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

riitaf ilottion SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Clock. IMPERIAL PA RLIAMEN T. HOUSE OF LORD.—(This Evening.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'cb,ck. Lord COLVILLE presented a petition from Wigton against the Police (Scotland) Bill. Lord REDESDALE presented a petition from Nos - f against the clause in the Divorce Bill compelling clergymen to n,arry divorced persons. SECURITY TO TRUSTEES' BILL. Lord ST. LEONARDS said, at the titan the Fraudu lent Trutnees' 8.11 was under discussion he suggested to the noble and learned lard on the woolsack that a mea sure ought to be introduced to afford relief to trustees who bad acted honestly. Tae noble lord admitted that such a measure was impracticable, but be thought V - at it was only difficult, and he accordingly framed a bill, which passed their brdships' house, and was sent down to the Commons where it was read a second itrie. Wh, n it was proposed to go into c ”umittee on this bill a learned gentleman (the Attorney. General) in the other house said, with that confidence which is peculiar to him, that this bill was so fraueit with in%ccuracies that it would take three days to remedy the defects, and ucdcr those circuinstancs he (the Attorney-General) thought the better course would be to withdraw the bill alt— gether for the session. He (Lord St. Leonardo) begg , d to give notice that, early next session he should reintto• duce the same measure. The LORD CHANCELLOR deprecated the system of alluding to the speeches that had been made in the other house of Parliament. THE DIVORCE BILL. Lord ST. LEONARDS wished to know when it WAS likely the Divorce and Ma rimanial Causes Bill would be transmitted to their lordshim in order that the amendments that bad been made in the other house mizi.t be considered. Earl GRANVILLE said it was impossible to say when the bid would come up to their lordships. If the noble and learned lord had given him notice of the question, he would have made inquiry on the subject. The bill had, however, been so fully discussed in both houses, that it was not likely to occupy much of their lordships' time. Lord CAMPBELL said he hoped the session would not close, even though it was continued for a consider elle time longer. He should regard it as a national calamity if the prorogation took place until this bid was passed. Lord REDESDAT_JE said the alterations that bad been made were of the most important description— (hear, hear)—such, for instance, of affording relief where it had been refused by their lordships. He thought it. would , be utterly impossiblis that these alter ations in the mea=sure, which materially affected the in terest of every borne in the kingdom c)uld be properly discussed at (.4 time when the house was so thinly at tended, Earl GRANVILLE said the Government were de termined to ref ist every attempt to postpone it. The iubj , .!et then droppeO. PROBATE AND LETTERS OF ADMINISTRA- VON BILL. The LORD CHANCELLOR moved that the Com MollB' amendmentA ti) this bill be agreed to. Lotd WYNFORD recommended their lordships no to agree to the amendmentp. LEFT SITTING I ROUSE OF COMMONS—(This Day.) The SrEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock. VA.TE BUSINESS. On the motion of Col. PINNEY, the sanding orders were suspended to enable Lord Rivers' E,tate Bill to be read a third time and tamed. MERSEY CONSERVANCY AND DOCKS (No. 2) BILL. . . . . . , • Mr. J. EIVART moved the appointment of the fol lowing select c,mmittee relative to the Mersey Conger vancy and Docks (No. 2) Bill :—Mr. Fitzroy, Mr, Ewart, and Mr. Kinglake. Agreed to. DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES (STAMP DUTIES.) Tho house went into committee and agreed to the fol lowing resclutions "That the samo amount of stamp duty as is now pay able on the admission of a proctor to any ecclesiastical court, shall he payable by every person to be admitted as a proetor in the Court of Divorce and Matrimonial Cause?, or in the Court of Probate, who shall not bare been previously admitted as a proctor in the other of such courts, or in an ecclesiastical or admiralty court, and have paid the stamp duty in respect thereof. "That every person who shall practise as a proctor or at a solicitor or attorney in the sail Court of Divorce and Matrimonial Causes, or the said C ,uct of Probate, shall obtain an annual c,rtitic de to authorise him so to do under the stamp duty ants in the same manner as procters practi,,ing in the Ecclesiastical or Adruir ilty Court., and solicitors and attorneys practising, in her Majest 'e Courts at Westminster, are now required to do by the said acts or any of them. DIVORCE AND MATIII NIONIAL CAUSES BILL. The committee on this bill was resumed. On clause &3, Sir NV. DEATFICOTE said that he very much regretted to inform the house that big friend and colleague (Mr. Gladstone) who bad an im portant amendment next in order on the paper for the consideration of the committee, bad lately been sufferirg under a severe domestlc aftetion, which was toe cause of his absencs from the flou,e a considerable poi Lion of yesterday The sport heosion that it would c,u , e his absence from the House the remainder of the session bad, he re , retted to say, ac' u ally occurred, and it devolved on him (Sir NV. lleathcote) to move the important amendment of his right hon. col league and friend to this clause. The c!ause as it stood called on the clergy to marry divorced parties, which would not only be rerognart to the feeling's of Oe majority of them, but (as most of them belie ied) contrary to the law of God. To relieve the clergy from the diffi culty in which they found themselves placed by this clause, his right hon. tiiend had given notice of this amendment which was to the effect that the marriage of divorced persons should be in the character of a civil contract entered into at the Registrar's office, but sanctioned by a religious ceremony, where a clergyman or dissenting minister curds be found voluntarily to perform it. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, regretted the absence of Mr. Gladstone owing to the dor:estie affction re• ferred to, who, he remA.ked, was one of the chief orna• merits of their debates. (Hear.) The amendment wl3 ohj-ctionable in many respects. It would inlet great irjury on the innocent husband or wife seeking to marry again, or an innocent person marrying the adulterer or adulteress, as the ca-e mit ; ht be. It would also have the effect, it' carried, of going far to c mSrrn the princip's that marriaee was icdissoluble. The amendment, carried, would only make the marriage valid on heir g solemni , ed in a particular form, which would be a great hardship nn the parties, especially if they were Dissen ters, and clergymen or liisenting ministers were wiling t> p rform the m rriage •rerco .y. A woman marrying unknowingly, a divorced man by the krin of the Church of England, would by the amendment be put in the Con of a concubine, and the children would be illegitima • He ruggezted that the committee should not decide the question on this amendment, but first consider whether divorced persons should have power to marry again, and on that being decided in the affirmative, thf T 1 consid(r whetter the clergy of the Church of England should or should not be exempted from solenani. , ing such marriages when they were reluctant to do so. He asked the right honourable baronet to withdraw his amendment. Mr. B. HOPE supported the amendment. 11,OCO clergymen of the Church of England hal petitioned against the clause, and he thought some deference should be paid to tb.ir ferline's. Mr. NEWDEGATE considered that nothing cau'd justify the bill in its present form, and urged the cJal tnittee to adopt the amendment. He called upon the committee to give due influence to religion al a correc tive to the dangerous tendency to the WI Mr. D. GRIFFI HIS said thai, he had intended to move an amendment prohibiting the guilty party from being married by the forms of the Church of England, but considering the arguments of the Attorney-General unanswerable against the amendment he should oppose it. Lord J. MANNERS enforced in a lengthened speech, the duty of the committee to respect the conscientious scruples of the clergy, as weil a 3 numbers of the laity, en the compulsory marriage of the guilty parties. Mr. ADAMS expressed a hope that the amendment would be withdrawn. He considered it was essential I tat a religious sanction s h ou ld b e o b serve d i n the so mnisation of marriage—whether of members of the Church t "England or of Di.senters. (llear, hear.) He also objected ~ t ‘ o . . the amendment because it set a brand on innocent religious es ,.:: o ' n le s , as being unworthy to partake of the conscience shouldYbeof marriage, Ile thought liberty of 1 ymeiveti to the clergy in this respect. and where cler permitted to perfee, the willi ng th e y s h ou ld b e of the divorced par marriage ceremony on either marriage. ties wis h ing again te contract Loid LOVAINE would vote fo r t , lr amendment if it was pressed to a divieion,thou g h i , . a t t beught it wooll evotrced ersons. inflict great har d •h i p o n the innocent "lid b p Mr BRISCOE hoped there w the clause, because i t was undesi rable either° division on I:er r e d ein a: a triumph on this imp o r tan t point. li,PanYn:hould the conscientious scruples of the cler gy should be ei spected, and he would ra ther that the su ggestion o the Attorney General should be adopted. Mr. SPOONER asked the right hon. bare net (Sir W. Heathcote) to withdraw the amendment, because it would inflict injury on the innocent parties. If it had been confined to the guilty he should have voted in its favour. Mr. MALINS also hoped the amendment would be withdrawn that the sense of the committee m i g ht be taken on the question as suggest -Al by the learned Attor ney-General. W.EIEATIICOTE regretted that the discourage ment be th oug h t should be given to the marriage of divorced parties was not entertained by the committee, and as it appeared t o b e their wish to raise the question relative to the clergy i n another shape he would wits draw his amendment. The amendment was then witbrawn. Major WARBURTON moved at the end of clau-e 53 :—Provided always, and be it enacted, that no priest or deacon shall 1r• liable to any suit, penalty, or cen• ■ore for refusing or consenting to solemnise the mar i ge of any person who shall be divorced by virtue of tL.,B act He considered his amend mint Was necessary, be• itty It' 4 6 ski ri 0.141, ip 11 MI) . A.. V_ Yi4y DIST Tliii ti.„it. PG CI A I' 1 t'i, igAY c.tuse by the bill i ciergy would be culled on to act Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official asslgnec, Pa- n opoosition to their ordination vows. Without the singhall-street ; Giltspur-street. PARLIA2I2I.NT. John Witherden, coal merchant, Me of Dunstable, Bed amendment he proposed the clergy would have to Rio- John Aug. 27, at eleven, arid Oct. 2, at ene,.at the Bed 13[H their non4nie nces o r a ba-idon their position. Mr. WIGRAM su orted the amendment as an act Court of Bankruptcy. Cannan, official assignee, Alder- PPmanbury ; Armstrong, Old Jewry. cf justice to the clergy. The marriage ceremony Charles Dorrett, dealer in wines, Lincoln's-inn, Au 7. was framed on the oeinion of the church, that marriage 27, at half-past twelve, and Oct. 2, at eleven, at the Omit of Bankruptcy. Cannan, official assignee, Aldermanbury ; was indissoluble ; but the house having decided to the contrary, they were bound either to modify the marriage Rees, Cppthall-court, City. ceremony su as to remove the lawful impediment that George Young, victualler, Old-street-road, Aug. 28, at would exist under that service, or else give them an one, and Oct. 2, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. option to celebrate it or not. He thought there was not Cannan, official assignee, Aldermanbury; Wright and Bonner, Fenchurch-street. John Frederick Augustus Minch merchant, Mincine.- time to do the former this session, and as it was tinad lane Aug 31, at one, and b Sept. P, at' twelve,. at the Court visable to force the clergy in hostility to the law, as had of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee, Guildhal-cham Dawson and Bryan, Bedford-square. been the case in Prussia, on this point, it was better to give them an opt onal course of proceeding. He never ; bers ; rec illected a memorial presented to Pa rliament so nu- John Hinkley, jun., corn d ea l er , B ren t woo d, E ssex , userouely signed by the members of one profession as Au g . 28, at half-p as t one , an d O c t. 2, a t h a lf- pes t e l even , that by the clergy on this point , wh i ch he looked u p on l at the Court of Bankruptcy. Cannan, official assignee, as importing that the whole of the clergy were unani- Aldermanbury; Melton, Thomas and Hollams, Mincing- MOU3 on it. He thought a few cases of marriage 1 lane. of divorced persons that had been solemnized was no reason for their withholding the relief asked for by the whole body of the clergy. Lord EBRINGTON supported the amendment, General THOMPSON wished to know what clergy. man was likely to bo made a martyr under this bill. A divorced person would not be likely to seek out a clergy. man who would not marry him, with a view of directing attention to the misfortune under which he laboured, but rather resort to a clergyman—and they were always to he found—who would marry divorced persona. Mr. C. FOSTER expressed a hope that the Govern ment would accede to the amendment. Mr. AYRTON considered that the amendment would have the effect of strengthening tbe power of clergymen who were Romanista in heart, and would enable them to carry out their views of marriage being a sacrament and indissoluble. He admitted that the conscientious scru ples of the clergy should be resp-cted, but the same liberty of conscience that they claimed for themselves they should grant to others. (Hear.) WHlst therefore they refused to perform the service they should not have the power of shutting up the parish church which was the property of the State, and prevent the parishioners 'rotn being married there by a clergyman who was willing to perform the marriage ceremony. Mr. WALPOLE supported the amendment on what he considered unanswerable ground, viz , that Puha meet had no right to impose on any person or class of persons in this country the painful dilemma of obeying or disobeying two laws set before them—(hear, hear) — that of the statute of Charles 11., that required the per formance of the marriage ceremony in a particular man eer and the indissolubility of marriage, and this bill which made carriage dissoluble and allowed the divorced parties to marry. For the sake of peace in the Church he asked the Government to accept the amendment. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he was most happy to et ite that be had been authorised by the notle lord at the head of the Government to accept the amend ment with a qualification that he thought would meet with the approbation of the committee ; but before stat ing it be must call the attention of the committee to the considerations that bad weighed greatly with the Go vernment before final'y bringing before them this propo sition. He asked the committee first to consider if they were or were not about to introduce a qualification that might prove a snare to those for whose relief it was pro posed to be given. If it were found right to give this relief here, where were they to stop ? It would pervade the whole services of the church, especially those of baptism, burial, and the hay sacrament, and lead to disunion, and those evils in the Church which it was desirable to prevent, and which he prayed they might never see. (Hear, hear.) He presumed that the hon. and learned member bad well considered the effect of the proposed change, and therefore the Government were prepared to accede to the amendment in these words :—" Provided always and be it enacted that no priest or deac in shall be liable to any suit, penalty, or censure for refusing to solemnise the marriage of any person whose adultery or crime has been the ground of the dissolution of aey marriage." (Hear.) That he thought wou!d meet the case of a wife and her adulterer. The Government also proposed to add to the clause words nempe:liug a rector to give the use of the parish church to a priest or dean n of the Church of England willing to solemnise a marriage of parishioners to which the said rector had objections. Mr HENLEY approved of the clergy amendment of the hon. and learned Attorney-General, but he asked f it more time to enable tbe committee to consider that part with reference to the use of the parish church. After some remarks from Sir W. HEATHCO Mr. WALPOLE said that he did not agree with the hon. and learned Attorney-General that the relief given in this case would have hereafter to be granted in reference to the other services of the church, because in this case the c'ergy had no additional po er or authc nty given to teem, but would only act under the decree or authority of the new Divorce Court. After some further discussion, it being near four o'clock, the Attorney-General gave notice of his amend ment for consideration at six o'clock this evening, and the debate was adjourned. The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and the house resumed. HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at twelve o'cl )ck. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Lord' Amendments to the Lancaster and Car -li3la and Ing!eton RAilway MU were considered and agreed to. MERSEY CONSERVANCY BILL. Sir J. GRAHAM moved that a select committee be appointed to inspect the Lords Journal relative to the Mersey Conservancy Bill, which had passel this house. The right hon. baronet having explained the objects of the bill and its progress through this house and 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 bi►l, with a view of introducing another bill thin session, to be passed through i's various stages without delay, to give effect to the bill in the House of Lords, changing the amount of compensation from 750,0001. 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. The Consolidated Fund (Appropriation) Bill, the Probates and Lettere of Administration (Ireland) Bill, and the Jurisdiction in Siam Bill were read a third time and passed. The Cust ,ms and Excise Bill, and the Customs Bill were considered or amended and agreed to, and ordered to be read a third time to-morrow, MERSEY CONSERVANCY AND DOCK BILL. On bringing np the report of the committee appointed this morning on this bill, Sir J. GRAHAM said he bad 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 oppur tunity 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 hospitals, and the treatment of the sick and wounded. Sir J. RAMSDEN hoped the right hon. gentleman would not press fur this return immediately, as the rs port had not been received. Col. NORTH inquired whether the report would be laid on the table in the present session. Sir J. RAMSDEN could not say, as the report had not yet been made. MR. F. WARD AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH ACT. Mr. CONINGHAM asked the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education, whether Mr. F. 0. Ward had been correctly reported to have said at the International Congress at Brussels, in Sept. last, that the application of the Public Health Act to 200 houses in England bad diminished the morality by 50 per cent., and had in their vicinity quadrupled the fertility of the soil Thomas Bnrbridge Marston, dyer, Leicester, September 8 and 22, at half-past ten, at the Nottingham Shirehali. Harris, official assignee, Nottingham ; Davis, Leicester; Knight, Birmingham. Thomas Wilson, railway carriage maker, West Brom wich, Aug. 28, and Oct. 9, at ten, at the Birmingham District Court. Whitmore, officialassignee,Birmingham; Smith and Burdkin, Sheffield ; Smith, Birmingham. Joseph Willniott and Jobn Hartley, sawyers ani timber merchants, Es , ex-street, Kingslund-road, August 29, at twelve, and Sept. 2, at half past one, at the Coutt of Bankruptcy. Cannan, official assignee, Aldermanbury ; Roscoe, King-street, Finsbury. Robert; Sutton and William Haywood, booksellers, Liverpool, Sept. 8, and 30, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Morgan, official assignee, Liverpool ; Pem berton, Liverpool. Hugh Mackay and William Bishton Davies, shipwrights, Liverpool, Sept. 1 and 21, at eleven, at the Liverpool Dis trict Court. Cazanove, official assignee, Liverpool; Dodge, Liverpool ; Ewer, Liverpool. John Matthews, statuary, Plymouth, Aug. 31, at ten, and Oct. 5, at one, at the Exeter District Court. Hirtzel, official assinee, Exeter; Elworth, Plymouth. Joseph Bradbury Robinson. hosier, Macclesfield, Aug. 31, and Sept. 23, at twelve, at the Manchester District Court. Fraser, official assignee, Manchester ; Parrott, Colville, and May, Macclesfield. Hector Melville, cooper, Liverpool, Sept. 8 and 30, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Cazenove, offi cial assignee, Liverpool; Blackhurst, Liverpool. Benjamin Moseley, scythe manufacturer, Bradway, Derbyshii e, Sept. 5 and 26, at ten, at the Leeds District Court. Brewin, official assignee, Sheffield,; Ryalls, Shef field. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. John Kid I, mathematical instrument maker, Dundee. Hernulewicz, Main, and Co., iron and wire fence manu facturers, Glasgow. William Thompson, cattle dealer, Drumboy. Hugh Smith, dyers, Glasgow. John Lamb, miller, Glasgow. Mr. W. COWPER said that Mr. Ward was not offi d aily connected with the Ikard of Health, but the zeal and ability with which be had supported sanitary measures which had preserved the lives of many of his fellow.countryinen had exposed him to some of the rais• representations which had been cast on the [l.)ard of Health. He had a copy of Mr. Ward's speech at Bra,- &el, and he must say that the misrepresentations of w hat he said arose from one part of the speech having been quoted and nut 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 swis factory returns reLiting to Croydon, Leicester, Rug'iy, &c In the other part of his speech be was speaking of the increased fertiiity caused by sewage irrigation, and when he said it had bean quadrupled, be was speaking of what had occurred in the neighbourhood of Edinburgh and Ayr. sitbr whether by any rnean4 as oht;Tition to maintain, wife itea,ifig, litigation c‘ailci Le effected. ?Ir. MA LlN'i when a wormn had provrty why shouli not d7e baiihaticl lave a t , imilar Vai. e? Why to (tits , ,if divi,rco Ought shti not to no colopeihd to Wake a Re'r,tioin(!vt for the twnefit of children? Lord J. MANNERS said he knew that such a ease ha•l ari , en, and he hoped the Attoroey-General would alter the (dance so as; to meet suca a ca,e. Mr. BUTT' said the case just aLuded to was pro vided for in the 421 clause ; but the case put by Mr. Henley was not provided for. de had given notice of his intention to move au amendment, to the , ff,:ct that in the case where an innocent wife obtained a divorce, the Court shou'd have the power to award her a main tenance from the linsband',.; property. If that was the intentio❑ 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 hal submitted. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he would take the matter into consideration. The amendment was nut 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 been treated as a crime, this bill pro posed to abolish actions of crim. can., and give the power of imposing on the adulterer a fine with c ,etc. The question f. , r the c irninittee to decide was, whether a fine un the adulterer was sufficient, leaving the husband or wife untouched. If the committee should think proper to make the adulttrer punishable by imprison ment, it would be Tight to do so whether the proceeding should befor diesolation of marriageor judicial separation. He proposed to amend the clause, so as to make it run thus :—" Whenever on any petition for desolation of marriage the adultery shall have been establist,ei, it shall be lawful for the oourt to order the respondent and also the co-re-pondeut, it any, to be punished by fine or im prisonment, or by fine and imprisonment as if on convic tion for a misdemeanor." Previous to putting that amend ment, however, be proposed in a previous line of the dance to solagtitute the word on" for the word "in." The ATTORNEY-GENERAL sai I the question was whether it should be competent to the court to impose on the adulterer a pecuniary penalty, to be applied for tee benefit of the husband and children of the marriage, or to make a provision for the unfortunate wife, eau whether the adulterer-should be criminally punished. He would not enter at any length into the question, be cau-e from the time of the Commonwealth all persons had joined in condemnation of the principle of making adultery punishable as a crime. Oa three several occa sions the principle had been discus.ed in Parliament, in 1781, in 1800, and again in 1312, oa a bill of divorce, aecompanied with circumstances of singular Wee city, on an action for the seduction of a married woman by a clergyman in Devonehire. 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 would overstep the limits of criminal jurisdiction. The Government intended to re-iet any attempt to make adultery the subject of criminal punishment, and he trusted the committee would negative the ameedinent. 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 laws in which the crime of adultery was set down as a grave offence and punished as such. It was so treated by Mae Jewe the Egyptians ; the Arabs, the inhabitants of the north of Germany and several other countries, and 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 an offence against social order, it allowed parties to marry again, and it imposed a pecuniary flue, which, once paid, would enable the adulterer to enjoy the fruits of his crime. Tice effect of tto bill, without some such amendmeut as th,t now proposed, weuld be to encour age and not to disoeurage the ailtrterer. A great deal had been said of the R:,fortnatio Legutn. Was it true that Cranmer and his associates took the same view as the Attorney-General, treating the mime merely as a private injury I The Reformatio Leguin condemned the adulterer or adulteress to perpirmal banishment or irn• prisonment. Tne bll treated this great crime with favour and enciiragement unknown in the records of the history of any other country. How would it operate on different classes of the community f Tile wealthy man amid pay a fine. The poor man would be unable to do so, and would, have to go to prison. The young and wealthy seduces would be told—" Pay your money—aed then yon will be absolved, and may marry whom you please." The poor man would be told, " You must go to prison, not; because you have committed an offenoe, 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, cunpletely failed in doing so, and wan a mere mockery of justice. The opinion of Lord Lyndhurst 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 tbe 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 I. Why, a man, not know kg that he had committed an act of adultery, migbt he visited with fine and imprisonment. Toe climes in volved another point, and that was an inefficient sub stitute for the ile.;ion of cries. 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 on 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 lot it be raised on a separats and distinct clause, and then it could be fairly discussed, Mr. WrilfAHON observed that they were going to as similate the law of this country to that of otheecountries. In Scotland, by the old law, adultery was a capital of fence, and simple adulter' was treated as a misdemea nour. In Francs and the United States it was punish able by fine and imprisonment. In the year 1300 a bill passed the Lords waking adultery punishable as a mis demeanour. It was a doubtfal point at the present mo ment whether adultery was not an indiotat to offer.ce. Mr. WIGRAM suggested that it would be better to Ist "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 r AQUATICS. LONDON UNITY ROWING CLUB. A very spiri'ed four-oared cutter race amongst the members of the a ove club took place yesterday after• noon from Barnet-bride to Putney, for five silver tan kards for the first boat, and fivo other pieces of plate for the second, the whole generously presented by Mr. C. Morto,., the proprietor of Canterbury Hall, at which tavern the club bolds its meetings. The weather wag fine, and the attendance of spectators considerable. 4C on.ft Mr. HENLEY thought they ought not to impose a fine unless they constituted adultery a crime. The At torney-General had given notice of au amendment that the fine be paid to the husband. If this were to be as compensation, he did not see why a jury should not settle it instead of the judge. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL remarked that by dividing on the words "in" or "on" they were deter mining whether a clause should be inserted tusking adul tery punishable by flue and imprisonment. If they were to have a fine he preferred that it should be ree , eased 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 nut. Mr. MALINS asked how hon. members who came in to vote when the bell rang, and who had not heard the discussion, were to know how to vote when the question put was whether the word' should should be "in" or " on"t The amendment was then withdrawn, Mr. BUTT moved to omit the words " to impose upon the adulterer a fine and." The AT f 0 RN EY-G ENE RAL agreed, and the clause was altered accordingly. _ Black Mr. G. Hurst I Mr. E. Tuttle Mr. C. Boden Mr. C. Jackson T. Toritkins, Cox4wain. Yenom Mr. R. Jones 1 Mr %). Burrows Mr. T. Day Mr. H. Dainton T. Sheppard, Coxiwain. Blue.. Mr. W. Hazlewood Mr. W. Mills, sen.l f Mr. J. Amor Mr. F KMEbt R. Miller, Coxswain. White 0 Mr. J. Benny Mr. W. Gobly i Mr. F. Cook Mr. C. Gardiuer R. Bassan, Coxmain. Red Mr. G. Watson Mr. T. Selby I Mr. T. Squires Mr. R. Bennet B. Green, Coxswain. Mr. Morton was umpire. A. very fine sta t was effected, which was succeeded by the whole of the boats remaining nearly oar and oar fur a quarter of a mile at a fine pace, the winners then gradually drew slightly in ad , wvice, followed by Yello w, between whom and Blue there was a most gallant race for second [lice. B!ack kept the lead and won by half a duzin len.eths ; there was' not half that distance between the second and third. Lord J. MANNERS then proposed to insert the words, " that the adulterer be punished by flue and im prisonment. or by flue or imprisonment." Mr. BUT r 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 proceedings. He did not think criminal punishment should be inflicted unless there was a conviction by a jury. INDIA.—A coloured Map of India will be presented gratis with the Dispatch of Sunday next, Aug: 23. This Map„ measuring 17 inches by 12, will form a part of the forthcoming Atlas anuounced to be is , ued Grati4, and to commence on October 4. Many thousands of pounds will be expended in pro:iucing this truly invaluable work, which, completed, will be found the most comprehensive an•l general'y useful, in fact, the best Atlas ever pub lished. The " Dispatch. Atlas" may be ordered of any BookAtller or New agent in the Kingdom ; or at tte Offide, 139, Fleet-street. WIGRAAT should vote for the amendment. There should b• some mode of punishment, and he saw no better mode of doing it than by imprisonment Sir G. GREYsaid if they determined to punish adultery as a crime, they ought to let the person to be punished have the ordinary advantages which persons bad when charged with criminal offences. Sirr W. HEiTHCOTE supported the amendment. Mr. PULLER said there wss this objection:to making adultery a criminal offence—it would give any discarded servant power to drag parties before the court for matters which had 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 indiut ment. He would have a trial by jury ; and he would have the charges against hint clearly stated in the peti tion. The amendment did,n)t go so far as he could wish, or so far as he hoped the committee wouki yet consent to go ; but he should give it his support. Mr. LIEGON reminded the committee that one of the principal ohjects of the b►ll 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 T said the inquiry necessary for the purposes of a divorce was by no means the same as that required before they could punish a roan for adultery. In the lat ter case they must prove that the defendant knew that his paramour was a married woman ; whereas no snob point arose with regard to the simple question whether there should be a divorce. BIRTHS. OF A $Oll. On the 16th inst., at 40, Paul'a-road, Camden-square Mrs. Henry Philp. On the 17th inst., at 7, Alfred-place, North Brixtong the wife of Mr. A. Rosenthal!. . OF A nevenrss. On the 17th inst., at 8, Westbourne-terrac e nor th , th e Captainwi o fe n o t f he7th in Ai st a . tr w vs. idmore-hill, B rom l ey, Kent, the wife of W. T. Hillyer, Esq. MARRIED, At St. George's, Hanover -square, Lonis Augustus biCaptain R. N ., to Mrs. Nicholson, of Lin ..wood Esq., al .. ,Lincolashire. 6 .2 On the 15th inst., at Han well Church, Mr. G. liumford, of Bathurst-street, Hyde -park-gardens, to Sarah, youngest hdoauugseh,teHrill'i ng t d h o e n. late George Daniell, Esq., of Colham- On the 1% inst., at Bittes D well-house, Lutterworth, Thomas Belgrase, Esq. Commander R.N. On th e 17th inst , at 1 10, Wigmore-street, Mr. John D* Coati, aged 77. On the 16th inst., George Douglas Dods, staff surgeon in her Majesty's Forces, aged 49. On the i6th inst., at 4, Albion-street, Hyde-park, Thos. Freckleton, Esq., of Great Valley, Kandy, Ceylon, age( t 33. Mr. HENLEY objected to the amendment. They ought first to settle whether adultery was t be treated as a crime. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Puller) talked of the hardship of allowing a Fervant to commence a prose cution for matters which had been condoned; but did ~ot that show that adultery was a private wrong? It was not competent to a person to make up a public offence. Lord J. MANNERS observed that in France aryl other countries where adultery was punished by flue and imprisonment, no suit cluld be commenced except by the injured party. Mr. ADAMS should vote against the amendment, but he wished it to be understool that he was not oppo,e(s to the treatment of adultery as a punishable offence. He might remind the committee that the defendant would not have the advantage of the previous inquiry before On the 12th inst.. at St. Alban's, the Rev. Win. Mogg 80we0,,D.D., late vicar of Shipton Bellinger, aged 93. On the 15th inst. Mr. Peter Kruse, of Sloane-street , Chelqsa, formerly o f Swan-wharf, aged 72. On the 15th inst., at 6, High-street, Deptford, Mr. B. Buchanan Martin, formerly of H.M. Duckyard, Deptford aged 87. LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG of No, 112, Strand, Printer, at Ths Sun Office, No 112, Su-ad, in the freeinot cf the Savoy, in the count) , of Middleacx, Tuosdray, August 18, 1857. - • • -- - , es. the grand jury, which was enjoyed by persons accused calculate. In the majority of the divoree eases Oa Of the most trivial offences. (f-Teer, hear.) came before the House of Lords it had been shown tha Tae amendment was then negatived. ' the adultery had been cementted to fac , litate ti.,e divorce. Mr. allaMAtiON thought the clause was now useless, They were l-aving the lessons of eziperience to enter the question of costs b r in g pr ov id e d f or i n c l ause 48. , upon t h e f i eld o f experinasut, and it was the duty of Nee, rthelese the clause was agreed to. those who recommi nded that course to prove that it On clause 32, "cast idy of children," would not be attentied with those evils which he had Ler I LOVAINE (for Mr. Deurnmena) moved to ic- , pointed nut. The law bad never yet gone so far as to sert, instead of the Court of Chancery," at the end of I declare that the guilty perry should he at liberty te the clause, " the permit promoting the suit, if such parent ; marry again—though in enabling the innocent- perty to shall have fowl free fr to cruelty or criminality. I remarry, that result had followed. There were various The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected to the amene- modes of meeting the oljection to which this clause was' meet. Of course tee Court of Chanc e ry would respect I open, and the way he proposed to meet it was, to pro the rights of the innocent parent, where that parent was vide that the dissolution of the marriage should not able to discharge the duties of guardian. enable the guilty porties to marry retain. He moved, in The amendment was negatived. the first instance, the amendment of which his right hen Mr. BUTT moved an amendment providing alimony and learned friend the member for the University of pendente lite, if the suit was one of divorce, in the same Dublin, who was not present, had given notice, viz., manner as if it was for a judicial separation, in line 15, leave out "the respective parties thereto," The ATTORNEY-GENERAL would consider the and insert, " the party on whose petition the mar subject ; and riage shall have been dissolved," and leave out The clamor was agreed to. "as if the," and the whole of line 16, in order On clause 43'—" Questions of fact may be tried before that the dissolution of marriage might take its the court." course, as it did at present, without directly sane- Mr. M•VIAHON moved the following proviso— taming the re-marriage of the guilty parties ; but be a Provided also that, unless the court shall otherwise proposed afterwards to submit his own amendment — order, the contested fact shall be t r i e d i n t h e c o un ty leave out " the respective parties," &c,, t o t h e en d a a where the adultery is alleged to have been committed.' the clause, and insert "the party on whose petition the The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that that would marriage shall have been dissolved to marry again, but generally be the case ; but it would be convenient in no sentence or decree of dissolution of marriage proa some instances to try the cause in London or Middlesex. flounced or made under the authority of this act, shall After some cinversation, enable the party, by reason of whose adultery or other Mr, M'MAHON withdrew his amendment, and the offence the marriage shall have been dissolve], to marry clause was agreed to. again" Clauses 34 to 38 were agreed to. air G. GREY looking at the amendment as a whole, Oa clause 39, thought it would be very inexpedient to adopt it. The The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated, in answer to bill wo uld no t ena bl e the guilty party to marry again, questions, that he proposed to add words to meet the any more than the existing state of the law did. At case of parties residing out of the jurisdiction, and to present, though it was not declared, yet by giving the give the court the same pOwer as was conferred by any party in whose favour the divorce was granted that statute on the Court of Chancery. right, the gully party practically was enabled to exer- The clause as amended was agreed to. case it also. Take the case of a woman who had the On clause 40, misfortune to commit a breach of the marriage vow at Sir W. HEATHCOTE mo ve d th e om i ss i on o f the an early per i od of life. Was she never to have an op words exempting a petitioner from answering any goes- portunity for penitence or contrition, and, her husband tion which might tend to show that be had been guilty having married again, was she to be compelled to lead of adultery. for the remainder of her existence a life, as it had been The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the last law of termed, of " degraded celibacy I" (Hear, hear.) That evidence in these cases was that the husband and the would, in fact, be the result of adopting what was pro vide should not be. examined aeainst each other. The posed. words in the clause were not founded on the common Mr. S. ESTCOURT said the great advantage of law principle—that a party could not be examined to a d ipting the amendment of the right hon. gentleman criminate himself. (alr. Napier) was, that it would leave the law recisely* Sir W. HE A.TEICOTE said the clause gave the power as it stoo d at present. He believed they would be to examine the parties on all points but one, and that wrong if they attempted to make this bill a reflection of the most material. Ose divine law. No doubt it became them to bear that - Mr. AYRTON said the m a i n o bj ec t o f the clause was law in their conscience,. ; but they must remember that to get rid of the documentary examinations in the ecale- t h ey were th en exerc i s i ng their legislative functions with eiastical courts. iegard to a civil right. (Hear, hear.) On the one hand,' Mr. MaMAHON supported the amendment. they ought not to giie tie guilty parties a right to claim Mr. BUTT said they had no right to put to a witness religious sanctions to a second marria ge ; but, on the questions which held out the strongest possible tempts. other, it did not become them to take away from a tion to commit perjury, guilty woman a locus penitential. Mr. LOCKE (Southwark) said that no man was bound Mr. GRIFFITH observed that the effect of prohibit to answer a question which would subject him to eccle- ing an adulteress from contracting a second marriage siastical censure. woula be, in many cases, to pr o t ec t the sedu cer rga i n st Mr. HENLEY doubted wh e th er th e exem pti on wen t the natural! consequences of his own act, and to numbers far enough. It a man were asked whether he had been such a prohibition would be very agreeable. guilty if bigamy, was he to be required to answer that ? The committee then divided— The ATTORNEY-GENERAL explained the precise For the amendment effect of the clause, which was only to give the new Against it court the power of examining parties in the same way Majority —6O as the House of Lords now examined a petitioner. At Mr. GLADSTONE said his amendment stood next, the same time it was necessary to put a limit to the clues- and he trusted he should not he expected to move it teens that might be asked. The case of bigamy was so rare, then, as he should deem it necessary to trouble the corn and necessarily included adulery, that no special execup. nate° with a statement of some length. tion as to answering on that point was required Lord PALMERSTON thought the request of the The amendment was negatived, and the clause was right hon. gentleman perfectly reasonable. agreed co. The CHAIRMAN th en reporte d progress, and o l r Clause 41 was agreed to, tainted leave to sit again this day at 12. Several verbal amendments were made in clause 42, TRUSTEES RELIEF BILL. which was then :weal to, Mr. WALPOLE moved that the house resolve itself On clause 43, which refers to the mode of taking evi- into committee on this bill. dance, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL" objected to the mo• Mr. BUTT suggested whether it would not b e bett e r tine, on the ground that the house had not sufficient to omit this clause. As be understood the 'clause, one time to consider it, and stated that it was his intention of the parties could now give evidence on affidavit, and to introduce a comprehensive measure on the subject after having does) so, the other party could require the next session. . person making the affidavit to he brought up to London, Mr. WALPOLE consented to the withdrawal of the fee the purpose of being orals) , exa 'tined, and the whole bill, and the order was di se h arge d mater weull have to be gone over again. JUDGMENTS BILL. Mr. GL DaTONE said before the clause passed, he This bill was committed pro forma. should like to know from his bon, and learned friend the BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY (IRELAND) Attorney-General whether the hon. and learned member BILL. for Youghal accurately represented the effect of the The Lords' amendments to this bill were considered clause. and agreed. to. Tne ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that as the bill CROWDED DWELLINGS PREVENTION BILL. stood there were some matters which must be tried by a On the question that th e bid be committed, jury. There were others which th e j u d ge might send to Mr. RIDLEY teought such an important bill ought be tried by a jury. But there were many matters with not to be pressed forward at that late period of thessea' regard to which it might be co n v en i en t t o h ave the evi- sion, and said that unless the right hon. gentleman (air. deuce tak n by affidavit. But if the opposing party Cowper) consented to withdraw it he should move that desired to have the benefit of a viva voce examination, it be committed that day three months. even alter the evidence so given on affidavit, it would be Mr. HENLEY trusted the bill would be withdrawn, competent for that party to require the evidence to be as lie considered it equally objectionable and unintel' given orally. In many cases that would be the most h a po e. convenient mode of proceeding, Mr. KINNAIRD defended the bill and bad nO beg- Mr. Burr said that the fact .off the adultery would , not be tried bye jury, unless either o f th e res p on d en t s de- ration in declaring that if the whole of the metropolis could be polled the great majority would be found mantled it, and they would have that power even after favourable to the measure. the petitionnr had verified his case by affidavit, and been Lord V. TEMPEST opposed the bill, on the gr ound cross-examined in court. that it was obscure and despotic. They might almost Mr. GLADSTONE wanted to know whether both suppose that it came from the Tuileries. (Rear.) processes of affidavit and ex am i na ti on an d t r i a l by j ur y Toe house then divided on th e mo ti on for going into could be applied to the same cas e I committee. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said any person Far the motion familiar with the course of procedure would know that Against it the court would not :grant the right of cross-examining Lord V. TEUPEST said he must resist going into unless the party demanding it declared he did not intend committee at that hour. He would therefore move that to apply foria trial before a jury.- the denate be adjourned. Mr. BUTT thought it would be better to strike out Mr. CO WPE ft was willing to go into committee and the clause altogether, report progress. . A division was then called for, but none took place, Mr. COX hoped the house would not go into 0301 ' and the clause as amended was agreed to. tnittee at that hour. Clauses 44, 45, 46, 47, were also agreed to. Mr. HENLEY humorously expressed his hope that On clause 48, the bill would be made to apply to Scotland, and that Mr. adaMA HON considered that in all cases the costs they should not be allowed there to slee more than should follow th e even t, an d move I to i nsert th e wor d s , " three in a bed. " (Great laughter.) p "That when any contested matter shall be tried by a Lord V. TEMPEST having withdrawn his motion for jury the costs shall abide the result of the verdict, unless the 'adjournment, the bill passed through committee pro that verdict be afterwards set aside." forma. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL could not assent to Some returns were ordered, and the house adjourned the amendment. The matter tried before the-jury might at two o'clock. , be only a part of the subject in issue bet veen the parties. The clause was t*:en agreed to. Clause 49 was also agreed to. Clau-e 50, court to make rules and orders. Mr. WIGRANI moved to add wor fs to enable the court t s provide for hearing certain causes in private. Mr. MALINS did not think the words necessary, as every court bad the power of hearing causes in private: it was the constant pr mace of the Court of Chancery to do so. He a-as unwilling to insert words which would sanction a practice which was open to many objections. Mr. WIGR Mal said the 43rd clause provided that all evidence shot ad 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." Lora LOVAINE supported the amendment. The committee divided. For the amendment 23 Against Mr. HENLEY proposed to strike out the whole of tbe section after the word "save" in the 21st line. His object in doing this was to leave open to the court the framing of it rules of procedure, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL hal not the least ob• jection to give up the words. The amendment was agreed to and the clause passed. Oa clause 51, Mr. MALINS objected to the appeal court number ing within its members the judge against whose decision the appeal went. The clause was agreed to. Oa clause 52, Mr. WALPOLE objected to the appeal in these cases being limited to questions of law. In matters of divorce questions of faot were far more likely to arise than questions of law, and inas:nuch as all courts were liable to error, he trusted that something would be den e to meet this difficulty. Ile moved to omit words effect ing this object. Mr. BOVILL said 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 reidy 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 amendment and the clause were agreed to. On clause 53, Mr. ROLT said that upon this cl use the potency of the bill for good or evil mu-t depend. He could not. agree with the view which hal been stated, that this bill was but to create a new court for the administration of the fie believed that its object wa s to sanctityain taizhistineglaw. m of the marriage vow in the minds -of many, yet giving relief to the fa iv, in who se case t h e sanctity any bl oi that vow hal been violated. With that prin ciple he did not think that this clause was in consonance. The result was that the offence of adultery, which was an offence by the laws of the country, was to be re warded by the liberty to marry again, In cases where incompatibility 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 temptation to the commission of adultery. It might be said that you could scarcely adopt any legalttion 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 tee guilt. They eh -tad take into account the effect which such a law would have upon the many who diii not tall within its scope. It was th e d u ty o f th e l eg i s l a ture to pro-.Lct the man, and no t t o sacr ifi ce th em t o the fewwno fell into error. It might be well to consider what was the law in other countries as well as in our own country up was distinct, ac for Cambridge ,l had e to tbe pre-ent tim e . It b a d n ever yet been w b i e itten in wa the law of any country that divorce given, that reasont theadulterer of adultery. tiho In France marry His hon. friend the member an amendment embracing that principle which he „hhhe should no rj'cet with he iaw the ac co content to take as a compromise, though his own• amendment went further. In Scott rid it was t ee same, wh-le in Swedes the adulterer could, not marry again except with the consent of the spouse and by the royal author'ty ; and then as regarded our own country, he contended that special acts of parliament, under which a clearly showed h that t t h he r i g t y e n t e o r m l l a a r w r y did notan r w e a a s ig g ni i s v e e) t ' 'he prin ciple of the remarriage of a man or woman divorced for the crime 01 adultery, The probable result of grantas this license, and extending it to the middle class would be to sap and weaken the notions of fidelity in the con jugal relations to. an extent that it was anposeible to MILITIA BILL. On the motion that the amendment of this bill be con sidered and agreed t Coi. Noun{ asked for an txplanation from the Government, relative to the caps and helmet covers of the men sent to India. He believed we were losing many men in India from the want of these savers. Sir J. TRELAWNY gave notice of his intention to put a question to the Un ler-Secretary for War, relative t the sergeants of the army. The consideration of the amendment, for want of time was postponed. The other orders were agreed to, and the morning sitting was suspended at 4 o'clock. Toe house resumed at 6 o'clock. [LEFT SITTING.] THE PERSIAN WAR. (From the Gazette of this Evening.) INDIA BOARD, AUG. 17. The following notifica , ion has bran received from the Governor•Gaueral of Inhii in Council, in addition to those published in the London Gazette cf the 11th inst. NO II FICATION. F,rt %Vl' lam, Foreign Department, Ja;y 1, 1857. Since the Notification No. 140, dated the 18th ult. was published, the Right Honourable the Governor- General in Council has received a dispatch dated the 27th of May, 1857, from Lieutenant-General Sir James Outran, K C. 8., bringing to notice the services of cer tain officers attached to the Expeditionary Force whose names were cot before the Government at the time the Notification above referred to was issued. Tna Othceri no w rautieed by the Litutentant-General, are— Captain Pottinger, Brigade Major Artillery at Bushire. Captain Graves, 3rd I,!ght Cavalry, who brought the - regiment out of action at Bushire. Captain Aitcheson, Brigade Maj,:r Infantry at Bushire. Erevet-11:4jor Sibley, Brigade Maj.)r Infantry at Bushire. Captain I). Hay, Acting Brigade Major Infantry at Bushire. Brevet-Major Baynes, commanding 20th Native Infan try at Bushira. Sulgeon Stove l l, Superintending Surgeon at Bushire. Breve . -Major lleat!y, Aide-de Camp to Brigadter- G,neral Havtlock at Mohumra. Lieutenant-Colonel Hutt, C. 8., commanding Artillery at Mohumra. Captain Worgan, commanding mrrtars on the raft at Mohumra. Captain Dougla., Brigade Major Artillery at Moliurnra. Captain Bouvtrie, Brigade Maj )r Infantry at Mohurnra. Captain M‘Ktchnie, Brigade Major Infantry at M.o butura. Lient.-Colonel Le Grand Jacob, commanding Light BAt'al;ren at Mohumra. Majlr 13( ileau, commanding Madras Sapper and Miners. Lieut. C. Cierk, Madras Cavalry, Aide de-Camp. Captain Lucas, Assibtant-Commissary-General. Lieut. Havelock, Assistant-Quartermaster-General. Surgeon Mackenzie, Superintending Surgeon at Bushire and Koosh-ab. To all these officers, no less than those who were honourably mentioned in the Notifica. ion of the 18th u t,, Leut.-General Sir J. Ootrarn, K.C.8., has expressed his obligations ; and the Right Hon. the Governor General in Council has great pleasure in offering to them his cor dial thanks, and assuring them that it will be his care to recommend their services to the most favourable con sideration of her Majesty's Government and the Hon. the Court of Directors. G. F. ED MONSTONE, Secretary to the Government of India. LONDON GAZETTE—(This Evening. ) DOWNING-STREET, AUG. 10. The Queen has been pleased to appoint the Reverend J. Bowen, L.L.D., to be ordained and consecrated Bishop of Sierra Leone, in the room of the Right Reverend John W. Weeks, deceased. DOWNING-STREET, AUG. 16. The Queen has been pleasedto appoint J.. 1 ardine, Esq.; C. St. George Cleverly, Esq., (Surveyor-General) ; H. T. Davies, Esq., (Chief Ma g istrate) ; and George Lyall, to be Members of the Legislative Council of the co lony of Hong Kong. Her Majesty has also be pleased to appoint Michael Henry Gillwey, Esq., to be Attorney-General for the colony of Natal ; Augustus Frederick Gore, Esq., to be Assistant Government Secretary for the colony of British Guiana •, and Charles Waters to bo S , ,licitor-General, and James Brown, Esq., to be Surveyor-General, for the Pro vince of New Brunswick. WHITEHALL, AUGUST 14. The Queen has been pleased to appoint George Ding wall Fordyce, Et q., advocate, to be Sheriff of the shire or aheriffdom of Sutherland and Caithness. WAR-OFFICE, PALL-MALL, AUG. 18. Erratum in the Gazette on the 14th August, 1857. BREVET. Fo r Captai n Thomas Baker Pleydell, retired full-pay to hav e th e h onorar y ran k o f Major-Gene pil4raalys:itleoaylla: da,as Cap tain Thom a s B a k er Pl u yd e ll, ret i re d full -1 m.rine s , to have the honorary rank of Major. COMMISSIONS SIGNED B Y LORDS LIEUTENANT. E A s r q th ., u r r es ß ig e n id ed , M; Dri,:tusor Castlemartin lc,:ilf 2 Y .7 e g omanry Cavalry—Douglas Surgeon, vice Joshua Paynter, Troop, vice Deciraus Royal eliam Militi re H er a s rr p i r e o s m t o o t b e e d. Cornet of a By ers, J 1 u Delaware Lewis, Gent., to be Second Lieutenant. BANKRUPTCY ANNULLED. William Henry Brown, steel roller and merchant, Shef field. BANKRUPTS. COURSE OF EXCHANGE.--THIS DAT. Amsterdam 11 17 Gibraltar •••••••••• •• •• Ditto, three months .. 11 1914 Leghorn ..•• •• .... •• •• 2 9 90 Rotterdam ............ 11 1 s, Genoa .. 25 80 Antwerp ••.•••••.••• •• 25 40 Milan •••• •• •• •• •• •••• Brussels 25 4 Venice........ •• - aambargh ...• •• •• •••• 13 8% Naples ............•... 42% Altona •• •• •• •• •• •• . • Palermo •••• ****** •• •• 128 Paris ..•• .... 25 2714 Messina Do. three months ••25 65 Lisbon . 525 i; Maneillas ............ 25 673 Oporto ...............• 3 Bourdeanz . ........ IRio Janeiro ..... .•• •• .. Frankfort-on-Maine .... 11914 I.luenos Ayres ..•• • • .... Berlin •• I ,New York,6o days' sight Vienna .• •• •• •• •• ••• • •• 10 33 'Philadelphia •• • Trieste.... ..... • 10 34 j yawn or BULLION, PER oz: Petersburg ... ... 365 Foreign Gold In Bare £3 17 9 Madril •• ••••••••• .• .8 48 Portugal Gold Coin •• 0 0 0 CAdiZ ••••••••••• •• •• • • 49 Mexican Dollars •. •• 0 0 0 13 trcelona •• •• •• •• •• •• • • New Dollars •••••• 0 0 0 .. Silver in bar% 0 0 0 THE ATLANTIC TELEGRAPH. VA LENTIA HARBOUR, AUGUST 14. The expedition far connecting the opposite shores of the Atlantic has at length, in consideration of the many difficulties which have beset the under taking, and the lateness of the season, been finally abandoned, at least for the present. It was in teach d, after the breaking of the cable, to lose no time in endeavouring to underrun the portion al ready laid down, to join the fractured ends, and again push forward with the remaining amount of rope ; but the general opinion was decidedly against the probability of recovering the part sunk in anything over 1,000 fath:mis. The total length would be thus shortened by about 100 miles, if not more, and as 350 miles of rope had been paid out in 260 direct miles of distance, and this too in fine weather, and in partially shallow wa!er, the elide would not he sufficiently long to reach the opposite shore. Taking the whole circumstances of V:e case into consideration, it was judged better to postpone the whole undertaking until neat year. 'the Leo pard and Cyclops par: ed c map iny shortly after the accident. The Niagara, Agamemnon, and Susque- 1 hanna signalled that they would proceed direct to make arrangements for the second expedition next year ; and if the two Governments should require the use of either of the vessels of war, to land the cable at Trinity Bay. The 350 miles of wire already laid cl , ,wn will he left in its present position until next year, when there will be an attempt to reco ver it by underrunniug, which will be doubtless partially successful. The Cyclops, aPer having communicated the disastrous, intelligence, got up her s team in the evening and endeavoured to leave the harbour, but having received some injury to her machinery, she was obliged to postpone her departure until this morning, when she left for Gravesend, there to await orders from the Admi ralty. Soon after the arrival of the Cyclops the officials and employes of the comp . ny had the whole of the powerful batteries and other valuable apparatus u- , ed in signaling to the ships removed frim the temporary hut and tents which had been erected at the landing beach, and shipped on board a small schooner for London. Thy land line from Killarney, in direct communi c ition with the telegraph to London, is now com plet,id t within a few miles of the place where the cable was landed, and will, by to-morrow evening be entirely finished for working. The blame of the fa lure of the undertaking cannot with justice b> fixed upon any particular individual. It must he referred more to an accumulation of unfavour able iircumstance9, none of which, taken separately, was sufficient to mar the plan, but which, coming together upon the engineers, induced them to abandon it for the present. Yet, at the same time, there is no hiding the plain fact, that hid lighter and less complicated machinery teen used for pay ing-out the cable, the undertaking would have had a very much better chance of success. The whole of the officers connected with the company will leave for London on Tuesday next. SLB fARI TELEGRAPH. IA correspondent writing to a contemporary, says :—"Sir,—Can you spare sp ace i n your co l umns 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 Dalhousie under the comfortable conviction that Lord Dalhousie's state of health prevents him from undertaking any defence, or 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 a gainst the unfortunate sceptic who may venture to doubt whether Sir Charles's dicta were al ways con 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 Ellenberough's self laudation, or Mr. Disraeli's po litical importance, or Sir C. Napier's personal merits, 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 Ma admirable letter in your paper of today, pointedly alludes to the subject of rapid communic at•on. Can any one doubt its value at such a moment t It is almost impossible to overrate it. The determina tion which, taken a few weeks earlier, might ha - re 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 au opportunity foreffect ing the object which almost seems providential. project for connecting th e Old seems destined f or a ti me , an d The World a w g i n m tihfi thecen t New I hope only for a time, to remain in abeyance. During the approaching autumnal gales it will hardly be pons le!e to lay theline across the Atlantic; but the line is perfect and ready for 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 (anda 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 opportunity of doing it to-day ; to-mor row it may be 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 be generally better perforated than any other service. lam quite sure that if Government departments had been guilty of half the misdeeds which have been perpetrated by almost every board of railway directors in 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. Edward Simmons Cooper, leather seller, c ommere ,_,. place, City-road, to sur render Se p t. 2, at one, and s:pl7. 39, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, n fa. cial assignee; , Tring Hen The d William Chappin, straw hat - e epot of the 88th Foot proeeeded yesterday Strong, Jo win-street. fordshire, Aug. 28, at two, and Sept. 4, at eleven, at the from Gosport to Colchester. THE INDIAN BUDGET. Lord C. HAMILTON begged to ask the President of the Bard of Control whether it was intended to mako the usual annual statement on Indian fivance this year, a nd, if so, on what day. Mr. Y. 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 calving attention to the affairs . of India, and for the President of the Board of Contr .1, to explain the prospective situation of the finances 6f India. This session the recent occuirences hal caused the aff sirs 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 chat 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., h.r Maj,.st)'s Government had decided that there should be no Indian financial statement this year. PRIEST 3 IN TtlE COUNCIL AT MALTA. Mr, KINNAIRD begged to ask the Secretary of State for the Ccdonics whelier any steps had been taken, or any crticr in council had been i.ieued, to 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 as members of the said council ? Mr. LABOUCEIERE said that the Crown had been advised to issue an order in cmncil by w hi c h, f or th e future, priests of any religious persuasion were to he ineligible to be members of council a t M a lt a. Th e ru l e would not be retrospective, or disturb those persons who now had seats at the council ; but when a general election occurred, or when a n y vacancy occurred, the rule would be that no priest could sit in the council. STIPENDIARY NIATRA.TE3 AT KILKENGISNY. Mr. SULLIVAN begged to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether it was the intention of Government to appoint a s tipendiary magistrate to the district of Kiikenny, in the room of Mr. J. Green, who had been physically unable for many months to attend his magis terial duties Mr. 11. HERBERT said that as then 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, stops would be taken to make a change in the ap pointment. THE LIBERTY OF TOE INDIAN PRESS. Mr. DISRAELI—I wish to make an inquiry of her Majesty's Government respecting an act of the legisla tive council of India. which has been lately passed (I believe it is number 15 of the year 1857), re.trictin4 the liberty of the press in toe dominions of the East India Company. I wish to know of the right hon. gentleman the President of the Board of Control whether be w ou ld obj ct before we separate to place a copy of that act on the table Mr. V. have not the least objection to place a copy of that act on the table. I may Bay that it has been only passed for one year. Mr. DISRAELI—There are two other documents which I wish to have laid on tie 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 Indite, explaining the reason why he has extended 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 adch essed to the Governor-General on the sulject of the European populition. If there is no objection t the pr )(Inchon of those papers I will give notice of a motion for their production as unopposed returns. Mr. V. SMlTll—lltave 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 l'y on the table a copy of the friend of India, fir which a warning was given to that journal Mr. Y. SMITII--If the hon. gentleman will commu nicate with me in private, I will endeavour to meet his wishes. TEM DIVORCE BILL. The house then went into committee on this bill. Progress was resumed at clause 30. Mr. HENLEY said that in claim 16 provision was made that in all suits other than for a dissolirion of mar riage, the court should proceed on the principle now acted on in the Ecclesiastic Court, and 83 grant alimony and the means of carrying on a suit to a wife pendente lite ; but he did not find in this clause any pro vision of that kind applicable to divorce a vinculo. He should wove to in=ert the word " alimony." Lord LOVAINE moved, in line 8, to leave cut "may, if it shall think fit," and insert " shall." The ATTORNEY-GENERAL sail that in divorce bills hitherto, according to the practice, the House of Commons took on itself to award some means-of main tenance to the wife, when the husband only was con cerned. But this clause referred to both parties, and he thouht had better remain as it was. Toe bill, as it was worded, did not throw on the court the necessity of adopting the practice of the Ecclesiastical Courts in divorce, although it had done so in cases of judicial sepa ration. The question was whether that practice was a desirable one to be maintained. The result might las that a wife might fall into the hands of evil advisers, and might use such a power for purposes of extortion. When a wife applied for a divorce a vinculo matriononii, it was not desirable that the court should be comoelled to adopt such a rule as that proposed. It was better to leave this matter to the discretion of the court in making rules for its procedure, Mr. HENLEY feared that the court would have no ' power under the clause. He did not ask to make such a rule imperative on the court. As the 16th clause had made a provision on this subject in cases of judicial sepa ration, it was not too mach to ask that in a suit for dis solving a marriage a woman should not be left without reasonable means of carrying on the.suit. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL —There was a coca• mon law liability for a husband to maintain his wife, but there was none to compel him to give her the means of carrying on a suit against him. That was a practice peculiar to the Ecclesiastical Courts. He would eon. I