The Sun. — London, England, 1857-08-18 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.) ROYAL COMMISSION. __ Their lordships assembled at four o'clock. The royal assent was given by commission to the following bills : County Court Judges (Falconer's and Yates Salaries), Superannuation Act Amendment, Boundaries of Land (Ireland), General Board of Health Continuance, Atter nies and Solicito►s (Colonial Courts), Ilticit Distillation (Ireland), Loan Societies, Burial Grounds (Scotland) Act (1855) Amendment, Summary Proceedings be fore Justices of the Peace, Glebe Lands (Ireland), Banking, Crown, &c., Suits (Scotland), L an d T ax Commissioners Names, Industrial Schools, Muni cipal Corporations, Fraudulent Trustees, . New Zea land Loan Guarantee, New Zealand Company's Claims, New Zealand Government Act Amendment, Haelingden and Todmorden Roads, West Somerset R a il wa y, New Brunswick and Canada Railway and Land Company, Norfolk Estuary Act Amendment, Thames Conservancy, Tweed Fisheries, British and Irish Grand Junction Railway', Fine bury Park (No. 2), Sittingbourne and Sheerness Railway, Herne Bay and Faversham Railway, Taff Vale Railway, South -Eastern Railway (Greenwich Junction to Deptford), Newry and Enniskillen Rail way, Mayor's Court of the City of London, Wac 43Am Railway, Shepherd's Disabilities Removal, Baring's Diborce, and Guistiniani's Naturalisation. The Lords Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, the Ea•l of Harrow by, and the Duke of Argyle. Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition from Cupar, Fife, praying that certain enactments in the Boundaries of Burgh bill might be made obligatory instead of per missive. THIRD READINGS. On the motion ~ f Lord REDESDALE, the Seinde Railway and the Eastern Bengal Rail way (Amendments) bills were read a third time and passed. ROYAL BRITISH BANK. The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition from the s'riar,hi , l iers in the Royal British Bank praying that that portion of the Joint Stock Companies Bill which bad reference to them might not be passed into a law. The Commons' Amendments to the Lords' Amend ments in this bill were then considered. As the bill was first framed the Tipperary Bank shareholders were required to refund the 2s. dividend which they had re ceived, in order to share the advantages of the present measure. The Commons did not think it was fair to ask those judgment creditors to refund the 24., and proposed amendments accordingly. The LORD-CHINCELLOR made a further amend ment to the amendments, to the effect that the share holders should not refund the 2s. He .coved, therefore, that the Commons' amendments with an amendment be agreed to. Lord ST. LEONARDS was of opinion that the Com mons' amendosentq were such as ought to be agreed to. Their lordships divided, when there appeared— Content Non-content 9 Maj REFORMATORY SCHOOLS BILL. The Commons' amendments to this bill were consi dered and agreed to. EiULNVICFI COLLEGE BILL. The-Commons' amendments to this bill were consi dered. The Eari of HARROWBY moved that the Commons' amendmenti to clauses 3,4, 5, and 6 be not agreed to. The motion was agreed to. LUNATICS (SCOTLAND) BILL. This hill as amended Was read a third time and passed. BURIAL ACTS (AMENDMENT) BILL. This h 11 as amended was read a third time and passed after the Earl of GBANTILLE had made certain amend ments, which were a reed to. BOUNDARIES OF BURGHS (SCO rLAND) BILL. This hill was read a third time and passed. The Valuation of Land (Scotland) Act Amendment Bill was read a tbird time and passed. The Ecclesiastical Commission Biil passed through committee. The Consolidated Fund Approopriation, the Probate and Letters of Administration (Ireland), the Parochial Schoolmaster's (Scotland), and the East India Mutiny Bills were read a first time. Their lordships shortly afterwards adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at twelve o'cl)ck. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Lordl' Amendments to the Lancaster and Car lisle and Ingleton Railway 8,1 l were considered and agreed to. MERSEY CONSERVANCY BILL. Sir J. GRAHAM moved that a select committee be appointed to itrpect the Lords Journal relative to the Mersey Conservancy Bill, which had passed this house. The right hon. baronet having explained the objects of the and its progress through this house ancl the House of Lords up to its being referred to a select committee, said that the object of the motion was to put an end to the present bill, with a view of introducing another bill this session, to be passed through is various stages without dtlay, to give effect to the bill in the House of Lord., changing the amount of compensation from 750,000/. to 1,500,000/. Mr. J. EWART seconded the motion. After some remarks from Mr. HENLEY, The motion was agreed to and the committee named. DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES BILL. The committee was resumed on this bill. On clause 28, providing for the dismissal of petitions, Mr. HENL EY asked for an explanation of the clause. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the the 27th and 28th clauses were proposed with a view of prevent ing collusion between the par.ies in uncontested cases, and the 29th gave an =tended area of defence. Mr. HENLEY moved the omission of the words "alleged adultery," and the insertion in the'r place "facts allPged," to make the clause consistent with the 27th clause. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected to the amendment. After a discussion in which Sir W. Ileathcote, Lord John Manners, Mr. Ayrton, the Attorney-General, Mr. I Butt, Mr. Henley, Mr. B.)ril, Mr. Wigram, and Mr. Walmla, took part, The amendment was withdrawn. Mr. BOVILL moved an amendment :----That condo nation of adultery on the part of the husband should not be an absolute bar to a di v'orce for subsequent adultery on the part of the wife, but that it should be left to the discretion of the c turt. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL accepted the amend. ment, and it was subsequently agreed to by the Coal• mittee. Mr. H. INGRAM moved an amendment, prohibiting a petitioner, whose petition has been dismissed from again petitioning the court in the same ca. ,, e within five years. If parties aggrieved were allowed perpetually to apply to the court it would engender the worst feelings and destroy domestic peac,!. On the other hand a period of five years was likely to cool down the passions, and give rise to a reconciliation Tne ATTORNEY GENERAL said that the appre hension of the hon. member was unfounded, because the bill prevented a second application to the Court after a decision in the same case. After some discussion the amendment was negatived. The clause, with amendments, was then agreed to. Clause 29 decrees dissolving marriage. Mr. M‘MAHON moved an amendment that adul tery, previou-ly committed by the petititioner, should be a bar to obtaining a, divorce for subsequent acts of adultery on the part of the husband or wife, as the case might be petitioned against. A discussion ensued, and the committee divided. For the amendment Against it: Alsj rity The arnetalinent was eonsequdntly lost. Mr. MONSELL proposed to leave out the words "such marriage ti be diss,l-led," for the purpose of in serting the words " sentence of judicial Reparation for life." He thought it the best way of raisin, the impor tant question, that had not been cmsidered by the com mittee cr the house in connection. with this bill, whe ther they would give to the court about to be constituted the power of granting divorc3 a vinculo, with power to the parties to marry again. Mr. WIGRAM rose to order. He doubted if it was competent to raise the question after the committee had passed the 25th clause. - Mr. FITZROY said that the committee having de cided to give the new Court power to grant divorce by the 25th clause, it could not be again raised. Mr. MONSELL seid his oi'ject in wishing to take a discussion on the question of divorced parties then was to Pave time. The motion being out of order was than withdrawn. On the question that the clause stand part of the bill, THE DIVORCE BILL. Mr. WALPOLE moved a proviso to the effl.ct that The house then went into committee on this bill. the C our t s h ou ld no t on an application from the husband Progress was resumed at clau se 30. 1) . 1. divorce against the wif e for adulte r y, grant or decre e a Mr. HENLEY Raid that in clau se 16 prov i s i on was divorc e made that in all suits other than for a dissolu ion of mar "° - o: s ee where it was proved that th e h us b an d h a d p re - Iv committed adult er y w ith ou t con d ona ti on on th e riage, the court should proceed on th e pr i nc i ple now Pert of the W 1 . i . ~. acted on in the Ecclesiastical Court, and s, grant meTnht,eaets.T, T e .O a lkltlEY- . GENERAL opposed the amend- alimony and the means of carrying on a suit to a wife pender.te lite ; but he did not find in this clause any pro -11 would L: 1! inconsistent with the principle of the tell_ nation to ard if they permitted divorce with condo- vision of that kind applicable to divorce a vineulo. He extreme adoptcase,it sueh a proviso as this. To suppose an should move to insert :he word "alimony," tieroule be a hardship to refuse a hut- Lord LOVATNE moved, in line 8, to leave cut "way, band a divorce profligate wife because some if it shall think fit," and insert " shall." twenty years before from lira: committed an isolated act of The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that in divorce adultery of which his w were instituted against 1 1 ,;7 as ignorant, till proceedings zdilher agents had made the bills hitherto, according to the practice, the House of Commons took on itself to award some means of main discovery, The husband repented of his tenance to the wife, when the husband only was con error, and his subsequent coLetethave his w ife no cause of comphtint.havlntbweaens aßcTahesatsiotno cerned. But this clause referred to both parties, and he give thought had better remain as it was. The bill, as it was that migh t palely b . let, to the discretion Lid J. RUS'iELL supported te clf t he court. worded, did not throw on the court the necessity of proviso, adopting the practice of the Ecclesiastical Courts in After :wile discussion the committee divided. The divorce, although it bad done so in cases oltjudicial sepa numbers were — ration. The question was whether that practice was a For the eroviso.. 4l that one to ba mairttineti. The result might be Against it BO n h o a t t d a e w si if e might fall into the hands of evil advisers, and Mojerity agaiest it 39 1 might U'e applied for a power for purposes of extortion. When 4.l7lwatitleerati the,elec rapbuie that radivorce a vinculo inatricnonii, it was Mr. 80 - STILL moved an amendment, that " no d e . crse shall be issued by the Court where a petitioner shall ' its Procedure, as that the court should be comeelled to adopt have been guilty during the marriage of uni, , Fondriet or Buell a rule proposed.. It was better to leave this neglect towards the other party to the tearrage." He retion of the court is making rules for Dower under the el e:) . urged that this discretion, which was similar to that e.x feared that the court would have no Ir. IeEN L -e,„ a rule imperative on tne co exercised by the House of Lords, should be granted to I A i rmaati d oen, a i p t p rovision on otnoothtnisHe did cot aeketo make such the Court. f ' • sub' ject i A n s ea t s h e e s l o 6 f t i h u d e i l c a i v a a l e s e h p s a d . The ATTORNEY-GENERAL accepted the principle/ echtutto.aek hat in a suit for die of the words of the amendment, but thoueht them too solving a marriage a woman should not be left without general for the object in view. He would consent to the introduction of words for withholding the decree i . where the adulte r y was caused by the neglect or miscon- reasonable means of carryi ng on the suit, duct of the husband. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL —There was give her Creme Mr. L'OVILL consented to the modification, and the moo law liatelity for a husband to maintain his COM• amendie, n_r, so altered was inerteri in the clause. Mr. BO VILL then rnov,d another amendment, that of carrying on a suit against him. Teat w as a 4ns f but there was none to compel him t o the ducii.; 40.111 u.t LC valatcj, "whore • ore the parties peculiar t the I:.c' • - ias'ical Courts. li . Practice 4,, .L , 4 , . e w ou ld cull. . eider whether by any means an obligation to maintain a wife pending litigation could be effected. Mr. MALINS said when a woman had property why should not the husband have a similar advantage ? Why IA case of divorce ought she not to be compelled to make a settlement for the benefit of children i ? Lord J. MANNERS said he knew that such a case had arisen, and he hoped the Attorney-General would alter the clause so as to meet such a case. Mr. BUTT said the case just alluded to was pro vided for in the 42d clause ; but the case put by Mr. Henley was not provided for. He had given notice of his intention to move an amendment, to the effect that in the case where an innocent wife obtained a divorce, the Court should have the power to award her a main tenance from the husband's property. If that was the intention of the clause the words did not properly ex press that intention, and if that was not the intention of the clause, he proposed to take the opinion of the com mittee on the point which he had submitted. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he would take the matter into consideration. The amendment was not pressed, and the clause was agreed to. On clause 31, Mr. PULLER said that it made an important alte ration in the law of England, for whereas up to this time adultery had not bead treated as a crime, this bill pro posed to abolish actions of trim. con., and give the power of imposing on the adulterer a fine with caste. The question for the committee to decide was, whether a fine on the adulterer was sufficient, leaving the husband or wife untouched. If the committee should think proper to make the adulterer punishable by imprison ment, it would be eight to do so whether the proceeding should be for dissolution of marriage or judicial separat ion. He proposed to amend the clause, so as to make it run thus :—" Whenever on any petition for dissolution of marriage the adultery shall have been established, it shall be lawful for the court to order the respondent and also the co-respondent, if any, to be punished by fine or im prisonment, or by fine and imprisonment as if on convic tion for a misdemeanor." Previous to put' ing that amend ment, however, be proposed in a prev:ous line of the clause to substitute the word "on" for the word "in." The ATTORNEY-GENERAL raid the question was whether it should be competent to the court to impose on the adulterer a pecuniary penalty, to be applied for Ve benefit of the husband and children of the merrier, or to make a provision for the unfortunate wife, and whether the adulterer should be criminally punished. He would not enter at any length into the question, be cause from the time of the Commonwealth all persons had j wined in condemnation of the principle of making adultery punishable as a crime. On three several occa sions the principle had been discussed in Parliament, in 1781, in 1800, and again in 1812, on a bill of divorce, aecompanied with circumstances of singular atr city, on an action for the seduction of a married woman by a clergyman in Devonshire. The opinion of Parliament was that it would not tend to advance the interests of morality to treat adultery as a crime, and that to do so woull overstep the limits of criminal jurisdiction. The Government intended to resist any attempt to make adultery the subject of ethnical punishment, and he trusted the committee would negative the amendment. Lord J. MANNERS believed the universal testimony of history to be against the opinions of the Attorney- General. The Homilies contained a table of the different lava in which the crime of adultery was set down as a crave offence and punished as such. It was so treated by the Jew', the Egyptians, the Arabs, the inhabitants of the north of Germany and several other countries, aid in France both the guilty parties were liable to imprison ment. The bill might be characterised as a bill for the encouragement and reward of the commission of the crime of adultery, for it declined making the act rn offence against social order, it allowed parties to marry again, and it imposed a pecuniary fine, which, once paid, would enable the adulterer to enjoy the fruits of his crime. The effect of the bill, without some such amendment as that now proposed, woul l be to encour age and not to diec.rurage the adulterer. A great deal had been raid of the Reformatio Legum. Was it true that Cranmer and his associates took the same view as the Attorney-General, treating the crime merely as a private injury ? The Reformatio Leg= condemned the adulterer or adulteress to perpe oaf banishment or im prisonment. The bII treated this great crime with favour and encouragement unknown in the rec irds of the history of any other country. How would it operate on different classes of the community ? The wealthy man could pay a fine. The poor man would be unable to do so, and would have to go to prison. The young and wealthy seducer would be told—" Pay your money—aud then you will be absolved, and may marry whom you please." The poor roan would be told, " You must go to prison, not because you have committed an offence, but because you have not the means to condone it." And yet this bill professed to place the rich and the poor on an equality. It, however, c)mpletely failed in doing so, and was a mere mockery of justice. The opinion of Lord Lyndhuret and other eminent men was in favour of treat ing the offence as a crime, and he trusted the committee would take the same view of the subject, and agree to the amendment of the hon. member for Hertfordshire. Mr. I. BUTT said the committee would involve themselves in considerable difficulty if on the present clause they discussed the question whether adultery was to be made a criminal offence. It would be an unprece dented thing in English law, on a civil proceeding, to convict and punish a man for an offence of that kind. What might be the consequence of carrying the amend ment of the hon. gentleman Why, a man, not know ing that he had committed an act of adultery, might be visited with fine and impriionment, Tue clause in volved another point, and that was an inefficient sub stitute for the action of critic'. con. because a remedy would be given only to those parties who had the means of pro ceeding for a divorce, and the action, which was the pro tection of the poor man's home, would be taken away. It was absurd to make the punishment of a criminal of fence dependant on the accident of resort to other pro ceedings. It would set a bad example to the people to say " the adulterer ought to be punished with imprison ment, but there is a shield round him, and he cannot be so punished unless a suit for divorce be instituted." He trusted the committee would not oa the present clause be drawn into a discussion as to the propriety of making adultery a criminal offence. If the question was to be entertained let it be raised on a separate and distinct clause, and then it could be fairly discussed. Mr. M`VIATION observed that they were going to as similate the law of this country to thatof other countries. In Scotland, by the old law, adultery was a capital of fence, and simple adultery was treated as a misdemea nour. In France and the United States it was punish- able by fine and imprisonment. In the year 1800 a bil, passed the Lords making adultery punishable as a mil demeanour. It was a doubtful point a' the present mo- meat whether adultery was not an indictal le offecc 3. Mr. WIGRA.IVI suggested that it would be better to lat "In" stand, and moved to insert some words that would raise the question. It was not well to take a divi sion as to whether a word in a clause should be " in" or "on.e the grand jury, which was enjoyed by persons accu:ei of the most trivial offences. ([Tear, hear.) Toe amendment was then negatived. Mr. M'MAHON thought the o'ause was now useless, the question of costs being provided for in clue 48. Nevertheless the clause was agreed to. - - On clause 32, " custody of children," Lori LOVAINE (for Mr. Drummond) moved to it- Bert, instead of " the Court of Chancery," at the end of the clause, "the parent promoting the suit, if such parent shall have been free fr •m cruelty or criminality." The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected to the amend. ment. Of course the Court of ChaLcary would respect the rights of the innocent parent, where that parent was able to discharge the duties of guardian. The ainendmnt was negatived. Mr. Bur moved an amendment providing alimony pendente lite, if the suit was one of divorce, in the same manner as if it was for a judicial separation. The ATTORNEY•GENERAL would consider the subject ; and The clause was agreed to. On clause 43—" Questions of fact may be tried before the court." Mr. M•MAHON moved the following proviso " Provided also that, unless the court shall otherwise order, the contested fact shall be tried in the county where the adultery is alleged to have been cotnrnitted." The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that that would generally be the case ; but it would be convenient in some instances to try the cause in London or Middlesex. After some conversation, Mr. M`MAHON withdrew his amendment, and the clause was agreed to. Clauses 34 to 38 were agreed to. On clause 39, The ATfOItNEY-GENEItAL stated, in answer to questions, that be proposed to add words to meet the case parties residing out of the jurisdiction, and to give of thee court the same power as was conferred by any statute on the Court of Chancery. The clau-e as amended was agreed to. On clause 40, Sir W. HEA.THCOTE moved the omission of the words exempting a petitioner from answering any ques tion which might tend to show that be had been guilty of adultery. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the last law of evidence in these cases was that the husband and the wife should not be examined against each other. The words in the clause were not founded on the common law principle—that a party could nut be examined to criminate himself. Sir W. HEATLICOTE said the clause gave the power to examine the parties on all points but one, and that the most material. Mr. AYRTON said the main object of the clause was to get rid of the documentary ex ',mina:dans in the eccle siastical courts. Mr. AI'M ARON supported the amendment. Mr. BUT said they had no right to put to a witness questions which held out the strongest possible tempts. tion to commit perjury. Mr. LOCKE (Southwark) said that no man was bound to answer a question whic'e 1401111 subject him to eccle• siastieal censure. Mr. HENLEY doubted whether the exemption went far enough. If a man were asked whether he had been guilty et bigamy, was he to be required to answer that ? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL explained the precise of ...ct of the clause, which was only to give the new court the power of examining parties in the same way as the House of Lords now examined a petitioner. At the same time it was necessary to put a limit to the ques tions that might be asked. The case of bigamy was so rare, and necessarily included adultery, that no special exerap• tion as to answering on that point was required . The amendment was negatived, and the clause was agreed to. Clause 41 was agreed to. Severs' verbal amendments were made in clause 42, which was then agreed to. On clause 43, which refers to the mode of taking evi dence, Mr. BUTT suggested whether it would not be better to omit this clause. As he understood the clause, one of the parties could now give evidence on affidavit, and after having done so, the other party could require the person making the affidavit to be brought up to London, fur the purpose of being orally exa nined, and the whole matter would have to he gone over again. Mr. GLA.DSTONE said, before the clause passed, he should like to know from his bon, and learned friend the Attorney-General whether the hon. and learned member for Youghal accurately represented the effect of the clause. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that as the bill stood there were some matters which must be tried by a jury. There were others which the judge might send to be tried by a jury. Bat there were many matters with regard to which it might be convenient to have the evi dence taken by affidavit. But if the opposing party desired to have the benefit of a viva voce examination, even after the evidence so given on affidavit, it would be competent for that party to require the evidence to be given orally. In many cases that would be the most convenient mode of proceeding, Mr. BUTT said that the fact of the adultery would not be tried by a jury, unless either of the respondents de mended it, and they would hare that power even after the petitioner had verified his case by affidavit, and been cross-examined in court. Mr. GLADSTONE wanted to know whether both processes of affidavit and examination and trial by jury could be applied to the same case ? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said any person familiar with the course of procedure would know that the court would not. Igrant the right - of cross-examining unitise the party dernandin; , it declared he did not intend to apply fora trial before a jury. Mr. BuTr thought it would be better to strike out the clause altogether. A division was then called for, but none took place, and the clause as amended was agreed to. Clauses 44. 45, 46, 47, were also agreed to. On clause 48, Mr. !WM A HON considered that in all cases the c . ists should follow the event, and moved to insert the words, "That when any contested matter shall be tried by a jury the costs shall abide the:result of the verdict, unless that verdict be afterwards set aside." The ATTORNEY-GENERAL could not assent to the amendment. The matter tried before the jury might be only a part of the subject in issue between the parties. The clause was then agreed to. Clause 49 was also agreed to. Clause 50, court to make rules and orders. Mr. WIGRAM moved to add words to enable the court to provide for hearing certai n causes i n pr i vate. Mr. MALINS did not think the words necessary, as every court bad the power of hearing causes in private: it was the constant practice of the Court of Chancery to do so. He was unwilling to insert words which would sanction a practice which was open to many objections. Mr. WIGRA.NI said the 43rd clause provided that all evidence shou'd be taken in open court, and therefore this proviso was necessary. He would not object to add the words " with the consent of the parties." Lord LOVAINE supported the amendment. The committee divided. For the amendment . 23 Against Mr. HENLEY proposed to strike out the whole of the section after the word "save" in the 21st line. His object in doing this was to leave open to the court the framing of its rules of procedure. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL had not the least ob jection to give up the words. The amendment was agreed to and the clause passed. On clause 51, _ Mr. HENLEY thought they ought not to impose a fine unless they constituted adultery a crime. The At torney-General had given notice of an amendment that the fine be paid to the husband. If this were to be as compenation, he did not see why a jury should not settle it instead of tae judge. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL remarked that by dividing on the words "in" or "on" they were deter mining whether a clause should be inserted making adul tery punishable by fine and imprisonment. If they were to have a fine he preferred that it should be assessed by a jury rather than by a judge, and that it should be paid to the husband, or applied as a provision for the wife, or as a maintenance for the children. Bat at present they were merely discussing the question whether adultery should be punishable as a crime or not. Mr. MALIN'S asked how hon. members who cute in to vote when the ball rang, and who bad not heard the discus-ion, were to know how to vote when the question put was whether the word', should should be "in" or 4 , on"? The amendment was then withdrawn. Mr. BUTT moved to omit the words " to impose upon the adulterer a fine and." The ATT ORNEY - GENERALagreed, and the clause was aitared accurdingly. Lord J. MANNERS then proposed to insert the words, " that the adulterer be punished by fine and im prisonment, or by fine or imprisonment," Mr. BUTT said this raised the question in the most inconvenient form. He could not bring himself to agree that a person should be punished as a criminal on these proeee lings. He did not think criminal punishment should be inflicted unless there was a conviction by a jury. Mr. MALI'S objected to the appeal court number ing within its members the judge against whose decision the appeal went. The clause was agreed to. On clause 52, Mr. WALPOLE objected to the appeal in these cases being limited to questions of law. In matters of divorce questieas of fact were far more likely to arise than questions of law, and inasmuch as all courts were liable to error, he trusted that something would be (lone to meet this difficulty. He moved to omit words effect ing this object. Mr. BOVILL Paid that it had been latterly a well known part of English jurisprudence to allow an ap peal on maters of law. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL quite went with the right hon. gentleman, and was perfectly re tdy to assent to his amendment. He had indeed been prepared to call she attention of the committee to the matter had he not been so well anticipated. The am-ndment and the clause were agreed tr. On clause 53, Mr. ROLT said that upon this clause the potency of the bill for good or evil rnu , t depend. He could not ' agree with the view which had been stated, that this bill was but to create a new court for the administration of the existing law. He believed that i;rt object was to main tain the sanctity of the marriage vow in the minds of many, but yet giving relief to the few, in whose case the sanctity of that vow had been violated. R ith that prin ciple he did not think that this clause was in consonance. The result was that the offence of adultery, which was en offence by the laws of the country, was to be re warded by the liberty to marry again. In cases where hie nnpatibility of temper rendered the marriage life un happy there was no remedy ; but if one or other of the parties committed adultery, then divorce was obtainable. The bill, therefore, would operate as a direct temp'ation to the commission of adultery. It might be said that you could scarcely adopt any legii-lieion which should be free from anomalies. That was true, but let them not carry anomalies further than was necessary. No doubt it was an anomaly that in granting relief by divorce to the in nocent party they necessarily granted relief to the guilty party also. But let them not reward the guilty party by giving the privilege of remarriage because of the guilt. They sh eild take iota account the effect which such a law would have upon the many who did not fa'l within its scope. It was the duty of the legislature to pro ect the man, and not to sacrifice them to the few woo fell into error. It might be well to consider what was the law in other countries as well as in our own country up to the present time. It had newr yet been wiitten in the law of any ceuu'ry that divorce was to be given, by reason of adultery. In France the law was distinct, that the adulterer should not marry with the accomplice. His hon. friend the member for Cambridge had an amendment embracing that principle which he shouldbe content to take as a comprorei,e, though his own amendment went further. In Scotland it was the same, whie in Sweden the adulterer could not marry again i-xeept with the consent of the spouse and by the royal authority ; and then as regarded our own country, he , contended that special acts of parliament, under which alone the authority to marry again was given, dearly showed that the general law did not recognise the prin ciple of the remarriage of a man or woman divorced for the crime of adultery. The probable result of grant'ag license, and extendivg it to the middle slats would be to sap and weaken the notions of fidelity in the con.; jugal relations to an c xtent that it was impossible to - 11ir. WIGRAM should vote for the amendment. There should be some mode of punishment, and he saw no better mode of doing it than by imprisonment. Sir G. GREY said if they determined to punish adultery as a crime, they ought to let the person to be punished have the ordinary advantages which persons had when charged with criminal offences. Sir W. HEATFICOTE supported the amendment. Mr. PULLER said there w4s this ohjectiooo making adultery a criminal offence —it would give any discarded servant power to drag parties before thecourt for matters which bad long since been condoned. If the amendment were agreed to, the accused party would have every advantage which he would enjoy if tried upon an indict ment. He wool I have a trial by jury ; and he would have the charges against him clearly stated in the peti tion. The amendment did n it go so far as he could wish, or so far as he hoped the committee would yet consent to go ; but he should give it his support. Mr. LYGON reminded the committee that one of the principal objects of the bill was to substitute one inquiry for the three which at present exists. But that object would be defeated if there must be a criminal trial as well as the inquiry before the court. Mr. BUT r said the inquiry beceisary for the purposes of a divorce WAS by no means the same as that required before they could punish a man for adultery. In the lat ter case they must prove that the defendant knew that his paramour was a married woman ; whereas no such point arose with regard to the simple question whether there should be a divorce. Mr. HENLEY objected to the amendment. They ought first to settle whether adultery war 4 t I be treated as a crime. The bon. gentleman (Hr. Puller) talked of the hardship of allowing a servant to commence a prose cution for matters which had been condoned; but dit rot that show that adultery was a private wrong? It was not competent to a person to make up a public offsncp, Lord J. MANNERS observed that in France and other countries where adultery was punished by fine and imprisonment, no suit c)uld be commenced except by the injured party. Mr. ADAMS should vote against the amendment, but he wished it to be understcod that he was not oppo-e' to the treatment of adultery as a punishable offence. (night remind the committee that the defendant would - I not iyove the advantage of the previous inquiry before_ calculate. In the majority of the divorce cases that came before the House of Lords it bad boen shown that the adultery had been c:antriitted to facilitate the divorce. They were having the lessons of experienc3 to enter upon the fi.ld of e xperiment, and it was the duty of these who recomim nded that course to prove that it would not be attended with those evils which he had pointsd out. Tae ltw had never yet gone so far as to declare that the guilty party should be at liberty t 3 marry again—though in enabling the innocent party to remarry, that result had followed. There were various modes of meeting the objection to which this clause was open, and the way he proposed to meet it was to pro vide that the disselution of the marriage should not enable the guilty parties to marry again. He moved, in the first in-Lance, the amendment of which his right hon and learned friend the member for the University of Dublin, who was not present, had given notice, viz., in line 15, leave out "the respective parties thereto," and insert, " the party on whose petition the mar riage shall have been dissolved," and leave out "as if the," and the whole of line 16, in order that the dissolutica of marriage might take its course, as it did at present, without directly sanc tioning the re-marriage of the guilty parties ; but he proposed afterwards to submit his own amendment — leave ont "the respective parties," itc., to the end of the clause, and insert " the party on whose petition the marriage shall have been dissolved to marry again, but no sentence or decree of dissolution of marriage pro nounced or made under the authority of this act, shall enable the party ; by reason of whose adultery or other offence the marriage shall have been dissolved, to marry again." — Sir G. GREY looking at the amendment as a whole, thought it would be very Inexpedient to adopt it. The bill would not enable the guilty party to marry again, any more than the existing state of the law did. At present, though it was not declared, yet by giving the party in whose favour the divorce was granted that right, the gui'ty party practically war enabled to exer cise it also. Take the case of a woman who had the misfortune to commit a breach of the marriage vow at an early period of life. Was she never to have an op portunity for penitence or contrition, and, her husband having married again, was she to be compelled to lead for the remainder of her existence a life, as it bad been termed, of " degraded celibacy ?" (Hear, hear.) That would, in fact, be the ramlt of adopting what was pro posed. Mr. S. ESTCOURT said the great advantage of adopting the amendm. ent of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Napier) was, that it wool I leave the law preei , e'y as it stood at present. He believed they woul I be wrong if they attempted to make this bill a refi,etion of the divine law. No doubt, it became them to bear that law in their consciences ; but they must remember that they were then exercising their legislative functions with regard to a civil right. (Hear, hear.) On the one band, they ought not to give to guilty parties a right to claim religious sanctions to a second marriage ; but, on the other, it did not become them to take away from a guilty woman a locus p2nitentim. Mr. GRIFFITH observed that the effect of prohibit ing an adulteress from c.mtracting a second marriage would be, in many cases, to protect the seducer against the natural consequences of his own act, and to numbers such a prohibition would be very agreeable. The cornini!tee then divided— For the amendment Against it Majority —.60 Mr. GLADSTONE said his amendment stood next, and he trusted he should not be expected to move it then, as he should deem it necessary to trouble the com mittee with a statement of some length. Lord PALMERSTON thought the request of the right hon, gentleman perfectly reasonable. The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and ob tained leave to sit again this day at 12. TRUSTEES RELIEF BILL. Mr. WALPOLE moved that the house resolve itself into committee on this bill. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objectel to the mo tion, on the ground that the house bad not sufficient time to consider it, and stated that it was his int,otion to introduce a comprehensive mea-ure on the subject next session. Mr. WALPOLE consented to the withdrawal of the bill, and the order was discharged. JUDGMENTS BILL. This bill was committed pro forma. BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY (IRELAND) BILL The Lords' amendments to this bill were considered and a!reed to. CROWDED DWELLINGS PREVENTION BILL. On the question that the bill be committed, Mr. RIDLEY tnought such an important bill ought not to be pressed forward at that lath period of the ses• sion, and said that unless the right bon. gentleman (Hr. Cowper) consented to withdraw it he should move that it be committed that day three months. Mr. HENLEY trusted the bill would be withdrawn, as he considered it equally objectionable and unintel ligNe. Mr. KINNAIRD defended the bill, and bad no hesi tation in declaring that if the whole of the metropolis could be polled the great majority would be found favourable to the measure. Lord V. TENIPEST opposed the bill, on the ground that it was obscure and despotic. They might almost suppose that it came from the Tuileries. (Hear.) The house then divided on the motion for going into committee. For the motion _ Against it Lord V. TEVI.PEST said he must resist going into committee at that hour. He would therefore move that the debate be adj mirned. Mr. CO WPEit was willing to go into committee and report progress. Mr. COX hoped the house would not go into CJlll mirtee at that hour. Mr. HENLEY humorously expresFed his hope that the bill would be made to apply to Scotland, and that they should not be all 'wed there to sleep more than " three in a bed." (Great laughter.) Lord V. TEMPEST having withdrawn his motion for the adjournment, the bill passed through committee pr, forma. Some returns were ordered, and the house adjourned at two o'clock. Vaval and Military Intelligence. Colonel H. Jervis, in command of the provisional battalion at Chatham, rcceivel erderi yesterday for the whole of the available non•comrnissioned officers and m?n belonging to the following . , depots at Chatham garrison to be held in readiness to em bark at Gravesend on board the Lightning for In- dia, for the purp(,se of reinforcing their respective regiments—viz., Bth (the King's), 10th, 29th, 32d, 35th, 53d, Ist battalion 60th (Rifles), 75th, 82d, and 84th. The remaining companies of the battalion of Royal Marine Light Infantry, stationed at Deal, arrived at he►d-quarter4, Chatham, on Saturday, in charge of Major S. Fraser, Captain It V. Alleo, and Lieutenant E. B. Sao at. The staff of thy bat- talion, under the command of Lieutmant-Colonel J. H. Gaseoigne, will be transferred to Chatham as soon as the =punts of the battalion have been made up. Lieutenant-Colonel RoV)ert Abercromby Yule, of the 9th Lancers, was killed on the 20th June be and its dependencies yesterday morning. .The Board consisted of Sir Chas. W,,od G.C.B, M P. ; • Rear-Admiral the Hon. Sir Rich ar.l Saunders Dun des, K.C. 8., and Mr. B a ti ng , M.P., accompan i e d by Mr. Romaine, S. c S -era at y; C iptain Sir B Ild win W. Walker, K. C. 8., Surveyor :•f • he Navy ; Lieutenant-Co:onal Greene, D:rector of Admiralty Engineering and Architectural Works ; Mr. West, of the Private-office at the Admiialry ; and Mr. Carroll, Assist ant-Secretary. Mr. Lloyd, Chief Engineer and Inspector of Machinery, and Mr. Scamp, Deputy-Director of Engineering and Ar chitectural Works, were also in attendance. The Board arrived at half-past 9 o'clock on Sunday night, per South-We&ern Railway, and immedi ately proceeded on board their old yacht the Black Eagle, Master-Commander J. R. Pe'ley, where they slept. At 8 o'clock yesterday morning their flag was hoisted at the main of the Black Eagle, when the flagship Victory salule - I it with 19 guns. At 9 o'clock their Lordships lauded at the new King's stairs, where they were received by Rear- Admiral Martin and all the dockyard a ttf. The flag was immediately transferred t) the dockyard gates, and the inspection comm.?ncA. wi-h the usual "walk over" the dockyard. They went on b and the gunboats Jassur and Jasper, which are fitting out for sea. At noon they mustered the men' of the dockyard, and afterwards diatnissed them with the customary half-holyday. At a quarter to 1 o'clock their Lordships let the dock yard, and went to the Royal Marine Art llery Barrack, to inspect the darns under the command of Colonel Packe ; from the Uunwharf Barracks tie Board went on board the Victory. Capt tin G. H. Seymour, C. 8., and 'mustered the officers an] men of the floet in ordinary, whence they pro ceeded to inspect the young officers' and seamen's training ship Illustrious, '72, Captain Harris, and the two instruction brigs, Sealark and Rolla, Lieutenants - Lowther and Nelson. After tAs their Lordships went to transact business on board the Black Eagle. They dined last night with the Commander in-Chief at the Ailmralty-hotise. The dock -adjacent to the Master-Boa swain's office in the dockyard is ordered to be lengthened. A letter from the Simoom states that she left the Mauritius on the 24th May, with ti - e sth Fusiliers on board, after firing a royal salute in honour of her Majesty's birthday, and arrived at Singapore on the 19th June, when she received orders from the cap tain of the Spartan to proceed immediately t, Cal cutta, at which place she arrived on the 4th July, and disembarked the sth. It was expected that she would sail again cab tut the 9th or luith July, to fetch more troops, either from the 0 tpe, Mauritius, or Suez. The Spartan and Shannon were at Sin gapore when the Simoom arrived there ; the Shan non having made a splendid passage from England, on ly having occasion to steam 36 hours on her voyage to the Cape, and doing the distance from the Cape to Singapore in 30 days. She was expected to pro coed c lm- nediately to China with Lord Elgin. The ()Rowing appointments hare been made at the Admiralty : • Spencer lvT. Maley, mate, to the Pelorus ; W. H. Elton, mate,. to the Pylades ; Cuthbert R. Buckle, mate, to the Assurance ; the Rev. F. R. Stratton, chaplain and naval instructor to the Py lades ; R. G. Clarke, surgeon to the N ila convict ship ; J. G. T. Forbes, assisi ant surgeon, to be surgeon ; T. Craig, assistant surgeon to th e Jasper, T. C. Hession, a.‘ sistant surgeon, to the Jasper ; T. Backhouse, clerk, to the Bescsweu ; W. Carter, clerk to the Boscawen ; J. Odevane, assistant clerk to the Boscawen. shall have been living apart from each other by consent previous to the adul'erv." The ATTORNEY•GENERAL agreed to the intro duction of worda to carry out the object of the hon. and learned member for Guildford. Mr. BOVILL then moved a third amendment to give the Court the widest possible discretion—the same as that enjoyed by the House of Lords. After the limita tion for divorce in the clause he moved to add "or where a petitioner conic: not as heretofore have obtained a divorce." After some discussion the amendment was negatived without a division. On again putting the motion that the clause stand part of the bill, Mr. MONSELL proceeded to raise the question of marriage by divorced persons, which be said would be contrary to the laws of Christendom, and he instanced the frightful consequences that had resulted to society from such a permission in Prussia. He asked the com mittee to express its opinion on the subject, and he therefore moved the expulsion of the clause. The committee then divided. The numbers were— For the clause Against it Majority The clause was then added to the bill, and the house resumed. • The Consolidated Fund (Ippropriation) Bill, the Probates and Letters of Administration (Ire!and) B:11, and the Jurisdiction in Siam Bill were read a third time and passed. The Cut )ms and Excise Bill, and the Customs Bill were considered or amended and agreed to, and orlered to be read a third time to-morrow. The sitting was suspended at 4 o'clo,,k. The house reamed at six o'clock. MERSEY CONSERVANCY AND DOCK BILL. On bringing up the report of the committee appointed this morning on this bill, Sir J. GRAHAM said he had intimated to the house at the morning sitting, in moving for a select commit• tee to inspect the lords' journals relative to the Mersey Conservancy Bill, that he would move for a suspension 'of the standing orders, for the purpose of re-intro ducing the bill and having it read a first and second time, in order to have it referred on Wednesday to a select committee to be appointed by a committee of selection, and thus enabling petitioners against the bill to be heard. His desire was to have the bill postponed till next session, in order to afford all parties an oppor tnnity of adjusting their differences. The standing orders were then suspended, leave was given to bring in the bill, and it was read a first and second time pro forma, and ordered to be referred to a select committee on Wednesday next, at three o'clock. SANITARY CONDITION OF THE ARMY. Mr. FITZROY moved for a copy of the report of the commissioners appointed to inquire into the regulations affecting the sanitary condition of the army, the organi sation of military hospital, and the treatment of the sick and wounded. Sir J. EAMSDEN hoped the right hon. gentleman would not press for this return immediately, a 3 the re port had not beet received. Cil. NORTH inquired whether the report would b 3 laid on the tahle in the present session. Sir J. RA MSDEN could not say, as the report had not yet been made. MR. F. WARD AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH ACT. Mr. CONING HA NI asked the Vice• President of the Committee of Council on E lucation, whether Mr. F. 0. Ward bad been correctly reported to have said at the International Congress at Brussels, in Sept. last, that the appl cation of the Public Health Act to 200 houses in England had diminished the morality by 50 per cent., and had in their vicinity quadrupled the fertility of the soil I Mr. W. COWPER, said that Mr. Ward was not offi d aily connected with the Board of Health, but the zeal and ability with which he had supported sanitary measures which had preserved the lives of many of his fellow-countrymen had exposed him to some of the mis• representations which had been cast on the Bard of Health. He had a copy of Mr. Ward's speech at Bras- Fe l4, and he must say that the misrepresentations of what he said arose from one part of the speech having been quoted and not the other. Mr. Ward aluded only to a class of houses in places where the air was impure and the water bad, and his statement was founded on satis factory returns relating to Croydon, Leicester, Rug‘iy, etc In the other part of his speech be was speaking of the increased fertility caused by sewage irrigation, and w ben ho said it bad been quadrupled, he was speaking of what had occurred in the neighbourhood of Edinburgh and Ayr. THE INDIAN BUDGET. Lord C. HAMILTON begged to ask the President of the Board of Control whether it was intended to mako the usual annual statement on Indian finance this year, and, if so, on what day. Mr. V. SMITH said the practice to which the noble lord alluded arose from a desire on the part of the house to have at least one day named for calling attention to the affairs of India, and for the President of the Board of Control, to explain the prospective situation of the finances of India. This session the recent occutrences bad caused the affairs of India to be brought forward and discussed on two or three occasions, and it must be ob vious that, owing to the confusion which existed in the North-West Provinces, it was impossible to make any estimate, until the troubles in India were at end, of what the prospective revenue of that empire would be. That being the case, and looking to the lateness of the session and the hopelessness, after the business now before the house was disposed of, of any members remaining, her Nlajesty's Government had decided that there should be no Indian financial statement this year. PRIESTS IN TaE COUNCIL AT MALTA. 1 Mr. KINNAIRD b egge d t o as k the Secretaryof State for the Colonio s wheth er an y s t e p s h a d b een ta k en, or any order in council had b e e n i s s ue d, t o remove from the Legislative Council of Malta any priest or other minister of religion, and to prohibit them in future from being elected or sitting. 33 members of the said council ! Mr. LABOUCHERE Paid that the Cro wn had been advised to issue an order in council by which, for the future, priests of any religious persuasion were to be ineligible to be members of council at Malta. The ruls would not be retrospective, or disturb those persons who now had seats at the council ; but when a general election occurred, or when any vacancy occurred, the rule would be that no priest could sit in the council. sn PE NDIA ItY MAGISTRATES AT KILKENNY. Mr. SULLIVAN begged to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether it was the intention of Government to appoint a stipendiary magistrate to the district of Kilkenny, in the room of Mr. J. Green, who had been physically unable for many months to attend his magis terial duties Mr. H. HERBERT said that as theta was no actual vacancy, it was impossible to say whether the Govern ment would make an appointment immediately. Still he might say that a statement that Mr. Green was not able to attend to his magisterial duties had been brought under the notice of the Government and was under con sideration, and if his absence was likely to be perma nent, steps would be taken to make a change in the ap pointment. - THE LIBERTY OF THE INDIAN PRESS. Mr. DISRAELI—I with to make an inquiry of her Majesty's Government respecting an act of the legisla tive council of I ,dia. which has been lately passed (I believe it is number 15 of the year 1857), restricting the liberty of the press in tt.e dominions of the E►st India Company. I wish to know of the right hon. gentleman the President of the Board of Control whether he would obj ct before we separate to place a copy of that act on the table I Mr. V. SMITH—I have not the least objection to place a copy of that act on the table. I may say that it has been only passed for one year. Mr. DISRAELI—There are two other documents which I wish to have laid on the table of the house, and if there is no objection to produce them I will make a motion for their production. One is a copy of the des patch of the Governor-General of India, explaining the reason why he has ex..ended this law of restriction to the loyal European subjects of her Majesty, as well as to the natives ; and I also wish for a copy of a memorial addi eased to the Governor-General on the subject of the European population. If there is no objection t the production of these papers I will give notice of a motion for their production as unopposed returns. Mr. V. SMITH--I have no objection to the produc tion of such papers as we have. The despatch of the Governor-General is in the possession of the Govern ment, but I am not sure that we have the memorial ; if we have it it shall be produced. Mr. AYRTON—WiII there be any objection to ley on the table a copy of the Friend of India, for which a warning was given to that journal Mr. V. SMITLI—If the hon. gentleman will commu nicate with me in private, I will endeavour to meet his wishes. SDBMAPINII TELLGRAPH. A correspondent writing to a contemporary, says :—"Sir,—Can you spare space in your columns for a practical suggestion ? While Lord Ellen borough is exhibiting himself, night after night, as being by implication the highest authority on military matters ; while Mr. Disraeli is sneering at Lord Dalhiusie under the comfortable conviction that Lord Dalhousie's state of health prevents him from undertaking any defence, or s from administer ing any castigation ; and while Sir C. Napier's clever but somewhat irascible opinions are quoted as oracles, and every other Napier holds him self in readiness to hurl any amount of vituperation against the unfortunate sceptic who may venture to doubt whether Sir Charles's dicta were al ways eon sistent, or urged in such a manner as to effect a practical good, I would venture to ask whether the country is more interested in the question of Lord Ellenborough's self laudation, or Mr. Disraeli's po litical importance, or Sir C. Napier's personal mcrits, than in bringing all its emergencies to bear practi cally on the present emergency, and in directing their application to facilitating the task we have in hand. Your correspondent at Hongkong in his admirable letter in your paper of today, pointedly alludes to the sulject of rapid communicAton. Can any one doubt its value at such a moment It is almost impossible to overrate it. The determina tion tion- which, taken a few we,ks earlier, might have saved an incalculable amount of life or expenditure may be rendered fruitless by the delay which under ordinary circumstances could not be avoided. At this very moment there is an oppeitunity for effect in,g the object which almost seems providential. The magnificent project for c innecting the Old World with the New seems destined for a tithe, and I hope only fer a t'me, to remain in- abeyance. During the approaching autumnal gales it will kirrilybe posslo!e to lay the line across the Atlantic; but the line is perfect and ready fur use ? Why should not the Government at once purchase it, and connect Alexandria with Malta by telegraph ? T believe there is also sufficient line still further to connect Aden with Suez. Here is a work worthy of an intelligent and practical people. If the great Carthaginian (and a greater than, Carthage is here !) ' found a chemical agent for clearing the difficulties which opposed the advance of his army, why shall not we put into immediate operation that wonder ful power upon which the safety and security not only of our army but of an empire may depend Is it to be a question of costs ? Why, millions may be saved by the transmission of one message. We have the oppoitunity of doing it to-day ; To-mor row it may he lost. lam not one of those who rail at red-tapist demerits or Government circum locution. On the contrary, I believe the service of the Government to bo generally better performed than any other service. lam quite sure that if Government departments hal been guilty of half the misdeeds which have been perpetrated by almost every board of railway directorsin the kingdom, to say nothing of joint-stock companies, the Thames would not be large enough to hold the drowning officials. If there is any one who would be likely at once to adopt such a suggestion as I have made, it will be our indefatigable Premier.—l have the honour to be, N. M. London, August 17. fore Delhi, while in the command of his gallant regiment, in an encounter with the mutineers. By his death the Queen's army has lost a gallant and valuable officer: Colonel Yule was in the prime of life, and had seen considerable service in India with the 16th Lancers and'the oth Lancers, into which VALENTIA HARBOUR, AUGUST 14. regiment he exchanged. He entered the former The expedition for connecting the opposite shores regiment as cornet in July/ 1835 , and served in of the Atlantic has at length, in consideration of that corps during the campaign in Aff g h an i s t an j the many chflicult'es which have beset the under under the late Lord Keane, and was present at the taking, and the lateness of the season, been finally siege and capture of Ghuzuee, for which he received abandoned, at least for the present. It was in a medal ; also the campaign on the Sutlej in 1846, j tended, after the breaking of the cab l e , to lose no and took part in the battles of Buddiwal, Ali wal, time in. endeavouring to underrun the portion el and Sobraon. During the later part of the Pun- ready laid down, to join the. fractured ends, and jab campaign be served with distinction as Major of again push forward with the remaining amount of Brigade to the second cavalry brigade, and was rope ; but the general opinion was decidedly present at the passage of the Chenab, at Ramnug- against the probability of recovering the part sunk gur, and the battles of Chillianwallah and Gooje- in anything over 1,000 fath ems. The total length rat. He had received the medals and clasps for would be thus shortened by about 100 miles, if not the campaigns of 1816 and for the Punjab. mere, and as 350 miles of rope hail been paid out The Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Merli- in 260 direct miles of distance, and this to-) in fine cal Department of the Army, composed of Cie Right weather, and in partially shallow water, the cable Hon. Sidney Herbert, M. P. (chairman), Mr. A. would not he suffic'ently long to reach the opposite Stafford, M.P. Colonel Sir Henry Storks, Sir shore. Taking the whe'e circumstances o f t , e case James Clark, Mr. J. R. Martin, Mr. T. Alexanchr, into consideration, it wag judged better to postpone Sir Thomas Phillips, Dr. Andrew W. Smith, an d the whole undertaking until next year. 'the Leo- Dr. John Sutherland, have within the last few days pard and Cyclope parted compeny shortly after the closed their bbours. accident. The Niagara, Agamemnon, and Sasque- The Sarah Sands steamship left Spithead on Sun- hanna s'g/flailed that they would proceed direct to day night for India with the following troops : .make arrangements for the second expedition next Lieutenant-Colonel Moffat; Captains Brett, Thom- year; and if the two Governments shoul I require son, and Gillum ; Lieutenants Galbraith, Hugh's, the use of either of the veresels of war, to land the Schotel, and CromPe ; Ensign Wood, Lieutenant cable at Trinity Bay. The 350 !rules of wite already and Adjutant Houston, Surgeon Grant, Assistant- laid d ,wn will he left in its present position until Surgeon Donovon, Quartermaster Hipkin, Pay- nest year, when there will be an attempt to Iwo; master Daniel, 21 sergeants, 11 drummers, 1.5 ver it by underrnunieg, which will be doubtle - sa corporals, 306 privates, 8 women, 7 children, partially successful. The Cyclops, of er having forming the head-quarters of th e 54 t h reg i men t. communicated the disastreus intelligence, got The depot of the 71st Foot proceeded yesterday her s team in the evening and endeavoured to leave by railway from Gosport to Chatham. the harbour, but having received some injury to - The depot of the 88th Fobt proceeded yesterday i her unauhinery, she was obliged to postpone her from Gosport to Colchester. departure until this morning when she 1 , ft for . The Cyclops Steam-vessel, lately engaged in lay- Gravesend, there to await orders from the Adrni ing the Atlantic telegraph cable, returned to Spit- x alty; Soon afterthe arrival of th e Cycleps i he. officials head on Sunday night. and employes of the comp ny had the whole of the • His Prussian Majesty's corvette Amazone, Capt. powerful batteries and other valuable apparatus Kuhn, last from Hor.eo, in Norway, arrived at used in signaling to the ships removed from the Spitbead yesterday morning, and saluted the ' temporary hut and tents which had been erected Governor and Port Admiral of Portsmouth, which at the landing beach, and shipped on board a small compliments wer e d u ly ackuowle Iged by the garri- schooner for London. • son battery . and Victory. The Captain was ! The land n ee f rom Killarney, in direct communi cation with tho telegraph to L o ndon, is now Com presented b y Ch eva li er V an D en B er gh, the Prussian Y rce -C onsu l a t Portsinouth, to the naval pleted t , within a few miles of the p l a ce where the arid military c hi e f s . The corvette remains a few cable was landed, and will, by to-mi , rrow evening days prior to proceeding to the Texele and a c ter - be entirely finished for working. The blame of wards to the Baltic. the failure of the undertaking cannot with justi ce The Pylades, 21, screw corvette, Captain De 'be fixed upon any particular individual. It must Courcey was re-swung for the adjustment of her ' Le ref e rred more to an accumulation of unfavour compasses. able circumstances, none of which, t iken separately, The Adelaide steam transport touched at Ports- was 'sufficient to mar the plan, but which, coming mouth on Sunday night from the ThalueP, and left together upon the engineers, induced them to yesterday morning for'China, after taking in some abandon it for the present. Yet, at the same time, Royal Marine Artillery. there is no hiding the plain fact, that had lighter The Lords of the Admiralty commenced their and less complicated machinery I een used for paj - annual oladal inspection of Portsmouth Dockyard i ng . o -0 the cablei_tho nndertaking 4 woulthhave had. f , • THE ATLANTIC TELEGRAPH. a very much better chance of success. The whole of the officers connected with the compaiy will leave f' , .r Lond , ,n on Tuesday next. T 1 1 ,3 following letteeg have been addrzi , sed to a contemp 1I itt y Sin,--The late disaster but realises your own sagacious predicion of April last, when inatituing a comparison between the cable then making and the submarine conductor proposed by Mr. Allan ; but it it truly remarkable to find how that gentle man, long before the cable was even commenced, fore old what would happen. In the prospectus of Mr. Allan's cotrapany, published at Christmas, the following wotds occur : "The many failures of the submarine cables hitherto consfructed are t•io notorious that it mAY be safely predicted, It will be found impomible to connect Europe with America by means of sub marine cables constructed on the principles of those now in use.' There great weight (from two. to six or eight tons -per mile) renders the c trriage of them difficult, and the laying of them almost impossible without consiant risk to the inte grity of the conductor.. • For l ong di s t inc e they are dtficient in the conducing power, while from their peculiar coufoimation they are selt destructive on being submerged to great depths ; moreover, their cost is enormons—tram 20U1. to 5001. per mile. The cost of the cable now making for the Atlantic Teleg.aph Company is said to be only 1801. per mile, and its weight abut a ton; but the principles of its construe ion are the same as the above, audit is even much weaker than any yet made." I am, Sir, your obedient servant, M. L. Sir,—Let me recommend, in the next attempt to lay this cable, the use of perforated tin buAys, which would hold the cable of er it was paid out, prevent ing a strain, and gradually, as ttiey sank in their order, tskitig it wAh them to the bottom. A. MACKIE. SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. TATTERSALL'S—MoNDAy. So many hones have of la'e been introduced into th betting simply for money-getting purpose, that the very little bueiness now-a-days transacted at the Corner cscites no surprise. Backtrs aced iayt rs are t qually shy, and "let I dare not wait upon I wont!, like the poor eat i' the adan.' Tre movements relative to Moppet for the Ehor Handicap , an d S aun t erer f or th e G rea t Yorkshire Stakes, show that Lord Derby did not greatly libel racing men when he stated in his memorable letter to the Jockey Cl' b•that horses were used merely as the instruments of gaining. About Mongrel; for the Ebor Handicap, any price might have been obtained, whilst 100 to 6 and 100 to 5 were laid against Saunterer, p.p., for the Great Yorkshire. Ignoramus was placed under considerable suspicion for the St. L.ger. I t the City, during the morning, 4 to 1 Lad been taken about him, but early in the after noon, at the Corner, 6 and 7 to 1 were offered against him. At last, however, be returned to sto I—t a ken. About Blink Bonny 65 to 40, and 350 to 200 were taken ; 800 to 100 was booked about Arsenal and Dee mour coupled. The su►joined list comprises the only bets that came under our /lotto+) : EBOR HANDICAP. sto I agst Warlock (taken) sto 1 agst Tasmania (taken) _ GREAT YORKSHIRE STAKES. 6to 4 eget Vedette (taken) 5 to 1 aget Skirmisher (taken) 20 to 1 aget Saunterer (taken) ST, LEGER. 65 to 40 agst Blink gamy (taken) 5 to 1 agst Ignoramus (taken) 8 to 1 agst Tournament (offered) 300 oven on Blink Bonny and Ignoramus, coupled (taken) ARRIVALS AT YORK. Drumour, Strawberry, Amsterdam, Queenstown, Schie dam, Sedbury, Bride Cake, Blue Bell, Walmer, Prioresgr Borderer, Tasmania, Night Ranger , Intercedona, Ditto, Old Times, Conductor, Comquot, Bel Esperanza, Perfee . tion, Coxwold, Syllabus, Skirmisher, Vedette, Rita , Pioneer, Sir Colin, Fisherman, Lady Alice, and Proud Preston Peg. The course is rather heavy, and in two parts. About, 100 yards of it is covered with wa t er, b u t it w ill b e c l ea red in time f r the races A QUATI‘CS. LONDON UNITY ROWING CLUB. . A very spirited four-oared cutter race amongst the members of the a , ove club took place yesterday after• noon from Barnes-bridge to Putney, for five silver tan- kards for the first boat, and five other pieces of plate for the second, the whole generously presented by Mr. C. Morton, the proprietor of Catiterbury Hall, at which tavern the club holds its meetings. The weather was fine, and the attendance of spectators considerable. Black Mr. G. Hurst I Mr. E. Tuttle Mr. C. Bolen Mr. C. Jackson T. Tomkins, Coxiwain. Yellow Mr. R, Jones Mr J Burrows Mr. T. Day Mr. H. Dainton T. Sheppard, Coxswain. Blue.. Mr. W. Hazl..;wood I Mr. W. Mliills, sem Mr. J, Amur Mr. F Knight R. Miller, Cc•xiwain. White Mr. J. Benny I Mr. W. Gobly Mr. F. Cook Mr. C. Gardiner B. Bann, C ociwain. Red Mr. G. Watson I Mr, T. Selby Mr. 'F. Squires Mr. R. Bennet R. Green, Coxswain. Mr. Morton was umpire. A very fine eta 't Wag effected, which was succeeded by the whole of th boats remaining nearly oar and oar fur a quarter of a mile at 11 , fine pace, the winners then gradually drew slightly in ad' vt.nce, followed by Yt-llom, between whom and Blue there was a most gallant race for second place. Black kept the had and won by half a dozen lengths ; there was not half that distance between the second and third. Country Markets. cIiBLAISFORD—AueI. 14. A moderate supply of wheat, both old and new, and millers and factors purchasing freely. Wheat, white, old, per s. qr. 53 new 63 red, old 51 new 51 Barley 35 Chevalier 40 Grinding 35 Malt 73 Chevalier 75 Oats, per qr 24 Peas, Partridge 41. White 39 Boiling 39 Dun - 40 Beans, Tiek 40 Harrow ticks 41 Mazagan 36 Ditto, new 36 Official Statement of the Qum in the port of London, froi Aug. 10 to Aug. 15, both it 40 42 4g 45 Entities of Corn, &c., recAved ,m the following ports, (rein reclusive. . • • - a 4 r l CQ cf 4 Colchester 324 ( ( 490' 80 Harwich S 535 41 8 40 Leigh Maldon :1791 1 r 144 97 550 COLCHESTER— AUG. 15. The supply of wheat was fair, and demand active, at is to 2s per qr. advance on last week's rates. Prices to-day were as follow :—Wheat, white, 62s to 70'. red, 583 to 6is; barley, 42s to 46s ; oats, 26s to 30s , bean', Mazagan, 403 to 44.4; middle and small, 44s to 465; peas, white, 38s to 42s ; grey, 42s to 465. KIRKCALD Y—Aua. 15. We had a good supply of wheat to-day, bnt small of barley and oats. Sales ready for fine wheat and oats, and at about last day's rates. Wheat. Barley. t Oats. f Beans. First 62s 62s Od 3ss 01 33s Od Os Oa Second Third 33s 26s 01 I 26s Od f Os Ha R T II S. OF A EON. On the 17th inst., at 7, Alfred-place, North Brixton, the wife of Mr. A. RoPentball. Oo the 16th inst., at 40, Paul's-road, Camden-square, Mre. Henry Philp. OF A DAEOUTBR On the 17th inst., at 8, Westbourne-terrace north, the wife of Captain Matthews. On the 17th inst , at Widmore-hill, Bromley, gent, the wife of W. T. Hißyer, Esq. MARRIED, On tho 15th ins+. Hanwell Church , M r . G. Mumford, of B a th urs t-street, Hyde-park-gardens, to S ara h , younges t d a ughter of the late Georga Daniell, Esq., of Colhatn house' Hillingdon. At St. George's, Hanover-square, Louis Augustus Ro binson, Esq., Captain R. N., to Mrs. Nicholson, of Lin wood flail, Lincolnshire. DIED On the lfth inst., at Bitteswell-house, Lutterworth, Thomas Be'grave, Esq. Commander R.N. On the 17th i nst, at 10, Wigwore street, Mr. John Da Costa, aged 77. On the 16th hag., George Douglas Dods, staff surgeon in her Majesty's Forces, aged 4 , ./, On the .6th inst., at 4, Albion-street, Ilyde-park, Thos. Freckleton, Ecq., of Great Valley, Kandy, Ceylon, aged 35. On the 12th inst.. at St. Alban's, the Rev. Wm. Mogg Bowen, D.P., late vicar of Shipton. Bellinger, aged 93. On the 15th inst., Mr. Peter Kruse, of Sloane-street, Chel-ea, formerly of Old Swan-wharf, aged 72. • • On the 15th inst., at 6, High-street, Deptford, Mr. B. Buchanan Martin, formerly of H.M. Dockyard, Deptford, aged 87. LONDON Printed and Pubikhod by MURDO YOUNG gf No, 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, Yo. il2, Strand, in the Frecinot of the 'Savoy, in the county - of Middlesex, Tuesday, August 18, 1857. r — on l gent gelle Ti th Dr, , teeti the •• `Art °Pen SltraE °T,Ct (VEN lied : 25th Meta e b. Loi ....., and ( Tbl Com p rifl orep street 1• .f Far B cl. thi Car North Ti c ) atm s dg Cross, A nd a ar i d ..rfe, gol Lone' am k s „ S Th e ott .011 PRE gITN, I,ON DON. ruEsp AY EVENING, AUGUST 18, 1857