The Sun. — London, England, 1857-07-07 00:00:00

portions he really required. Such a course would be of advantage both to the office and the country in saving expense. CASTLE DITCH, CHESTER. Mr. SALISBURY asked if a plot of land under lease from the principal officers of her Majesty's Ordnance to Mr. Jas. Martin, dated July 3, 1851, and known as the "Castle Ditch," in the city of Chester, was required by the authorities for building purposes, and the nature of the erections proposed to be put on such land? Sir J. RAMSDEN said that at present there was no intention on the part of the Government to take this lease, PETTY SESSIONS CLERKS (IRELAND). Sir G. FORSTER asked the Chief Secretary for Ire land whether the Treasury had come to any decision as to the u nappropriated annual balance of fines and penal ties, Ireland, being applied in future in aid of salaries for petty sessions clerks ; and, if so, whether he was pre pared to bring in a bill this session to provide for pay ment of petty sessions clerks by salary in place of foss, as at present? Mr. H. HERBERT said he hoped to be able to in troduce such a bill in a few days. STATUE OF RICHARD CGIUR DE LION. Mr. HANKEY asked whether any decision had yet been made as to the spot where the statue of Richard Cceur de Lion, by Baron Marochetti, purchased by sub scription, and presented to the nation in 1856, was to be erected ? Sir B, HALL said the site bad not yet been decided on. It was under the consideration of the proper de partment. GUANO. Mr. BAXI I ER, asked why no vessel of war proceeded to Bird Island, in the Pacific, before December, 1856, although, as it aoptltred from the printed papers, Mr. Maier, her Majesty's Consul at Woahoo, had made known to the commanders of all her Maj-sty's ships that bad touched at that port since Augu-t, 1854, and also to the Commander-in-Chiet of her Majesty's naval forces in the Pacific, the purport of Mr. Hammond's circular despatch of May, 1854, directing diligent search to be made for deposits of guano ; and whether Bird Island had since been taken possession of by the United States ? Sir C. WOOD said that the papers already on the table of the house, relative to the guano deposits, con tained ail the information the Government possessed on the sutject. He was unable to state the reason why no English vessel visited this island before that of the United States Government, except that they were other wise occupied. He was not aware that the United States Government had taken possesgon of this i.lAnd. THE NATIONAL GALLERY PICTURES. Mr. STIRLING asked the Secretary to the Trea sury the name of the artist or amateur upon whose re commendation the collection of pictures formed by Herr Kruger were purchased for the National Gallery, and whether the purchase was effected with the knowledge and advice of the trustees of the N a ti ona l G a ll ery ? Mr. WILSON said that the purchase allude I to was made four or five years ago, when the trusteeship of the National Gallery was in a state of transition, and conse quently without their advice or even knowledge as a body. The pictures were purchased by Mr. Dyce, and when one of the specimens was sent home Sir E. East lake approved of it, but neither he nor the trustees were in any way responsible for the purchases. THE ONEIDA, MAIL STEAK-SHIP. Mr. H. BERKELEY asked the Secretary to the Treasury, in reference to the st-itenneot of the First Lord of the Admiralty, that the steamer Oneida had been condemned by the Government surveyor, under what circumstances the said vessel was employed in the con veyance of her Majesty's mails from this country and Australia, notwithitanding such report; and whether it were a fact that he bad offered the Royal West India Mail Company to extend for two years beyond the time now prescribed the subsidy cf 270,0001., which they al ready received from Government, provided they consented to amalgamate with the European and Australian Com pany, the owners of the said steamer Oneida, and un dertake the Australian mail contract ? Mr. WILSON said that the Oneida had not been accepted fur the conveyance of mails by the Government. The Oneida was one of the vessels offered by the Austra lian Company to the Government for the purpose of conveying the mails to AuAralia. According to the rule of the Government, the Oneida was surveyed at Portsmouth on the 18,h September, last year. She left on the 19th, and the surveyor to the Admiralty reported to the Government on the 20th, the day after the vessel had sailed. The Admiral-y reported to the Treasury on the 21 t, and of course it was Got then pos sible to stop h-r progress, but an intimation was made to the company that the Oneida would not be accepted under the contract. With regard to the latter part of the question, he had to say that a similar arrangement as the hon. member suggested had been made to the Government, but no conclusion had been come to by the Government in reference to It. Mr. H. BERKELEY aQked if the company were liable for compensation for the loss and inconvenience sustained by the breaking down of the Oneida? Mr.WILSON said he was unable to answer the ques tion. THE ORDNANCE SURVEY. In answer to a question from an HON. MEMBER, Mr. WILSON said that the construction put by the Government on the resolution lately come to by the house relative to the 25 inch survey was that the works actually in progress should be finished on the 25-inch scale, but that those parts that had not been com menced should be commenced on the 6 inch scale only. He thought the Government would have no objection to continue the survey on the 25-inch scale, if the counties wi-hing it would pay the difference of cost out of the county funds. INCOME AND PROPERTY TAX RETURNS. In e.)nsequence of some remarks from Mr. DIS RAELI relative to the Government being unable to make a full return of what the right hon, gentleman re quired relative to the pronerty tax, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the Government did not feel themselves at liberty to grant tall returns relative to the income and property tax. There were no oljections to make the return as far as it could be done for the right hon. gentleman as it related to schedule A, but it must be distinctly under stood that the Government would withhold returns un der schedule B. Mr. DISRAELI said that his motion only had refer •nce to real property hearing on the franchise. The return was ordered. NEW WRITS. Sir G. GREY, in the absence of Lord Palmereton, moved that in all cases when the seat of any member had been declared void by an election committee on the ground of bribery or treating, no motion for the issuing of a new writ should be made without two days' previous notice being given in the votes. Mr. DISRAELI seconded the motion, considering it just and expedient. Mr. DUNCOMBE moved an amendment that seven days' notice ehoul•1 be given. Mr. MILES was in favour of the original motion. Mr. DIVETT considered that if the nouse was really desirous of putting down bribery, it should order pro secutions in every instance where it was proved they had occurred. (dear.) At present the reports of com mittees were allowed to pass without the slightest no tice. Talki❑g of bribery was a farce, About They pro secuted. Mr. HENLEY did not see that the issue of the writ had anything to do with the prosecution, fir nobody would think of suggesting a prosecution, without read ing the evidence, and that might be done at any time. Mr. ESTCOURT thought it would be unwise to de part from a precedent which had acted well, that pre cedent being contained in the standing orders of the house. After some remarks from Sir G. GREY in reply, The house divided. The numbers were— For the motion Against it Majority REFORMATORY SCHOOLS BILL. On the motion of Sir G. GREY, the order of the day for the house going into committee on the Reformatory Schools BM wad fixes for Thursday, at 12 o'clock. SCOTCH BILLS. On the motion of Lord DITNCAN, .consequence of the absence of the Lord Advocate--.the Court of Ses,ion; Crown, Suits ; Bill Chamber and Asse4sments (Scotland) Bills, were postponed till WedneHday. PROBATE AND LETTERS OF ADMINISTRA.- TION BILL On the motion for going into committee on this bill, Mr. MALINS said that he and those who acted with him intended to offer every opposition to the bill unless the Government recognised the principle of compensa tion in reference to the proctors. Mr. HADFIELD protested against such understand ing being entered into by the Government. After some further discusiion reative to the question of compensation, Str H. WILLOUGUBy said that the house appeared to bo going into committee on an important subjee, without inform a ti on re l ative to the compensation clauses. He asked how many officers were to receive eoripenead tion, and.the amount, if this bill passed into a he called attenti on t o the number of personas ol aw, an with the law no w rece i v i ng compensation. anected Col. 'SMYTH urged that Mi., house ouht to be in possession of the information asked before going committee on this bill, into The AIrfORNEY-GENERAL said that every de scription of compensation should be raised on the di s . cus.lion of the clause., when he would be ready to give every information. He thought it would be better to abstain from making any statement then relative to coitipensation, but wait tiil the question came regularly before the house. The how(' then went into committee on the bill. Clause 1 was agroad to. On clause 2 Mr. COLIrIER moved to substitute the term "Office" tf Probate for the term "Court" of Probate, in line 11, pag e 2. The present bill proposed a new court, which he had the authority of the Lord Chancellor for saying, would have very- little to do. The bu-iness of the court Was divided into two kinds, the common form business and the contentious business, There would be littll necessity for the presence of a superior judge to de termine this com n ," f o Of the conten tious business nine-tenthsnn business . to the judge of would be se nt .. common law, and, therefwe said, the new judge would h r a e, as the Lord Chancellor The bill proposed to send a cas e befo re to nothing to do was to send it to Court B, which hefocre Court A, which it back to Cenrt A. That was a b ourt B was to send what ha proposed was, that the court o f ri ad pnciple. Now, should have the -deter m i na ti on of all the con t entious law business. all the questi ons o f form being left e t o o nenti ous acted by th e reg i s t rar . Th ere could be only two e trans lions to the course h e p ropose d . The first was tha t j t e h e e judges o f th e courts of common law had not time to dis cliarge the biltiuess ; the second, that th ey were not. competent. With regard to the first objection, the insti tution of the county courts, and the simplification of pro cedure, hod so diminished the business of the superior courts that there could be noVoubt that they would have time to discharge the new business. In addition to thip, he might mention that there was a commission now sit ting to inquire whether the number of the judges of the higher courts might net be reduced. As to the compe tency of the judges of the superior courts there could be no doubt. It appeared to him that there should be either no court at all or a court that would discharge the whole business. Mr. ATHERTON hoped his hon. and learned friend would not persist in his amendments. If he meant to press the views he now put forward he should have op po :ed the bill on the second reading, because his amend ments were destructive of the very principle of the bill. His hon. friend said there was no neceesity for a new court and a new judge. He thought his hon. and learned friend underrated the business which the new court would have to transact. b But the o t t he d remedy fothretrhere hoped afotwastogtihvee the court more business Attorney-General the h ewonld, introductionwhe no theyof w ards cameords whichto the w 0 3 u 2 1 d d clause, agree to enable the new judge to try cases by jury himself, with out compelling him to send the issue to a court of com mon law. He also thought that the judge should be al lowed to hear motions for a new trial in these matters. Sir F. KELLY said that, having been unfortunately absent when the second reading of the bill was before the house, he begged leave now to offer one or two sugges tions with regard to it. He entirely concurred in the general principle of the bill. They were all, be believed, agreed as to the necessity of doing away with the eccle siastical courts. He approved of the clauses which threw the common form business into the hands of persons who were distributed throughout the different districts. The new court having power to deal with real property to some extent would increase the business of the new court, and remove a great deal of the objection, on the ground that the new court would have little business to transact. The hon. and learned member for Plymouth proposed that the entire contentious business should be transferred to the common law judges. He concurred with his hon. and learned friend in thinking that those iearned persons would be the best judges in those cases ; and if the Government were prepared to state that the judges were willing, as well as able, to transact the new business, he would adopt the amendment of his hon. friend. He must, however, express his doubts on that subject. As far as he could collect the opinion of the judges it was this, that it would be impossible, consist ently with the other important duties they had to dis charge, and the interests of justice, to throw . upon them this additional mass of business. (Hear.) The judges bad to open new nisi prius courts in order to be able to meet business they were now called on to tran-act. It was a matter of great importance to consider what the jurisdiction of the new court should be. In this respect what bad been suggested by the hon. and learned mem ber opposite was as nearly as possible in conformity with the bill which he (S,r F. Kelly) laid on the table last session, and he hoped those suggestions would be adopted by the committee. The Lord Chancellor had stated that a main principle of the bill was that the business of the court, and the mode of adruinics tration, should he based on common law principles, but he (Sir F. Kelly) submitted that would not be the case, unless the measure was materially altered. The sth section proposed to enact that the judge of the Prerogative Court should be the first judge of the new court. He would at the proper time propose to omit that provision, and leave the choice of he crown entirely unfettered. It was further proposed that until the jurisdiction of the Admiralty was trans fared to the new court the salary of the judge should only be 4,0001. He thought he ought to b© placed in all respects on the same footing as the puisne judges and the Vice-Ohancellir, and have the same salary. He also thought it would be advisable to make a further change, so as to enable the jode.e to transact the whole business of his court. With a competent judge, and he was sure none other would be appointed, there would be no cccis sion for sending issues to the courts of common law to be disposed of. The judge should have authority to sum mon a jury, and so dispose of the entire business. The result would be that the non -contentious business would remain in the bands of those best qualified for it ; and the whole of the contentious, except that small portion allotted to the county courts, would be disposed of by the court in London. It was said that the judge of the new court would not have enough to occupy his time. To meet this difficulty, he (Sir F. Kelly) suggested that, if her Majesty should be pleased to name him a member of her Privy Council, there should be a provision in the bill to make him one of the Judicial Committee. Mr. MALINS thought that the amendment of the hon. member (slr. Collier) would transfer all the business to the courts of common law. It raised a very important point, and he was surprised the hon. member had sat down without giving them some explanatirn of how the business was to be done. This bill was founded on the report of the Chancery commission, which, after full con sideration of the subject, reported that the jurisdiction ought not to be transferred to any court where the testa tut:Lary administration was not the primary business of the judge, and that it was inexpedient to transfer it to the courts of common law. The hon. member proposed to establish a registry instead of a court, but the commission reported that it was of the highest importance that the common form business should he presided over by a qualified judge. It had been said that the business of the court would be much increased by tie fact of its obtaining jurisdiction over cases of real estate, but the committee must be aware that there were very few cases which related solely to real estate. In his whele professional experience he Lad riot met mote than five, and all wills which related to both real and personal estate should be proved as at present, s that the increase from this source would be very small indeed. Mr. BOWYER entirely approved of the amendment. Its prirciple was to get rid of a most unscientific distinc tion of jurisdiction. There was no reason why they should have a separate court for wills any more than fir leases or for mortgages. He did not see what necessity there was for probate of a will any more than of a deed, although he admitted it would be very desirable to have a registration of wills. If a will was not disputed, why should it not be treated as a deed that was not disputed ? At present, if a real estate of 10,000/. a year was left to him, he took possetsion of it at once ; but if he got a le gacy of 101., he could not get it without obtaining pro. bate from the Ecclesiastical Court. The amendment prc. posed to give all the common form business to the regis trar, who would not be a court, while all the contentions business would go to the common law courts. Mr. ATHERTON , aid some remarks had been made as to the amount cf business in the common law courts. A certain class of scandalous business had been 'got rid of, but other business had very much increased, and it was as much as the judges could do to get through their work. He believed that very day there were six judges sitting in Guildhall to dispose of jury causes. Mr. WHITESIDE would wish to know from the At torney General why, if a man in the North of England was to be allowed to prove a wilt of 1,590/. on the spot in a cheap way, he should not do the saints if it was for 15,000/ ? Mr. A.YRTON hoped the important question involved in the amendment wouid not be decided on the narrow issue of whether the judges of the courts of common law -fere fully occupied er not. He believed the bill was founded on the soundest principle of law reform, that the entire of this business of wills and letters of administra tion should be entrusted to a single judge, who wou'd discharge the whole duty. He believed that the only way they could obtain perfection in the administration of jo-tics was by that di?ision of lab3ur which had proved so successful in every other department. Mr. DUNLOP said a system similar to that recom mended by Mr. Collier had been in use for the last 30 years in Scotland, and it had been fount to work ad mirably. (Hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL reminded the hon. gentleman that the Wills Act was not in force in Scot land. In that country any document, of the most in formal kind, would at once be admitted ; so that there was not tnat amount of care required in dealing with wil s there as was the case in England. When a man died they could not have a scramble fi r his effects ; and so they roust constitute some person as his representa tive. Who that representative should be was deter mined according to the tenor of the will itself, if the tee tutor left directions on that point; but if not, it must be determined by certwn rules of practice. In a great variety of cases no doubt there was no contest, but in struments were csnstantiy brought for the purpoie cf pro if 6f a most irregular, unfinished, and imperfect cha racter ; documents c mtsining numerous erasures, inter lineations and alterations, whether those alterations were intended to be final, or whether they were what were t .conically called deliberative ones. In all these cases he document had been submitted to the judge, and a vast proportion of the 25,000 wills which were annually proved needed thus his personal inspection, to satisfy him that the requirements of the Statute of Wills had been complied with. Now, that was a very onerous duty ; ler if the wrong document was admitted to pro ba4,e, and the wrong executor converted to his own use steak standing in the public funds, or in a public com• pahy, in the name of the deceased, the executor ap pointed by the will, which ought to have been admitted to probate in the first instance, might go to the bank, or to the public company, and insist on the money being paid a second time. It was clear, therefore, that the duty of granting probates could not 1).3 confided, with any chance of its tieing duly performed, except to a per s.ni of practiCal experience and skill. If they threw the work upon the judges they could only take it at cham bers, and the result would be the most conflicting and dis tracting discrepancies in practice. Besides, he (Sir It. li tileli) had justreceived a communication from the Lard Chieflkera tju'tic', stating that it was utterly impossible for Ini o ess h . ad la be a en fev e undertakeu. either the common form or the con tentions b : I appointedday s the reportto inquire of the int com missionersinto theconstitution of the cona an law courts would be published, and it would b e found to contain Bothell) found aetatement to thesame effect. H e (Si r R. B3th rand th a t i n two days 1 4 documents h a d b een reserved the r eg i s t ry of the Pre rogative Cou r t, f or the personal co nsideration consideration and exa inination of the judge, besides those which had been brought before him in court. The hone would therefore see how much time woul t be required when h not of the province of Cant er b ury only, but t of e busi ness, the country, came before one j u d ge. He would re' Whole I members that it was int en d e d f or the judge : I f I t u h d e } P o inn u ro. " bate Court to be likewise th e j u d ge ordinary of the court which would have to deal with marr i age and divorcret fie regretted that the powers proposed to be conferred on him were not larger, but it bad been thought desir able to adhere as much as possible to the report of the commissioners whb had sat upon the Ecclesiastical Courts. He was happy to say, however, that he entirely concur. red in the opinion which had been expressed, th a t this judge should have power to try issues himself when that could be conveniently done. So far, then, from having nothing to do, his apprehension was that the judge would 11" find his time adequate to the discharge of his duties, and that he would not be able to try any considerable number of issues. Still, whenever it could be conve. niently done, it would be open for him to take cases in stead of sending them before the ordinary common law tribunals. (Hear ' hear.) Mr. COLLIER, after the statement of the hon. and learned gentleman, and especially after the communica tion from the Lord Chief Justice to which be had refer red, would not press his amendments; but as it was now determined that there must be a Court of Probate, he would devote his attention to making that court as per fect as possible. (Hear.) The amendment was then withdrawn, and the clause was agreed to. On clause 5, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL proposed to strike out the proviso contained in the last three lines, because that ' would seem to make it imperative on the distinguished and eminent judge of the Prerogative Court to be the fiat judge of the Court of Probate. Sir F. KELLY concurred in this amendment. Mr. MA LINS thought that instead of omitting the proviso it would be better to insert the words, "if be shall be willing to accept such office." Mr. AYRTON regarded the two offices as virtually the same, and thought they ought to make the accept ance of the new judgeship imperative on Sir J. Dodson. The proviso was, however, struck out without any further observation. On clause 6, Mr. HODGSON asked the Attorney-General to fur nish the house, on some future occasion, with an esti mate of the prob a bl e y ear l y expense of the new court. Mr. ADAMS repeated' his suggestion that the Admi ralty Court should not be united with the Court of Pro bate. He thought it would be far better to send Admi ralty eases before the common law courts, with juries of nautical men, than that the judge of the Probate Court should not hays time to try the issues that might arise. He objected to the limitation of the provincial probates to cases where the property did not exceed 1,5001. There were cases in which a man's debts might swallow up the greater part of his estate, and there was no reason why the unnecessary additional expense of bringing the matter up to London shoul i be imposed upon the executors. Mr. W. WILLIAMS said that no alarm need be ap prehended with regard to the amount of work that would be thrown upon the judges by having to transact the business of the Admiralty Court. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL bad satisfied himself that there were reasons why it would be better that Admiralty cases should be confined to a single judge. The clause before the committee simply provided for a future eontingeney, upon which a bill would have, at some future period, to be brought in ; in the meanwhile that contingency ought to be provided for, and he trusted that the cenirnittee would accept the clause. Mr. ATHERTON thought that the common law courts were already sufficiently burdened, and that to add any more business would be to place the last straw on the camel's back. Sir F. KELLY approved of the cause. No doubt many questions came before the common law courts which came before the Court of Admiralty also ; but the latter court had a jurisdiction in rem which the former did nut possess. Tess jurisdiction was of the utmost uti lity where one of the parties, as frequently happened in collision cases, was a foreigner, residing out of the juris diction of the ordinary courts. He trusted, therefore, that this jurisdiction in Admiralty cases would be care fully preserved. The clause was then agreed to. Upon douse 10, Sir E. PERRY moved to leave out after " esta blished," and insert " District courts to be presided over by the county court judge in all county court distric's except those of the metropolis (Nos. 40, 44, 42, 43, 44, 45, 47, and 48), and a public registry shall be attached to each court, the registrar whereof shall be under the control of the Court of Probate." His object was to as sociate the registrar with the judge of the county court. Taking Devonshire, the county with w'aieh he was con nected, as an instance how the matter would be affected if the bill passed as it stood, he might mention to the committee that whereas at the present time probate could be obtained at the different places in that county, under the bill there would be but two such places where that facility would be afforded. Now the effect of his amendment would be to attach au ecclesiastical registrar to each county court. This proposal' would Lad to the appointment of 51 registrars instead of 41. There would accrue from such a proposition a benefit to the public, inasmuch as at a future time the registrarships could be held by the county court registrars. Mr. ATHERTON supported to„ amendment, consi dering it to be most desirable that in small properties the greatest possible facilities should be placed in the way of those having to administer the estates of deceased par- I ties. Mr. COLLIER thought it was contrary to principle that the contentious jurisdiction should be marshalled according to the county court districts, while the non contentieus jurisdiction was settled by the diocesan dis. tricts. One system ought to be adopted, and that system was the county court districts. The diocesan divisions were antiquated and inconvenient, while those of the county courts had recently been settled by a commission which had carefully inquired into the whole matter, and were therefore moat likely to meet the requirements and the state of population at the presenr day. Mr. B. DENISON supported the clause as it stood. He could safely say that those , parties who li ve d i n t h e Yorkshire distri c t s were extremely anxious that the ex isting divisions should be preserved, and that York should continue to be the centre of them. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was sorry that he could net for a moment listen to the amendment of the hon. member for Devonport. The hon. member talked of convenience; con venienee, when the committee was dealing with rural districts, consisted in preserving, as far as possible, the existing habits of the people. They would find it most to their convenience to go to those places to which they bad been in the habit of going in order to prove wills. The hon. member proposed to undo all existing arrangements, and then to impose upon peo ple the necessity of travelling about after the county court judge—for that functionary visited different towns is succession—in order to transact the common form business of proving a will. And the person to transact that common-form business was to be a registrar of that county court. But he reminded the committee that these registrars had important duties to perform, and it was highly expedient that their offices should be held by men who were possessed of ampleexperience. The:billßroposed to place experienced gentlemen in the position of regis trars, and to give them the means of communication with the judge of the Court of Probate in London. Thus it was hoped that due security was made for the proper fulfilment of the important duties entrusted to them. The county court judge would be competent to decide matters of fact, but it would be quite at variance with their intention to mix them up with more important questions. Mr. COLLIER said that all he contended for was that the registrar should be attached to the county court. Nothing that bad fallen from the Attorney-General had altered his opinion. Sir E. PERRY said that the Attorney-General had misunderstood him. His only object was that the regis trar ghoul f be attached to the county court, instead of the diocesan court. His hon. and learned friend proposed 41 registrars ; he suggested 52, to be located in some central spot in each district. The amendment was withdrawn, and the clause then agreed to. Clause 11 was then agreed to, without discussion. Clause 12, with some verbal amendments proposed by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, was also agreed to. Clause 13, Mr. DIVE rr moved to insert, in line 2, after the word "court," th e wor d s " and all managing clerks who have been continuously employed in any diocesan court for 15 years and upwards immediately before the passing of this act." The ATTORNEY -GENERAL objected to inserting any words having reference to the managing clerks in that clause. Their case might be considered lower down in the bi.l. After a short conversation the amendment was nega. tived without a division, and the clause agreed to. Clause 14, An amendment, proposed by Mr. SALISBURY, was assented to by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, and the clause agreed to. Clause 15, fees of diocesan and district officers. Mr. MALINS proposed that these officers should be paid by fix id salaries. Mr. ROEBUCK supported the amendment. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected. It would be impossible at present properly to apportion the salaries. Tne amount varied much in different districts, and if the officers were paid by sala r i es some would }Ave too mach and some too little. After an observation from Sir E. PERRY, Mr. HENLEY thought that Government had taken the wisest course in adhering to the fees. When this act had worked for a few years they might be able to fix on a proper scale of salaries. Mr. ROEBUCK said the work might be as hard in a small district as in a large one, while the fees would be very different. He wished to know on what scale the fees were to be regulated. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the mode of regulating the fees would be two-fold. lathe &et place they would be regulated by the amount of the stamp, which was sometimes so mai as sevenpence, and not according to the length of the document. In some csses the probate might contain only a few words, and in others it might extend to several sheets. The fee would be in proportion. Mr. BRISCOE opposed the amendment, which was put and negatived, and the clause was agreed to. Clau-es up to 23 inclusive were ordered to stand part of the bill. Mr. WESTLIEAD inquired whether the clerical sur rogates would under the bill continue to perform the duties which now dev)lved upon them of swearing affi davits, &c. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL could not say that it might not be necessary, in framing the rules and orders, to alter in some way the duties which were now per formed by the surrogates. But this he said, viz., th-t with regard to the surrogates, and the clerical surrogates more especially, it was intended to secure them the full measure of remunerative employment they now enjoyed. Mr. STEEL moved to insert in line 31, after " pro bate," the words "Provided that in every city, borough, and town throughout England containing not less than 5,000 inhabitants, the judge shall appoint the registrar (4 the county court of the district in which such city, borough, or town is situate, or some other fit and proper person within such city, borough, or town, to be such commissioner or commissioners." Lord HOTHA.2I believed there was considerable diffe rence in the duties performed by the surrogates in York and Canterbury, the duties of the surrogates of York being nearly allied to those of the proctors in the pro vince of Canterbury, consequently their emoluments wer:-0 y (Ater. Was it intended to mete provision Accord. _ _ rHE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JULY 7 1857 ingly in the arrangements for securing to the surrogates their full amount of remunerative employment ? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL could not undertake to say that the orders that wculd be framed would give to the surrogates, who were an exception to the general rule, duties quite as extensive or as remunerative a those they now enjoyed. The proctors of both provinces would be placed on the same footing ; but with regard to the surrogates of York, probably a special clause had better be drawn up to meet their case. The object of the hon. member (Mr. Steel) was, he thought, suffici ently provided for by the bill as it stood. The clause was then agreed to. Clause 25 was also agreed to. In clause 26, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL introduced several verbal amendments, for the purpose of enacting that if any case should arise not provided for by the new rule established under the bill, the mode of procedure should be in accordance with the present practice. As altered the clause would read, "The practice of the Court of Probates shall, except where otherwise provided by this act, or by the rules and orders made under it, be, so far as the circumstances will admit, according to the present practice in the Prerogative Court." After a few words from Sir F. KELLY, expressing an opinion that the practice under the bill would, as the Attorney-General anticipated, be precise and simple, as well as expeditious, Mr. BOWYER proposed an amendment, to leave out the words, "as far as the circumstances of the case will admit," on the ground that they would give to the judge an undue power to alter the practice of the court. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL contended that some such power as he proposed was necessary, especially as the bill would bring into the court many cases of a cha racter different from those which came* before the Pre rogative Court. Mr. BOWYER thought the words would apply to all matters to be brought before the court. It would be easy to introduce words restricting the dispensing power to the new cases. He begged leave to withdraw his amendment. The amendment was then withdrawn. The clause was then agreed to. Clause 27 was withdrawn, the A ETORNEY-GENERAL stating that he proposed to substitute a new clause in lieu of clause 27. Clauses 28 to 31 were agreed to. Clauses 32 and 33 were postponed. On clause 34, Mr. MALINS objected to the transferring of the ap peal from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to the House of Lords, which was a most dilatory and expansive tribunal. He therefore proposed to sub stitute the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council for the House of Lords. The ATTORNEY-GENERALsaid that he admitted the great value of the Judicial Committee; but, if the amendment of his hon. and learned friend were carried, there would be two co-ordinate courts of appeal, which would be a great inconvenience. With regard to the House of Lards, he hoped that before long there would be an improved and generil court of appeal for the whole kingdom. (Hear.) He was afraid, too, that if the amendment were carried, it would bring the house into collieion with the House of Lords, and might therefore endanger the success of the bill. Mr. CAIRNS said it was very much to be regretted that there were two courts of appeal, but why should they, when they bad a choice, take the worst of the two tribunals as the court olappeal ? If the House of Lords was improved as a court of appeal, the appeal in these cases might be transferred to it. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that as the bill court of appeal was the H ouse o f was framed, the prope r Lords. The bill proeosed to affect real estate, and issues as to the title ewe about to be tried before the common law courts. In this respect the House of Lords, had an advantage over the Judicial Committee as a court of appeal, becatse the House of Lords had the power of summoning the judges, which the Judicial Committee had not. The procedure of the new court was assimilated to the common law procedure, and therefore the appeal should be to the House of Lords, who could'summon to tleir aid the 15 judges. Mr. COLLIER saidthat the bill, in fact, appointed a 16th common law judge, and therefore the appeal ought to be to a court of which the 15 common law judges might form a part. Mr. BOWYER said t seemed to be forgotten that all the chief judges of the common law courts, and some of the other judges, were ant only assistants but actually judges of the Judicial c o were always judges sitti ig Committee. In that court there who were versed in ecclesias tical law, but Cure 'vets none in the House of Lords. In appeals from the ecclesiastical courts, the Judicial Committee had always liven. the greatest satisfaction. A report of the House of Lords themselves had ad mitted that the a pp el latejurisdiction of that house was in an unsatisfactory state, and nothing had since been done to improve it. Yet,t was now proposed to send a new class of appeals to that tribunal. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to which app ea l s now c went from the testamentvyourts, sat at all time s o f the year ; and some of tie most important cases came on in November and December. If the House of Lords were made the court of appeal, it would be shut up for six months, and there would thus be a denial of justice for half the year. They muld not reckon on the atten dance of many law lords on appeals to the House of Lords. There was teas Lord Chancellor, and Lord Wensleydale had recentlybeen created peer for the pur pose ; but they could not eeekon on the regular atten dance of Lord St. Leonaids and Lord Lyndhurst. In the Judicial Committee there were five judges regularly attending, besides Sir John Dodson, Mr. BOLT considered the House of Lords as able and excellent a tribunal for the final bearing of causes as ever sat in any country. The most emi nen t men i n the country sat there to decide . causes, an d not hi ng bad oc curred to cast discredit on except some cases which had been tortured into an accusation against it. The Privy Council was not without itt difficulties as to the time and mode of hearing cases. There might be four members present one day, and four o.hers the next. Hence cases were sometimes adjourned far weeks or months to secure the attendance of the same judges. They must either have such a tribunal, or su c h 'an one as the H ouse o f Lords, which only sat during half the y ear. As to ex pense, he did not think ther s was any difference bet ween thenutrwt of two tribunals Probate unal being the nee constitut e d a court of re cord, the appeal was prc oerl y to the House of Lord s ; papers were p r i nte d i n both. The Court s i the cases taken before the Ju dicial Committee includ e d those arising in the coloni se and i n courts which were not courts of records. The ma tter h ad been fully considered by the commission, and he hoped the house would ad here to the big as it stood. (Hear.) Mr. HENLEY said that as landed property was now . he should th ere f ore sup subjected to the probate silty, it was mos t proper that questions involving that p ro p ert y s hould go, as they had i The , opinion o f th e commission been accustomed to do, t o that tri bunal which had waysal pnno rtt this the dealt point bill i with a wass it stood. ut h no e aomdnmous Mr. MALINS did not thin i th ere was any great force in the aroumeut about re al p ro perty , as .the only ques tion which the Court of Probate ha d to decide was whe ther there w a g a will or no veil ; and th e f orms to b e complied with were the same whether real or personal property was concerned. He denied that the House of Lords was a satisfactory court of appeal ; this great court of ultimate appeal was attended by two learned lords only—the Lord Chancellor and Lord Wensleydale. Such a court never could be satisfactory. If it was to be maintained, w hy had sot the Gove rnmen t t a k en steps to put it on a more efficient footing ? They could not mistake the opinion of that house last year. Even appeals from the decision of the Lord Chancellor were heard by himself, and one other, or at the most two other judges. (Hear, hear) Nothing of the kind could happe n i n th e J u dicial Committee, where there were always fi ve j u d g es in attendance. He denied that the judge of the new Court of Probate was a common law judge; therefore that argument entirely fell to the ground. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought nothing could be more unconstitutional or more opposed to existing rules than to confer this jurisdiction on the Judicial Committee ; nor could anything be more impossible in practice. The Judicial Committee was only created a t the expens e o f th e ordinary tribunals of the country, some of which h a d to be shut up while it was exercising its function s as a cour t of appeal. The Court of Chan cery, fur example, had then to be closed, and they were also obliged to draw a way one or two common law judges from their other duties. The Judicial Committee as at prese n t cons ti tute d was inadequate to the discharge of more th an it now accomp li s hed. It had not the pow e r of entertaining a single appeal from any common law or equity court in Westminster-ball ; and therefore when they were about to create a court with a jurisdiction partaking both of common law and equity it would be an anomalous proceeding to send its judgments to an appellate tribunal different from that to which the other courts were subject. They should adhere, then, to the existing rule, and not establish one that would lead to conflicting decisions. If the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords required ameodment let them amend it whet, they saw the prospect of their coming to anything like a unanimous conclusion on the subjec . But, at all events, the committee ought not to counte nance the present proposal, which would utterly destroy this bill, and would impose on the Judicial Committee of Privy Council a jurisdiction over a large of cases which it could not possibly discharge. Mr. NAPIER said that only last week the Lord Chan cellor, Lord Brougham, Lord Wensleydale, and Lord St. Leonard's, assisted by the common law judges, sat to hear appeals in the House of Lords, than which no more efficient or dignified tribunal could be found in any y country in the world. I t was sai d that the house last session almost unanim ous ) condemned the appellate jurisdiction of the Upper Chamber. That was entirely contrary to his own impression of the feeling evinced by the house. Uniformity of decision on questions affect ing the property of the country was indispensable, and to secure that object the House of Lords should be their tribunal of last resort. ----- Mr. MALINS Legged leave to withdraw his amend ment. The committee, withdrawn, and a divi s i on t oo k place. The numbers however, would not allow it to be were— For the amendment ..................... 27 For the clause ........................... 271 Majority ........... On the question that the clause be agreed to, Mr. MALINS said he wished the committee distinctly to understand that he greatly regretted they had had the trouble of dividing. lie had been desirous of withdraw • ng bie amendment, and he thought it was not fair that ;he division should have been forced upon bim under the circumstances. (Laughter.) The clause was then a , ireed to, as were the following clauses to 39 inclusive. On clause 40, which provides that probates and admi utration may be granted in common form by the district registrars when the pereon'el estate of the deceased is ui der the value of 1,5001., Mr. WESTHEAD moved the orniesiote of the woriis after the word "affidavit" in line 30, end the insertion of the following war +s —" and that such probate or let ters of administration shall cover all personality, wher ever situate." The object of his amendment was to en able exscutors, or persons taking out letters of administration, to do so to any amount of personalty. It was stated that four-fifths of the wil's proved in England related to - amounts below 1,5001., and he could not con• ceive what good reason there could be for debarring tes tators from obtaining probate of wills to any amount of personalty in the district courts. (Hear.) Mr. CAYLEY supported the amendment, and ap• pealed to the right hon. member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley), who was a member of the c immission, to explain upon what ground the limit of 1,5001. was adopted. In many instances the machinery in one nia nufectory might be worth 1,5001., and in another worth 2, 0001., and why should the executor of a man whose ma chieery was worth the former sum be enabled to take out letters of, administration in York, while the executor of a person who possessed machinery worth 2,0001. was obliged to come to London. The same observation would apply to household furniture, which in many cases was worth 2,0001., 3,000/ , or 4,0001., and in suoh in etances probate could not be obtained in the district court, but the wills must be proved in London. Mr. HENLEY regretted that he could not give a satisfactory answer to his hon. friend's question, for he must honestly say be was unable to a_sign any reason for the adoption of the limit of 1,5001 (" Hear," and a laugh.) He (Mr. Hanley) divided in the commission against the limit of 1,5001., and he was in a minority of one. (A laugh.) He must say, however, that persons whose opinions were entitled to much greater weight than his (Mr. Henley's) were strongly in favour of adopting a lower limit than 1,5001., and in several of the hills which had been introduced or shadowed out of late years it was proposed that t:se powers of proving in country districts should be limited to a much lower sum than 1,5001. For his own part, be would,have been glad to see the limit extended to 2,0001., or.even higher ; but as some concession roust be made when differences of opinion existed, he would rather have this measure with the limitation to 1,5001., than run any risk of its defeat. If, however, those who had charge of the bill would ex tend the limit, he believed it would be a boon to the country, for 1,500/. would not cover the value of stock upon a great proportion of farms. (Hear, bear ) Mr. MOWBRAY hoped the Attorney-General would accede to the suggestion of the right hon. gentleman, for the only objsct of the clause seemed to be to take busi ness out of the hands of the proctors in the country, and transfer it to Doctors'-commons. Mr. ROEBUCK said he should wish to ascertain from his hon, and learned friend the Attorney-General what reason existed for fixing a limit at al. (Hear.) There was just as much necessity for the employment of officers possessing integrity and intelligence in the granting pro bates of wills in cases in which the sum involved did not exceed 1001. as in those in which it reached 10,0001. If, then, the same qualifications were re guired in the farmer as in the latter case, why fix a limit 1 He saw no good reason why it should be done, while there were many strong arguments against the adoption of such a course. The tendency of the present day was to bring the law home to every man's door, and he should like to know why that which was a sound policy had been departed from in the present instance. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the point to which his hon. and learned friend who had just sat down, as well as the hon. member who had im mediately preceded him, referred, was one which had been the subject of frequent deliberations upon the part of tne commission, That deliberation, he might add, had depended not so much upon the pre con ceived notions of the members of the commission, as upon the evidence of the very experienced solicitors and other practitioners who had been examined before them, and all of whom had concurred in representing thegreat dangers which must attend the unlimited extension of the sum with respect to which probate should be granted in the country districts. He had not been aware that the point would have been pressed so much upon their attention that evening, but since the discussion with re ference to it bad arisen he had looked over some passa ges of the report of the commissioners, as well as of the evidence which they had taken, and he found in the re port the folio wing distinct expression of opinion upon the part of the commissioners : " We think it evident that protection would be best af forded the public by the establishment of a central court in London. The skill and vigilance which are required to guard against fraud and mistakes will be, we think, most certainly possessed by officers in London, under the imme diate control of a judge, to whom they will have an oppor tunity of applying in any emergency that may arise, and to whom they will be immediately responsible." Such was the opinion of the commissioners, and he might remind the committee that the practical working of the law as it stood, owing to the doctrine of bona notabilia, was to bring every cause in which the sum involved ex ceeded 5001. or 6001. within the jurisdiction of the Pre rogative Court. Now, if probate were granted upon an imperfect will, or to the wrong parties, and an executor or administrator were appointed to take possession im mediately of the estate of the testator, and it should be afterwards found that probate had been improperly granted, those persons who might have paid money money under its operation would have to pay it over again. The question therefore was one in which bankers and public companies, as well as the community at large were deeply concerned, and the commissioners taking these matters into consideration, had concurred in the expediency, of a thorough and frequent examination of the documents produced being entered into before probate could with any degree of security be granted. One of the witnesses who had been examined before the commission--he meant Mr. Trevor of the Legacy Duty-office, a gentleman of great experience and intelligence—stated, in reply to a ques tion which had been put to him, that, in his opi n i on , o ne tribunal for proof o f w ill s would be found more efficient than a great number, in consequence of the uniformity in dealing with those instruments which it would be cal culated to produce. He had gone on to say that since the passing of Lord Campbell's Wills Act he had known probates of wills to be granted iu the diocesan county in cases in which the document had been obliterated, and in which no inquiry had taken place as to whether the obliteration had occurred before or after the comple tion of the will. Such was the nature of the proceedings which were sometimes observable in the diocesan courts as they stood, and he did not therefore think that the committee would be warranted in assuming that each individual registrar would be competent to exercise over wills that same careful superintendence that would be exercised by the officers successively through whose bands they must pass in the Court of Probate in Lon don. He might also refs; to the evidence of Mr. Shep herd, who had been examined before the commission, and which went t 3 establish the justice of the view which he had urged upon the committee. The testimony of men of experience in such matters having then been opposed to the continuance of the power of granting probate to an unlimited extent in the case of the dioce san courts, the commissioners had come to the conclu sion that for the benefit of the country districts liberty should be given the registrars of those courts to grant probates to some fixed amount, but that that liberty ought to be confined within very narrow limits. Hi s right hon. friend the member for Oxfordshire was quite right in stating that several members of the commission had been desirious to fix that limit at even a lower sum than 1,5001., but it had not been deemed expedi ent to take that course ; while he was of opinion that, as great critical nicety, great care, and a knowledge of law were required in dea:ing with wills, it was desirable that the district registrars should not be intrusted with granting of probates in cases in which a larger amount was involved. Some limit must be taken, and, it he was not mistaken, the pres en t limit had been fixed by his right h on . friend the member for Oxfordshire, who had stated that, in his opinion, the farmers, whose interests would be affected, would rarely be found to possess bona notabilia exceeding the sum of 1,5001. (Mr. Henley was understood to express his dis sent from this statement.) He had understood the right hon. gentleman to have said so, but, be that as it might, he felt perfectly confident that any gentleman who looked carefully into the evidence which had been taken before the commissioners, and at their report, would feel that they had acted wisely in adopting the course which they had pursued. He hoped, therefore, that the com mittee would not consent to a proposition the effect of which would be to subject wills involving large amounts of property to a comparatively insufficient examination. Sir J. TROLLOPE said the argument of the hon. and learned gentleman sought to establish the expediency of a strict reliance being placed upon the evidence of the solicitors and other practitioners who had been examined before the commission. Now, so far as he (Sir J. Trol lope) recollected the evidence which had been adduced before that commission, it had emanated from persons who were connected with the courts in London—(hear) --and the whole tendency of whose testimony had been in favour of the system of centralisation. His own ex perience went to prove that the business which had been urought under the consideration of the district courls had been most satisfactorily discharged, and he should wish to know from the bon. and learned gentleman whether property which did not exceed a sum of 1,5001. was not of as much value to the person who possessed it as a larger sum would be to the person vrhoin the hon. and learned gentleman seemed to take it for granted would, if he were empowered to do so, seek for pro bate in the district court-. Now, everybody must be well aware that those who bad a large amount of property at stake brought their business up to London. He should like, however, to know why the shopkeeper upon one side of the street, who had property in volved m nly to the amount of 1,0001., should be enabled to transact business at a comparatively trifling expense in the district courts, while a farmer upon the other side, because he happened to possess some hundreds more, should be compelled to resort to the central court f London. He thought the reasoning of the hon. and learned gentleman in support of this view upon the matter was of a character the most unsound. He ob jected to any Ihnitetion at all, and should, therefore, vote in favour of the amendment. Mr. ROEBUCK said, the Attorney-General seemed to fancy that there must he some essential difference between the will of a rich man and that of a poor man, and that he was now making an experiment im corpore vile. (A laugh.) The hon. and Darned gentleman ap peared to think that a testator dying and leaving pro property worth only -1,5001. was a person so poor and unworthy that any inefficient officer might administer his estate, but that a man dying worth a greater amount of property required the exercise of a far higher amount of intelligence in the distribution of his effects. (Hear.) He (Mr. Roebuck) would ask the committee to look how these matters were managed in America. There they had local sou etc of probate which were re girded as great safeguards of the constitution, and appreciated ley the whole population. He wished to see law cheap, efficient, and brought home to every man's door, and he would therefore support the amendment. Mr. ROLT said, there vim, r.o r'onbt the small trades. man or farmer valued his property as much as a man possessed of a far higher ann.nnt of wealth ; but the rea son for the limitation proposed by the clause under con sideration w that a mistake in the granting of probate for farming stock was not irretrievable, and might be set right before any mi , chief was done ; but if they were dealing with money in the funds to the amount of thou sands of pounds, and any mistake were committed even for an hour or a day in the granting of probate, that mistake would be irretrievable. It was that considera tion which led the commission to the conclusion that it was right to limit the amount of the property on which property could he granted by the diocesan courts. Mr. ROEBUCK said the hon, and learned gentleman who last addressed the committee fancied that all pro perty under the value of 1,5001. must necessarily be farming stock, and that all above that sum was money in the funds- (A. laugh.) He would ask the hon. and learned gentleman whether a mistake committed in the granting of probate would not be quite as fatal where the money in the funds, which was the subject of it, was below 1,5001., as it would be where the sum was 15,000/.? If they wanted integrity in the administration of an estate above the value cif 1,5001., he (Mr. Roebuck) con tended they wanted it equally with respect to property below that amount. The committee then divided upon the question that the word, propos.ed to be left out stand par,: of the clause, the effect cf th.e amendment being to strike out the pro vision of the bill by which the jurisdiction of district re gistrars was confined to est Ate under the va ue of 1,500/. Tne numbers were— Ayes Noes Maj+Tity ---31 The announcement of the numbers was received with lou i cheers. The queAtion was then put, that in lieu of the words struck out the words " and that such probate or letters of aCmiwstration shall cover all personalty wherever situate" be inserted in the clauie. Mr. AYRTON suggested that, considering the late ne•s of the hour, the further consideration of the clause of the bill might be postpon d. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the practical effect of the vote at which the committee had unfortu nately arrived—(a laugh)—hon. gentlemen might laugh, and no doubt those woo were opposed to the principle of tl.e bill bad cause to do so, but that vote would, if car ri,d into effec., render the whole bill useless. So fully did he feel the fatal results to the tneaF , ure if the amendment of the hon, gentleman were carried, that he should feel it to be his duty to take the sense of the committee upon the question of the insertion of the words proposed to be introduced by the hon. gentleman. The committee then divided : For the motion l4l Against it 139 Majority The announcement of the numbers was received with great cheering. On the moti•.n of Lord PALMERSTON, The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and a , ked leave to sit again. SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS BEFORE JUSTICES OF THE PEACE BILL. The house then went into committee on this bill. On clause 1, Justices to have power to state a case for the opinion of the superior courts, Mr. HENLEY thought 14 would throw a great in crease of business on the superior courts, and be often used for the purpose of delay. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL believed the effect of the bid would be t bring up only difficult questions of law, which the magistrates were as anxious as the parties themselves to have the opinion of the court on, and no case could be stated except on the application of the parties, and with the consent of the justice. . Mr. G. HARDY considered no case had been made out to show the necessity of this bill. Mr. NAPIER supported the bill. It was a simplifi• cation of procedure, and afforded a substitute fur the circuitous process of the certtorari. Mr. J. D. FITZGERALD con'idered the provisions of the bill so valuable that at his suggestion it was pro posed to extend its operation to Ireland. Mr. MASSEY said that at present there was no means of reviewing the decisicm of a magistrate at petty sessions if erroneous in point of law. The object of the bill was to remedy this defect. Mr. EiENLEY must protest against the magistracy being put to any expense. He should euggest that the cases go through the Home office. Mr. NAPIER thought that his right bon. friend was under a misapprehension with regard to the bill. In most cases before magistrates there were two parties to the question, and these two parties would alone be Becessary to be represented before the superior courts. The ma gigtratewou,dbe put to no expense. . . Mr. HILDYARD c )nsidered it had not been shown that this act would not throw great r xpenses upon the magistracy. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL explained that under the bill all that was necessary was fur the magistrate to write down upon a piece of paper the point of law upon which he bad based his conviction. Beyond this he had nothing to and would be pet to no expense. • Mr. MILES moved that the chairman report progress. The bill would require great consideration before it could be assented to. The motion was agreed to, and the house resum e d. SUPPLY. The report of the committee of supply was brought up and agreed to. ATTORNEYS AND SOLICITORS (COLONIAL COURTS) BILL. This bill passed thr. ugh committee CONSTABULARY FORCE (IRELAND) BILL, Tnis bill was read a third time and passed. SMOKE NUISANCE (SCOTLAND) ABATEMENT BILL. This bill was read a second time. THE MILITIA. Sir J. RAMSDEN brought in a bill ti suspend t 6• making of lists for toe militia LIFE INSURANCES. Mr. WILSON obtained leave to bring in a bill to re gulate life insurance officits. The other orders of the day were then disposed o: and the house adjourned at a quarter to two o'clock. THE FEE'NC fl ELECTIONS. (From the Times.) The elections for Paris have terminated in the return of three Opposition candidates whose pre sence in the Chamber must be most profoundly distasteful to the Government. The intelligence which we publish this morning was received in London after midnight. It is, that Gen. Cavaignac has been elected by 10,950 votes against 9,952 given to M. Thibaut, the Government candidate ' for the third electoral district of the French ca pi ta l. For the fourth district M. 011ivicr, the Opposition candidate, has beaten M. Varin, the Government nominee, by 11,005 votes against 10,006. For the seventh district, M. Darimon, the well-known publicist, who at this election represented the Op position, has obtained 12,078 votes, whereas M. Lanquetin, the Government candidate, obtained but 11,038. A comparison of the figures will show how strenuous and determined the struggle was on either side. This is the first considerable check which the authority of the French Emperor has re ceive], and yet its significance will ba considerably exaggerated. As a demonstration it might be ofgreat mportance if the real brunt of the battle were:io be encountered on the floor of the Chamber ; but the Emperor is well aware that his power is not based upon that foundation. A Parliamentary majority to him is the laurel wreath round the sword ; it is not the sword itself. Tne army and the peasant proprietors are the real safeguards of his power and the guardians of his throne. M•re than this, if the great majority of the metropolitan voters, who really dislike the established order of things, and who have voted for the Opposition candidates, had believed that the effect of the votes which they have recorded would be to plunge France once more into the revolutionary Maelstrom of 1848, they would have held their hands. They may he very adverse to the present Government, but they are still more oppoSed to barricades, street fights, intestine turmoil, and the ruin of their private for tstaes. They do not, however, shrink from the organisation of a Parliamentary oppositiou, because 'he power against which they are acting seems so well established that its destruction, as they sup pose, 'can scarcely follow from such an attempt. We cannot blame them. It is natural that they should seek for freedom of action and speech, and for some share in the direction of political affairs, al though Frenchmen have grievously misused the op portunities presented to them in the course of the last seventy years. From the days of Louis XVI. to the days of Louis Philippe a stable Throne and an out-spoken Parliam'ent hav e never long coexisted in France. We have little expectation that any ft eq . ]. result will now be realised. TlaeXhamber will de stroy the Emperor, or the Emperor the Ckanber, and the chances are much n favour of the latter alternative. We believe the Emperor would wel come an Opposition in the Chamber which was not at the same time a threat against his dynasty and a conspiracy against his throne • and, allowance being made for the subAantial ' differences which exist between his position and that of a constitu tional Sovereign, he would be well satisfied that the "grievances of the country should exhale in the rounded periods of a few orators, and that it should no longer be possible to assert that his rule was the paralysis of p o liti ca l emotion, the deat h-bl ow to I fresdom of thought in France. Is this possible ? Can the French Emperor do this ? Can he place confidence enough in the mo deration, the patriotism, the generosity of his opponents, to intrust them with power which they may turn at any moment against his supremacy ? Can he govern constitutionally if he would ? Many great things he has accomplithel for the • benefit of France ; he has established tranquility and order within the limits of the mother country ; he has restored lustre to tile French arms,,.somewhat dimmed by the internecine strife of 1848 ; he has ever shown himself, finan cial mistakes apart, eager to further every-scheme which could promote the material pros' • ity of the people. All this ho has accomplished, but the con- dition of his success has been the estaLlishment Inc own unque-lioned and unquestionable so preit.a Histenuic of power would net worth six months' purchase iri toe f• ce :fa real Pill lit Is. en taty Olipositon, which could challenge, and with reason, his firiancial arrangyimints, and which could make- constant appeals to !he passions and preju dices of his violent and impulsive people. A des potism, whether founded upon universal suffrage or upon military force, or upon both, cannot flourish in the same soil with the Parliamentary system. The action of a strong minority in the French Chamber could have but one of jest.—the destruc tion of the Imperial power, and the substitution of another in its place. Who, in fact, would be its leader ? General Cavaignac—in other word, the soldier who was for a while himself the ruler of France, and who actually contended for the su preme authority against the present Emperor. The presence of a rival, unless he be. utterly helpless and disarmed, cannot be borne by an absolute monarch. The question, then, would seem to be, how far the Charnbi , r can be suffered to exist, now that it has b een i nv i gora t e d by the r. tur n oithese active and determined oppo nents of the Imperial Power. We bel'eve there has been grievous miscalculation in making any such appeal to the people, for the former Chamber was a ready implement in the hands of its master, and it would have been a far easier task, a far lighter sh.:ck to public feeling, to maintain an Assembly, no matter how servile to which th e coun t ry h a d become accustomed, dan by a fresh act of violence to stamp out once more the first spark of freedom beneath the armed heel of absolute power. The Emperor, no doubt, had been misinformed as to the popularity of his Government. Had the real feelings and opinions of the metropolitan electors been explained to him he would not have courted a dernons'ration which, construe it as mildly as you will, must be accepted as a protest against the Im perial system. The solution most accept ble to the Emperor would no doubt he a refusal on the part of General Cavaignac to tike the oath of fidelity to his Government, but we can scarcely suppose that the members returned on the Opposition votes will be guilty of so monstrous a blunder in tactics. Th s would he to dectire that they cast aside the weapon of Parliament try opposition as unworthy of their grasp. Fidelity to their cors•ituents im plies that they sh , uld take this oath, for otherwise City deprive those who have elected them of any resource save the barricades and an appeal to open force. This rejection of a position won after so long and strenuous a contest is so very improbable a contingency that it would be idle to speculate upon it. "We must consider, then, the new Chamber as Assembled, and the members as sworn. It will be an obstacle in the path of the present Emperor, which no doubt he will tolerate as long as it does not interfere with his popularity or power, .t.ut which he will brush aside the moment it endeavours to make its weight felt in opposition "to his will. Is yet he has the strength to carry out such a de sign, for he is not dealing with power, but with an institution, which may become one if he suffer it to grow to vigour and maturity. The previous career of the Emperor would seem to prove that he is not the man to hesitate in such a choice, or to shrink from such a difficulty. Country Markets. CHELMSFORD-JULY 3. The trade for wheat to-day was firm, at last week's prices, without much eagerness to purchase on the part of buyers. Tho prices were unaltered for Spring corn of all descriptions, and little business done. Wheat, white, old, per s. s. s. s. qr.3l 71 I Oats, per qr. 24 37 n0w....34 70 Peas, Partridge 41 46 red, old 30 61 White 39 42 n0w....30 64 Boiling 39 40 Barley 35 46 Dun 40 42 Chevalier 40 54 I Beans, Tick .36 41 Grinding ..........35 46 Harrow ticks 41 50 Malt 73 77 Mazagan 36 39 Chevalier 75 791 Ditto, new... 36 39 Official Statement of the Quantities of Corn, &c., received in the port of London, from the following 1 oits, from Juno 29 to July 5, both inclusive. p; g I 4.,) 7 3 A,, g 0 { 0 4 G. 44 e-- I i 41 i Colchester • ' ( Elarwich ' 3 -40 ( 6 0 Leigh I 160 —l 1 ktaldou i 772 ; 53 ; 65 ; n _- 1.127 COLCII :ESTER- JULY 4. To-day we had a rather small supply of wheat, and millers being bare of stock caused a better demand. The decline of last week was fully recovered for all useful sam ples. Beans maintained their price. No peas at market. Prices to-day were as follow :—W heat, white, 70s to 748; rod, 64s to 68s; barley, 38s to 428 ; oats, 26s to 28s ; beans, [azagan, 40s to 425; middle and small, 44s to 465; peas, white, 383 to 42s ; grey, 42s to 465. KIRKCALDY-JULY 4. We had a fair supply of wheat to-day, small of oats, and a few sacks of barley. A dull sale, at barely last week's prices. Wheat. Barley. 1 Oats. j Beans. First Second 54s Od 36s Ocl I 283 01 Os Oct Third 33s Od I 323 01 I 2Gs DJ f Os Oct COAL MARKET.—JULY 6. • Prices of Coals per ton at the close of the market. Walisend, Ate. Wallsend, to. s. (1.! s d. Stewart's. 17 0 Braddyll 15 9 Cassop l6 313outh Hetton... ........... 17 0 Caradoe... La mbton l6 el 4eaham l5 9 Tees l7 o(Trimdon. ...16 0 Ships at market, 38; sold, 29. (ADVERTISEMENTd— SPORTSMEN AND GENTLEMEN OF TIIE ARMY AND NAVY. —S. and Fi. Sob bone, opticians, 39, Albe marle-street, Piccadilly, West. Obsezve—opposite the York Hotel. --Portability, combined with great power in Field, Racecourse. Opera, and general out-door day and night powerful waistcoat pocket Perspective Glasses, weighing only four ounces, each containing 12 and 18 lenses, con. strutted of German glass, will show distinctly a person's countenance two and a half and three miles. They serve every purpose on the race-course, and at the opera houses, country scenery, and ships are clearly seen at 8 to 10 miles. They are also invaluable for shooting, deer-stalking, and yachting. Single ones, the size of a walnut, possessing the same great power. Her Majesty's Coast-Guards are making use of them as day and night glasses, in genera use by gen. tlemen, of the Army and Navy, and by sportsmen, gentlemen, gamekeepers, •and tourists. The most powerful and brilliant telescopes, possessing such extraordinary pow er t h at some, three and a-half inches, with an extra astronomical eye-piece will show distinctly Jupiter's moon's, Saturn's ring, and the double stars ; with the same tlescope can be seen a person's countenance three-and-a-half miles distant and an object from 14 to 16 miles. All the above can be had of larger and all sizes, with increasing posers, and are secured by Her Majesty's Royal Letters Patent. Newly-invented Spec tacle Lenses of the gri a est transparent power. The valu able advantage derived from this invention is, that vision becomes preserved and strengthened ; very aged persons are enabled to employ their sight at the most minute occupation— can see with these lenses of a much less magnify ing power —and they do not require the frequent changes to the dangerous effects of farther powerful assistance. Persons can be suited at the mos' .remote part of the world by send in , one of the glasses out of their spectacles in a letter, and stating the distance from the eye they can read small print with it, and those who have not made use of spectacles by stacing their age. Deafness.—A newly-invented instrument for extreme cases of d , afness, called the Sound Magnifier, Or4anic Vibrator„ and invisible Voice Conductor. It fits so into the ear as not to be in the least pert, ptibl, ; the un plea. sant sensation of singing noises in the head is entirely re mond It affords instant relief to the deafest persons, and enables them to hear distinctly at church and at Lublic assem. 1)110-. 31, Albemarle-street, Piccadilly,—Opposite the York Hotel, W. B I ,R T II S. OF A SON. On the sth inst., at 14, Ashley-phce, Westminster, the wife of Archibald Smith, Esq., of Lincoln's-inn, barrister at-law. On the 4th inst., at Ashdalo, Pembrokeshire, the wife of Henry B. Saville, Esq. OF A DAVOUTER, On the sth inst., at Adhury, Hants, tho wife of William Fox. Esq. On the sth inst ; at 7, Hans-place, Sloane street, the wife of Dr. Charles Gaga Brown. • MAItRIED. On the 4th inst., at St. Ju&J's Church, Southsea, Chas. ITyde, Esq., Captain, Gth West York Regt., to Mary Ann. Louisa, widow of the late William Henry Foakes, Esq., and only child of J. Sewell, Esq., of Albert-road, Regent's park. On the 4th inst., at Islington parish church, Alfred Aurelius, younger sun of Ww. Clark, Esq., of HiBhbury park, Middlesex, to Ma , y Ann Jane, only daughter of the late Stephen Price, Esq., of Felton Butler, Shropshire, and grabddaugilter of nichd. Wace, Esq., of College-hill, Shrewsbury. M racterl Mornii Stalls Polvzr had at their OF IL al Adults, at Cra cess of of Fort Boi The Ls from tl all the being Nvonde EVER Fancy evenin Is. s 'lay be Zeopo: M. having .brated clous .cent Seri d elharle dt istri it is hs.ve 1 the me smart The slam of of Fra XaPolf The Sonal 'egtabli *arc j c 2 gozar receive Maj est by the the m Las al The step ir be so matte] that a brand with 1 orman V ligerr take c are k( is at T. Riven rine CON riTh at th -NOV distr beat,‘ DIED. On the 6th inst., suddenly, at 25, Kensington -gate, Ed ward John Otley, Esq , of 59, Conduit-street, Hanover square, ag- d 59. On the sth inst., at 14, Blandfurcl-square, Edw. Wynd ham, Esq., aged 60. On the sth inst., Mr. B. W. Thompson, of 254, Oxford street, aged 53. On the sth inst., at Counter-hill, New-cross, Chas. Jas. Ellis, Etc,. ' aged 61. On the 4th inst., suddenly, Mary Jane, wife of Richard Abud, Esq., 11, Jonson-place, Harrow-road, daughter of Mr. Joseph Tussaud, Baker -street, and grandaughter of the late Madame Tussaud. aged 27. On the 3d inst., at B3th, Lady Ballingall, of Altamont, widow of Sir George Ballingall, late Professor of Milit Slug:Ty in the University of Edinburgh, aged 64. LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG', of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county of Middlesex, Tuesday, July 7, 1867. M M It r