The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-06-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLiAMEN T.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—YESTERDAY.
The Burl of HARDWICKti asked if the Government was tre-
pared to make a trial of Trotman's anchors in the royalOvi

The Duke of SOMERSET redlicd that tke Government did Dot
feel justified in taking any steps till the capabilities of these
anchors had been more fully tested.

Lord DUNGANNON enquired what steps had been taken
towards filling up the appointments in the packet service
between England and Ireland, and if it was true that the
captains of some of those vessels were incapacitated during the
past winter, by age and infirmity, from crossing the Channel'!
The Duke of SOMERSET replied that the Government had
nothing whatever to do with the appointment of these officer'.
The Endow:d Charities, the Local Board of Health, the
Tithe Commutation, and the Spirit (Ireland) Bills were read a
second time.

Oa the motion of the Marquis of Clanricarde,
A committee was appointed to devise some means for the
construction of breakwaters and harbours less costly Plan
solid masonry.
Their lordships adjourned at seven o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-YESTERDAY.
The morning sitting was occupied by the discussion, in corn'
mittee, of the Tenure and Improvement of Land (Irelltudijiill*

Some progress was made with the clauses.

An amendment moved by Mr. Maguire, giving to the chair-
man of Quarter-Sessions the power of sanctioning Improve'
ments demanded by the tenant, and refused by the landlord,
was negatived after a division.
At the evening sitting,
Mr. COLLIER gave notice that he should move a resolution t°
this effect :—" That the deter.aination of all questions relating
to the taxation of the country be!onged to the House of
Commons, both as to the manner, the matter, and the time ; and
that as the House of Lords had refused to repeal a tax which
the Government and the House of Commons considered nee's'
sary to meet the supply for the year, the Cammons considered
this a breach of privilege and an interference with the proper
functions of the House."

Mr. SHERIDAN asked whether any intelligence had been
received relative to the disturbance recently reported id
Naples..

Lord PALMERSTON said that he had not received any infor-
mation on the subject.
In reply to a question,
Mr. LAING said that the contract for the Cialway Packet
Service was not included in the estimates for the other petel/40
service, and would be brought forward in a supplemental
estimate. •

In reply to Colonel Sykes,
Sir C. WOOD explained the reason whichiliad prevented She
production of the promised papers relative to India; detain
errors had been made, and the papers had to be referred.bacg
to the printers.
On the motion that the house, on its rising, adjourn until
Monday,

Lord PALMERSTON stated that he proposed to take the debate
on the Indian Army, on Monday. If the bill was read seeond
tune, it would be understood that the committee would nut be
taken before the papers on tke subject were prodtrced.

Mr. lionsmAx complained of the manner in which the paper.
connected with the Indian Army question had been treated
and neglected by the Secretary for India. lie trusted that
when the papers were produced, they would be the real pare.
wanted, the earliest papers of Lord Clyde, and
.a continuous
narrative of that which had been falsely called a mutiny.
Mr. A. Mim.s observed, on the general subject of the Indian
army, that the opinion of the minority of the House had been
that of three successive Governors General and a• majority of .
the Council of India.
Sir C. Woon asserted that no papers had been sippressed by
him, either directly or indirectly; and declared that the.
charges against him to that effect were-totally unfounded. JD
denied that he had in any way garbled the papers, although he
admitted that he had omitted certain passages which 1110
thought unnecessary.
In reply to Mr. E. James, .
The SOLICITOR-GENIMA.L said thatit was intended to proceed
with the Bankruptcy Bill during the present session.
Mr. M`MAHON complained of the imperfect accommodation
afforded to the celebration of Roman Catholic worship in Irish
country districts.
In reply to Mr. Kekewitch, •

Sir G. C. LEWIS said that the disturbances in st. Gnearge'r,
in-the-East did not warrast further interference on the part of
the authorities. No remissness could be charged against than,
inasmuch as seventy-three policemen were employed to keep
order.

Mr. 0. STANLEY called attention to the state of Holybes4
Harbour, and the effect at that place of the late gales.
Mr. MILDMAY followed up the subject with some enquiries
touching the employment of Trotman's anchor by tlisr-Adrai"
ralty for the naval service.

Lord C. PAGET said that some slight casualties iniVe occurred
in Holyhead Harbour during the late gales, but they were
attributed to collision, and not to any default -in ilia harbor
works. With regard to the Trotman anchors, that invention. ,
although possessing some valuable qualities, 'exhibited iertgo
defects which had hitherto prevented the Admiralty froo
adopting it for the naval service.
Mr. BRADY asked whether it was true, as stated,in the Trish
papers, that the Sheriff of Leitrim, accompanied• by a arcs of
police, dragoons, and infantry, had taken possessionlgir the
Earl of Leitrim of a Roman Catholic chapel. at Haltdford,
that county.
Mr. NEWDEGATE, referring to the subject previously brought
forward by Mr. M`Mahon, deprecated all intetteren4e 11;ith the
rights of proprietors is granting or refusing sites fot the. sive'
tion of buildings for public.worship, . .

Considerable discussion followed, chiefly /relating to the
local circumstances of the cases mentioned.

Mr. CARDWELL observed that the possession of property gave
its owner many opportunities to benefit and conciliate the
inhabitants of the districts in which his estate lay.. 11e
referred to a report from a select committee, in which laud'
owners were earnestly enjoined not to refuse grants of sites
for places of public worship, if reasonably required by the
dwellers upon their property or in the neighbourhood.

Many remarks were made in the course of speeches made b 1
several hon. members during the discussion, respeStng the
delay in making progress with the Roman Catholics Charitisi
Bill, which has stood on the papers night after night without
being actually brought forward.
Mr. NEWDEOATE, who opposed the bill, complaine4 of O.
useless trouble that was thus given, and thought tht.Govertl'
meat ought to prevent the motion paper trona becom4 orer'
crowded. ••

Mr. BOWYER, WllO had charge of the bill, said he had don•
everything to push it forward. He had entered it on the paper
feu• Thursday next, there being no previous entry for that day,
and that if it did not come on first the fault would nut be his•
Sir G. C. LEwis observed that Thursday was a Government
night, and the rule of first come first served could not apply to
private members' bills. Under such circumstances the Govern'
ment was, however, willing to facilitate the progress of the
measure in question so far as was consistent, with a due regard
for public business. The motion for adjourning to Monday
was then agreed to.
The House having gone into Committee of Supply,
Mr. LAING brought forward the civil estimates,
with the vote of £1,209,000 for the packet service, •
Mr. COGAN complained that the item for the Galway picket
contract had been postponed, and inquired what course the
Government meant to pursue with regard to that question•
Mr. LAIN° said that the Galway contracts had been referred
for investigation to a select committee.
Colonel Denire demanded whether the present Governaiet
considered themselves bound by the undertaking of their pre-
decessor ? Was the contract held to be valid or notl That
was the simple question.
This appeal was reiterated from several quarters, but elicited
no further reply from the Treasury Bench. •
The other items of this vote were then subjected to a.
longed and miscellaneous discussion, whi,h chiefly oeeupie*
the remainder of the sitting.