The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1858-05-18 00:00:00

Majority against putting the question 9
Their Lortiahips then 'gamed.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-MONDAY.

Petitions were presented by Mr. MOODY, from inhabl-
tents of Kingsbury Episoopi, in the county of Somerset,
In favour of legalising marriage with • deceased wife's
sister; and from Bath, county of Bomenset, to the
same effect, by Mr. BYDNIY HENDSZT, from Protestant
Dissenters of Somerset-street Chapel, Bath, from inhabi-
tants of Treborough, Homerset, from Wesleyan' of
Quiet-street Chapel, Bath, and from inhabitants of
Oxford-street, London, with a slinkier object ; by Mr.
K. NITYDR, from Monekton Wyld, against the abolition
of
_churoh-rates. _

Mr. CABDWILL said, I beg to give notice that on
Thursday night I shall move a resolution in the follow-
ing terms :—" That this House, while it abstains from
expressing any opinion upon the policy of any troolania-
tion which may have been issued by the Governor-
General of India in relation to Oude, has seen with
regret and serious apprehension that Her Majesty's
Government have addressed to the Governor-General,
through the secret committee of the Court of Directors,
and have published • despatch condemning in strong
terms the conduct of the Governor-General, and are of
opinion that such a course on the part of the Govern-
ment must tend in the present circumstances of India to
produce most prejudicial effeote by weakening the autho-
rity of the Governor-General, and by encouraging to
further resistanoe those who are still in arms against
us." (Cheers.)
The order of the day having been read for proceeding
to the consideration of the Lords' amendments of the
Oaths Bill,
Lord J. Menu, said he begged to move that the
House do disagree with the amendment omitting clause
6. (Cheers.) It would be unnecessary for him to
renew the argument which had been so repeatedly used
on this subject in that House, and which bad been so
successful in that House against the proscription and
disabilities of the Jews. He begged to state that it ap-
peared to him that the oath which be proposed warn
compromise and concession with the view to satisfy those
who had not been satisfied. He believed that the words
" on the true faith of • Christian" were introduced in
consequence of there being at that time a sect of Roman
Catholics who said that no oath need be kept with
heretics. With regard to the Oath of Abjuration, the
words were introduced in consequence of the assumption
of the title by the House of Stuart, and of there being
many persons in this country favourable to that house ;
but, in fact, that oath was but the record of forgotton
battles and causes which were now utterly repudiated by
all parties; so that if he were to frame a Bill according
to his own views he should put nothing in it but a simple
oath of allegianoe. (Cheers.) He had now merely to

propose that the House disagree with the Lords' amend-
ment under consideration. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. NEWDEGATI opposed the motion of the noble
lord.
After • short debate, the House divided, and the
numbers were—
For disagreeing for the Lords' amendment 263
Against it
--
Majority ll3
The next resolution of the Lords was to omit clause 8.
Lord J. RUKBELL moved that the House disagree
from the Lords' resolution.
The motion was agreed to.
Lord J. RUSSELL then moved that a committee be
appointed to draw up reasons for disagreeing from the
Lords amendments.
The motion was agreed to.
The House then went into committee upon the Prince
Edward's Island Loan, when
Lord STANLEY moved that • loan of £lOO,OOO to the
colony be guaranteed to relieve it from embarrassment,
thereby, he observed, repairing • wrong caused by an
Act of the Imperial Govern gent (the history of which
he detailed), whereby the sproirth of the colony had been
retarded, the investment being one that would repay
itself.
Mr. BLACKBURN opposed the motion, which was,
however, agreed to.
The House then adjourned.
TUESDAY.

Lord V. TEMPEST gave notice that he should move as
an amendment to the motion of the lion, member for
Oxford (Mr. Cardwell), to the effect that this House in
its present state of information, abstains from express-
ing an opinion on the policy of any proclamation
which may have been issued by the Governor-General of
India in relation to Oude, or on the course pursued by
the Government with reference to such proclamation.
(Cheers.)
Mr. CARDWELL said it was the wish of Hor Majesty's
Government that the motion of which he had given
notice for Thursday should be discussed on that day, and
he appealed to hon. members who had notices on the
paper for that day to give way, that the motion might
have precedence on that day. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. TRELAWNY declined to postpone his motion on
Thursday relative to the Church-rate Bill, unless the
Government would give him another day. (Hear,
hear.)
Mr. CARDWELL said it rested on the Government,
under the circumstances to state whether the motion
should oome nn on Thursday or on the following day.
(Friday.)
Mr. Die•Aet.i—Friday Is quite at the right Lon. gen-
tleman's service. (Cheers.)
Mr. CanDwuz—Then I will bring it on on Friday.
(Cheers.)
The adjourned debits on the Oaths Bill (Amend-
ments) relative to the nomination of Baron Rothschild •
member of the committee for the Lords' Conference, was
resumed by the SOLICITOR•GENERAL, and after Some
discussion the House divided. The numbers were—
For the motion 251.
Against it
Majority —6s
The motion for appointing Baron Rothschild on the
committee Was therefore carried.

On the motion of Lord Jour RUSSELL, the oommittee
et once withdrew.

A series of resolutions, proposed by Lord EBRINGTON,
and censuring the barrack accommodation of the army,
was agreed to; is was an address for inquiry into the
best means of abolishing all toll•bars within six miles of
Charing Cross.

WEDNESDAY.

Mr. AYIITON, in moving that the Poor-rates (Metro.
polio) Bill be read isecond time, argued that its prin-
ciple of enlarging the area of rating had been recognised
by the repeated attempts to give it practical effect by
legislation, which, he contended, laid • sufficient ground
for an investigation of the sub)ect by referring the Bill
to a Select Committee. He reiterated the arguments he
had used when moving for leave to introduce the Bill,
maintaining the accuracy of his figures and facta, which
showed that narrow areas in the metropolis, where the
rich resided with the rich and the poor with the poor,
imposed a heavier charge upon the poor parishes or
unions, and gave • greater exemption to the rich. He
now, he said, threw the Bill upon the President of the
Poor Law Board.

Mr. DITCOURT complained that some of the arguments
put forward by Mr. Ayrton were of a minatory character,
and he defended the House from the implied charge of
legislating upon this subject from selfish motives. He
recapitulated the chief allegations in the petitions pre-
sented against the Bill, and, after showing the functions
and powers proposed to be conferred upon the Court of
Justices who were to make the assessments, he observed
that his main objection to the Bill applied to its prin-
ciple, which had, lie said, the fatal blot that those who
contributed the money were to have no share whatever
in its distribution, there being not one word in the Bill
as to the control of the expenditure; it simply provided
a machinery for transferring money from one set of
pockets to another. He denied that the House had ever
given its sanction to the principle of enlarging the area
of Poor Law rating, and, after reviewing the complaints
of Mr. Ayrton against the existing system, he asked the
House to consider the injurious consequences of passing
the measure, which he pointed out, insisting that there
was only one safe principle in dealing with this subject
—never to extend the area of liability beyond the limit
which would give • representative body. He moved to
defer the second reading for six months.
Mr. HYNG could not support the second reading of the
Bill. Although he admitted the inequality which ex-
isted in certain parts of the metropolis, he considered
that the principle of the Bill was wrong and unsound,
but which, if adopted in the metropolis, ought to be
carried still further.
Sir 8.. HALL likewise opposed the Bill, denouncing
the whole proposition as absurd and preposterous.
ME. JOHN LOCKE defended the Bill. A state of
things, be said, which called upon the poor to support
the poor required alteration. A remedy was proposed,
and all that was asked was to refer the proposition to a
select committee.

Mr. T. MILLER contended that the principle of the
Bill erred against the first principle of the Poor Law
—that those who paid the money should have • control
over its expenditure; and that it would give to poor
parishes the privilege and power of expending the money
of their neighbours.
Mr. T. DONCOMBE was adverse to the principle of the
Bill, and put it to Mr. Ayrton whether, after what he
had heard, anything could be gained by referring the
Bill to a select coinmittee.

After some remarks by Sir W. CORDINGTON and Mr.
COLLIER,
Mr. AYRTON withdrew the Bill.
Mr. T. DUNCONBE moved the second reading of the
Patent Law Amendment Bill, its object being, he said
to lessen the oosts of patents by reducing the fees.
The motion was seconded by Sir J. SHELLY.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, after remarking that the Bill
seemed intended simply as a means of increasing the
business of patent agents, gave an exposition of the law
and practice of agents, and of the effect of the Bill in a
financial view. It would, he said, throw • charge upon
the consolidated fund, and deprive the Patent Law
Commissioners of • surplus which it was intended to
appropriate to a museum, or place of deposit for models,
and a library. lie moved to defer the second reading
for
_six months.

Mr. Dumoomint and filr J. MELLY defended the Bill,
in reply to the Solisitor-General and after some further
discussion the motion was negatived; so that the Bill is
lost.
_ _ _

Mr. Serjeant ARANY moved the second reading of the
Reformatory Schools ( Ireland ) Bill, the object of which
he explained, as well as the amendmanta he intended to
propose in order to obviate objections.
Lord Hug said he did not intend to offer any °Nee.
Mon to the wend reading of the 818, which extended
to Ireland a measure adopted in England. He at the
same time threw out suggestions as to its operation, and
es to the state of prisons in Ireland.
A short discussion ensued, in which Mr. BAOWZLL,
Mr. HATOHNLL, Mr. LIFIOY, and Mr. STAPLITON took
part, and the Bill wee then read a second time,
Mr. HAMILTON obtained leave to bring In a Bill to
reduee the stamp duty on passports
The house, after some further busting', adjourned at
5 o'clock,