towns less densely populated. By any observations which he had made, he did not mean to imply that he app rove d o f th e machinery intro duced by the Noble Lord, and he was bound to say that his former objections to that machinery were strength ened rather than diminished.—(Hear, hear.) He would not now enter into any discus-ion upon it, as he thought that the proper place to do so was when the Bill went into Committee. He was of opinion that the Noble Lord went far beyond the very sound principle which he had laid down, namely, " that the proper course was to have local authority .and local superin tendence, only assisted by a central authority." Whereas he had greatly exceded that object, and had provided a central authority which would control and supersede all local authority. He was anxious to explain to the house his opinions, and what were the grounds of his objection to the measure of the Noble Lord, as he stated before, he should vote with the Noble Lord, for going into Committee, and against the Gallant Colonel, if he intended to divide the House upon his amendment, because he should be unwilling that it should be considered that he was ad verse to the object sought to be attained by the Bill. Perhaps he might be allowed to remark that if the Noble Lord did not intend to proceed with this Bill until a future session, and if he found that he was unable to do so, he should abandon it for this session of Parliament. It would be wise for him to introdnce a single clause, by which a great many important objects of the present Bill might be obtained, such a clause would not take more than a week to pass. It would be simply to enable the Town Council and the Commissioners of Paving and Lighting to carry into effect the provisions of the Towns Improvement Consolidation Bill, giving them an optional power to do so would confer a real and practical benefit; without such a clause the Bill would be perfectly inoperative, whereas by passing it they would give life and vitality to its very important provisions. He should vote for going into Committee. Sir J. lIANMER said that he happened to represent one of those to wns which were worst circumstanced (Hull), as far as regarded sanatory regulations ; and he, there fore could not avoid saying that he hoped that the Go vernment would carry into operation some portion of this measure, although they might not be able to reach every thing which might be desired by carrying out the present suggestion, a step would be made in a right di rection, and a signal benefit would be conferred on the country before they returned to their constituents. Mr. HENLEY said lie did not intend to vote for going into Committee, especially as this Bill extended it s provisions to the rural districts ; he did not I know what the Government intended, but he could tell them that, according to its present construc tion, it was applicable to every acre of land in England. They shrank from dealing with a great evil when it existed under their noses, and yet they travelled over the country to Mid out plans on which they might exer cise their ingenuity. He thought the measure a bad mea sure, intended to be carried out by bad means. He did not think that the framers of the Bill knew very w e ll what they were about. Did they know that, after seven years, by the operation of the Bill, no houses would remain untaxed ? Didithey mean also to enforce party walls on all houses built in small villages ? The thing was absurd, and yet such was the case under the Towns' Improvement Bill, which was incorporated with this Bill in one small clause. He should give his decided oppo sition to this measure. Mr. HUDSON complained that the Government dealt out one measure to tke City of London, and r and very different measure to the provinces. s an i o m t e he Hon. Members did indeed say that the country districts of England—and one Hon. Member had par ticularly referred to the inhabitants of Yeolnk—were particularly partial to the measure. He died that g that was the case. They were desirous of so me sanatory reulations, but they were decidedly av measure. But now th e matter of sanatory erse r to this regulations had been pressed to an unre asonable degree. He hoped that the H ouse would resist the measure pass ing through the House this session. The country was perfectly sick of the system of centralization, they wished to attend to their own business themselves. Lord J. RUSSELL said, that if the Hon. Member for Sunderland were right, that all the corporations were able to conduct their own business themselves, then there was no necessity for any legislative interference what- I ever. He tho ug h t that the most consistent course for those Hon. Members who objected to the occlusion of London from - the Bill, would be rergo into Committee, and propose to add London to the Bill. With respect to the exclusion of London, the Government took the same view of the matter as the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Lincoln) who had paid such attention to the subject, viz., that a separate Bill was necessary for London. He (Lord J. Russell) vess certainly no party to the exclusion of London from the Bill, for he thought that there was much need of some measure of this nature to apply to the city of London. He hoped that the House would so far approve of the principle of the Bill as to allow the House to go into Committee on the subject. After a few words from Mr. HUDSON in expla nation, Mr B. DENISON said that the feeling of the `pest Riding . of Yorkshire was decidedly in favour of the Bi ll. Mr. MUNTZ thought that the Bill was a ba d Bill, a vexatious Bill, and a very long and anomalous Bill. The Bill proposed to exclude a place which neede d the most interference, and included those towns which did not need it. The people of Birmingham were fully able to attend to their own sewering and cleansing withoutlike the assistance of a London commissioner. He did not , the idea of those commissions, and the more lie saw them the less he liked them. How easy i t was to wiel g' place matters connected with sanatory stat istics ! Mr. Chadwick, in 1841, compared Derrittend with Birming ham, in order to show that the mortality of the former place was much greater, but there was no comparison between the two places. He should give his strenuous opposition to the measure. Mr. REDHEAD YORKE said that the exclusion to the metropolis was sufficiect reason for him to vo against it. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared — For going into Committee .......... 191 Against it —l4l Majority The Bill then went through C o mmittee pro forma. POOR-LAW ADMINISTRATION BILL. There port on this Bill was brought up, a nd on the mo tion of the Attorney General, the following clause WBS addeor d to the Bill :—" And be it enacted, that in any civil criminal proceeding it shall not be necessary to prove the sending of the original order of the Poor-law Comm sioners, or of the Commissioners constituting gany board of uardians, in any case iu wbch anersons profess ing to form a board in obedience i to such order shall have taken upon themselves to act, and shall have continued for three years to ac t i n the execution of t he laws for the relief of the Poor ; and in no proceed in g shell it 41) lawful to question th e qualification or validity of the , election of any person as a guardian after the mil tit twelve months next following the election , or the tinin when the alleged disqualification or want of qualificatiobe of the person against whom such proceeding sha ll directed, shall have arisen." Mr. SPOONER moved the insertion of the following clauses:—Clause 19. Provided always, and be it declared and enacted, that no rule, order, or regulation of the Poor-law Commissioners heretofore mad e, or hereafter to be made, prohibiting the granting of relief to nay able-bodied person, except within the workhouse of the ol union, shall remain or continue in force or effect fro and after the passing of this Act. Clause 20. And b e it declared and enacted, that it shall uot be under or lawful for the Commissioners appoi nted this Act to make or issue any rule, order, regulation, prohibiting the granting o f relief to lily able- bodied person requiring the same, except within the workhouses of the union. Clause 21. And be it de clared and enacted, that from and after the passing this Act, Act, it shall be lawful for every board of guardian! of the poor, and they are hereby respectively and required to set to work, out of the workhouse of the union, all such able-bodied persons as shall lawfully re quire relief from any parish within such union ; and to grant such relief as to the said guardians of the `Pall shall seem fit, out of the workhouse of the union, to all such able-bodied persons so set to work as aforesai. empowered Sir GEORGE GREY resisted the adoption of the clauses, on the ground that they proposed to make an alteration in the law and not in its administration. After a short discussion, Mr. SPOON ER consented to withdraw the clauses, and the report was agreed to. CORN IMPORTATION BILL. The report was brought up and agreed to. The Bill then went through Committee, the House re sumed, and the report was ordered to be received on Monday. THE CANADA CONSOLIDATED REVENUE FUND. This Bill was re. The Stock in Tra p de orted Exemption Bill was read a tee° rld time ; as also was the Parliamentary Electors Bill. TITHES COMMUTATION BILL. This Bill went through Committee, and the report Was ordered to be brought up on Monday next. THE REPRESENTATIVE PEERS (SCOTLAND) BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. POLICE CLAUSES BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. on Mr. STUART WORTLEY gave notice, that Monday next he would put a question to the Secrets/ for the Home Department whether the Governteeu_, would take any means to insure the employraenteu: Counsel in cases of prosecution for felonies and mis s meanours, under this Act ? JOINT STOCK COMPANIES (No. 2) 13114 1 - This Bill went through Co mm itt ee , an d the report Wa ordered to be brought up on Monday. THREATENING LETTERS BILL. This Bill passed throu g h C omm i t t ee , with the add i ; tion of some verbal a men d men t s , and the addition 0, the following claus e , on th e mot i on of Mr. BODICIN.r "And in order to prevent justice from being . defeated 1 1 clerical or verbal inaccuracies, be it enacted, that in a Or informations or indictments for sending, deliveri n g% uttering any letter, or writing, the sending, deliverl or uttering of which is made an offence by either of t a ,, before recited Acts, or by this Act, it shall not be Deo!: sary to set forth any copy or fac simile thereof, any la" or custom to the contrary notwithstanding." TRADE EXEMPTION BILL. This Bill was read a second time. ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION. Mr. E. DENISON moved the appointment of the following Select Committee on the Ecclesiastical Co.?: mission :—Mr. Evelyn Denison, Sir George Grey, ..525. James Graham, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, M r . Goulburn, Lord Seymour, Mr. Nicholl, Mr. Barin g' Mr. Acland, Mr. - Vernon Smith, Earl of March, Mr. Aglionby, Sir John Yarde Buller. Mr. FOSTER complained that the Committee did not represent any important or e xtens=ive nlortance constituencies ; and considering this and the .of of !the subject, he begged to suggest the propri ety Mo - day, Hon. Gentleman postponing his motion until ) 1 ,, day, when it would come under the attention of a lull House. Mr. DENISON explained that many of the Sem Mem b ers of Gentlemen whom he had nominated represented l arge constituencies. He was anxious that no time should be lost in investigating the matter. Mr. HORSMAN considered that more unexception able names could not have been selected. After some further consideration, the motion Wa s agreed to. ROYAL MARINE SERVICE BILL. rising Thne This t wh BHae House ml ordereds u w e a t s o tn r h e ea oftnd ' o a adjourn Mr. j h r 00. i uu r p d rr nnA t e i Rmd untilKe aE at n Rj u d a. pas. o n tseaue Monday. House at its ;ter to One o'clock. [ADVERTISEMENT.] DEAFNEaS, NEW INVENTION , 39, ALBEMARLE-STREET, PICCADILLY.—The Organic Vibrator, an el" traordinary powerful small newly-invented instrument, for deafnes s ' entirely different from all o th ers, to surpass anytning of the kind th4v, has been, or probably ever can be produced it is modelled to ..,, the car so that it rests witkin, w.thout projecting, which c an be inser te d in the ears and removed in company unobserved ; and, being of the same colour as the skin, is not perceptible. The powers of Bits_ valuable new invention are so grea t as to bring very defect i ve hear' ing, of long standi ng , t o it s perfect and natural state, and to en able deaf persons to enjoy genera l conversation, to hear distinctly church, on the bench, a t th e b ar, : an d at publ i c assemblies; th° ..",. pleasant sensation of singing noises in the ears are entirely re.010 . ° 41 10; and it affords to individ ua l s a ff ec t e d w ith t hi s dreadful malady assistance that possibly could be desired. Also improved atfa c r i Z Trumpets of every description. Th e new l y -i nvente d Siterjtan-as immediately they are placed befor e ex t reme l y i mper f ec t vis',ott,.., mist and dullness which appear before the eyes is at once. removed' .. every object becomes clear an d di st i nc t , so that the mos t a ged perfect sight becomes bri g ht an d b r illi ant, an d i s broug ht t o its You ,,, ful, natural and original st a t e . Al so A c h romat i c Teleaeopes, —'4" Glasses, Microscopes, &c. Caution—Messrs. 8. and B . soloni Opticians, are not in any way co nnec t e d w ith a person o f the same t he name in their immediate neighbLurhood, nor in any part ot:_ country. To prevent mistakes be ca u ti ous , an d Obs e rve—OnlY ba had at 39, Albemarle-street, Pi cca dilly ( oppo ,it e th e York HoteiL . [ADVERTISEMENT.]—DR. BRIGHT, OF ELY.PLAy s. HOLBORN, AND HOLL O W A Y' S P ILLS AND O INTMENT .—C•PY s " letter from this celebrated physician to Professor Holloway. — UF I think it but an act o f j us ti ce to inform you that I have titedP Ointment and Pills in s evera l cases of ulcerated sore legs, which 10r a considerable time had resisted every kind of treatment, which were afterwards effect ua ll y cured by the use of your ruttcho h • - 'iu In cases of bad breasts I h ave also found them of great serv ioa. , deed, from my pra c ti ca l k nowledge, I think them invaltudgi of most cases. (Signed) RICHARD BRIGHT, M.D."—To t r socl, all chemists, and at P ro f essor Holloway's Establishment, 244, 6 London. BTS. On the 17th inst., in Gr ov e - terrace, Kentish-40 0 1 I ° l4 William Reid, of a daughter. On the 17th i ns t., a t B r id gwater, the w if e o f J o hn rat* sons, Esq., of a son. On the 17th i ns t., a t W oo df or d , M rs. H enry Mildre d , of daughter. On the 17th inst., at Cowes, the lady of W. Carter Hoff" meister, M.D., surgeon to the Queen, of a daughter. . On the 17th i ns t., at Deptford-lane, Peckham, Mrs. Chris topher Prince, of a daughter. On the 17th inst., at Stanmore Lodge, Lower Tulse-bilt Mrs. Herbert Dalton, of a son. On the 18th inst., at Bentinck-street, Manchester -square' Mrs. James Benham, of a son. AURRIED. On the 17th i ns t ., at St. George-the-Martyr, Southwark, Mr. W. K. Deane, of Lower Broughton, Manch es ter, to Jailer second daughter of Mr. Yates, of Bolton, Lancashire. On the 17th i nst. , at J o h n Knox ' s Ch urc h , St e p n ey, i•- xi r• T. R. Baskett, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, to Christiana, daug hter ofJohn Kirkalely, of London. On the 16th inst., at Edgbaston, near Birmingham, C. 1 pe, Esq., of Ifarborne, Staffordshire, to Sarah Ann , e ldes t daughter of the late Edward Rickards, Esq. DIED. On the 13th i ns t., a t P ap ill on H a ll, L e i ces tershire, Sarah.. the wife of T. Marriott, Esq. On the 13th inst., at Bishopwearmouth, Durham, Barba ra * third daughter of the late Charles Johnson, Esq. On the 14th in -t., at York-grove, Peckham, Mrs. J. Hart. On the 15th inst., Mr. James Hopkins, Studley Houses. New-road, Hammersmith. On the 14th inst., in Montagu-place, Bryanston-squi" the Rev. G. Capper, Vicar of Wherstead, Suffolk, aged SO On the 15th inst., in Sloane-street, Lieutenant-Colonel W. Roberdean, late of the Bengal Cavalry, aged 58, On the 15th inst., in Cadogan-place, Elizabeth, Widow of the late A. M'Pherson, Esq. On the 16th inst., at Vale House, Stoke-Newington, E. P' Symons, Esq., aged 70. London : Printed and Publi s h e d by AMID° YOUNG, of v.. IS' Suand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, In the Jrc .. 7... (4 (h a SAVOY* IA the COWS/ 3Aturik7e 1847. A LONI for Colon') Th eve r) Ins a An Prods there ream rite the 1 certi %Lis, Irian gisti %co b elieu