The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1859-08-16 00:00:00

WEDNESDAY.

Mr. BRIGHT moved for seleot committee to inquire
into the allegations contained in tJia petition of Mr.
Hugh C. E. Childers, presented the previous day.
Mr. OVIREND, to whose conduct in connexion with
the election for Pontefract the petition related, said be
did not complain of Mr. Childers for presenting the
petition, or of the motion for a committee to inquire
into allegations affecting his honour; on the contrary
bin desire was that the whole matter should be
thoroughly sifted. He did complain, however, of an
expression which had been used the day before by Mr.
Bright, in his absence, for the first time in his life in con•
neston with his name,—the word "fraud." Mr. Overend
entered into very full details a the transaction in
question, supported by oormspondence, whence be
inferred that the original object of the arrangement
between hnu and Mr. Childers was that there should
, be a dignified withdrawal of the petition, and he insisted
thst his seat had never been in issue.
Mr. BRIGHT disclaimed the position of an accuser in
this matter. The case, lie said, had appeared to him
as of such a nature that he could out refuse to present

the petition.
After some remaiss by Sir W. JOLLIEFE and Mr.
DISRAELI,
Sir G. GHEE said if the mere question raised by the
petition was whether there bad been a coinpromise
between Mr. Overend and Mr. Childers, and the former
had not fulfilled the stipulations, be agreed that the
question would be withdrawn from the cognisance of the
House; but that waa not the whole question, for the
petition alleged a matter as to the stun to be paid by Mr.
Childers as a consideration for giving up the petition,
which would he a corrupt compromise, and fully deserved
the consideration et a committee.
The :notion was agreed to, and tho committee nomi-
nated.

Oh the order for considering the European Troops
(India) Bill. as amended,
Sir. C. WOOD eXpleiDed the partiCUlet reason for
introducing this Bill. He stated the limitations which
had been imposed upon the East Indis Conipsil as t°
the number of their European troops, which had been
increased by Act of Parliament in l&3 to 21,000, but
that number had been at one time exceeded under a
doubt which this Bill would remove, legalizing ,at had
been dune, and giving • margin for an increased force
to the extent of :30,000. The opinions of the members
of the Royal Commission differed as to the expediency
of a local army in India; but he thought the weight of
authority MOO iu favour a a local force, of which lie
pointed Out Wine of the advantages. The late Govern-
ment had come to a decision that a local army should
he maintained, and the present Government had
arrived at the Name conclusion. Referring to
the discontent of the European troops in India, he
observed that lie did not think that they had any sub-
stantial grievance; but there were palliatives of their
conduct, and he did not think it fan to treat them se
wrongheaded or mutinutui. The water had been left
to the declined, of the Governor-General and Commander-
in-Chief in India, and the men who wished it were to
, have their discharge and be sent home.
I General Part regretted thss this portion of so impor-
tant a question should have been brought on at so late •
I period of the session, this Bill being in direct opposition
to the report of the Royal COODOIDOOII, that DO local
I army should be maintained in India. He regarded the
I conduct of the European troops in a more serious light
than Sir C. Wood, and he asked whether the Govern-
ment had received any communication from Lord Clyde
and General Benefield cestecting the =Airy.
I The discussion was continued, and the Bill was read •
third time and pealed.
Mr. HODGSON moved an address to Her Haieety to
cease inquiry to be made into the existettoe of corrupt
practices in the borough of Wakefield by the appoutta
swot of a °osmium.

The motion which wu cpposed by Colonel &MYTH and
Mr. BRADY, and supported by Mr. E. JANIS, and Mt.
CAINE', was agreed to.
The Houma adjourned shortly before 6 o'clock.

THURsDAY.

In reply to Mr. E. James,
LEwis said a deputation of the master-builders
had waited upon him on the subject of the "strike,"
ani stated the grounds of the difference between them-
selves and the men, ant: the reasons which had deter.
mined their conduct, expncsaing an opinion, in which he
did nut concur, that it was desirable that the House of
CUILIMMIS or the Uoveniment bould arbitrate with the
view of bringing about an accommodation. Ile had
bald that, in his opinion, neither one nor the other
could undertake the office of arbitration.
_

In answer to a .mes put by Mr. alumni,
The CHASCELLOU of the Eli:new:Es said he did not
think he should be justified in refining the grant at the
Chiltern Hundreds to a member against whose return
a petition was merely pending; that the (lamellar of
the Exchequer must have ovine formal Act of the House,
oreoine potent facts, that would afford him some reasons
for reto.ing the grant.
Sir J. l'AxtliN asked the First Commissioner of
Works whether it was his intention to proceed with the
works, as proposed by Mr. Hawksley, for partially
chaining the water in the Serpentine.
Mr. Fertuov said it was his intention to proceed with
the works for totally and effectually purifying, not
"partially cleansing," the water, and he entered into an
explanation of the plan in order to correct what ho
said were misapprehensions in this matter.
The iliscus.sion, which by the indulgence of the House
was allowed to proceed, showed in its progress that
such high authorities ns Mr. Stephenson and Sir J.
Paxton differed upon essential points.
. . . .

In reply to Mr. Aruott,
On tha order for going into committees upon the
Charitable TruAta Acts Continuance Bill, which had
conic down from the Lords,

_
Mr. NEWDEGATE offered a strenuous opposition to the
Bill, which went, he said, beyond the suspension of the
Law of Superstitions Uses, to which he would not.
object, and be protested strongly against the legative
authority assumed by Cardinal Wiseman, which he
maintained was contrary to law. He mowed to defer
the committee for three months. . .

Upon a division, the amendment was negatived by
70 to 47, and the House then went into committee on
the Bill. Upon the report the Bill was mad a third
time, and passed.
The House then, in committee, discussed the clauses
of the Divorce Court Bill (likewise from the Lords),
which underwent material amendmeate by the omission
of the 4th clause, which extended the jurisdiction of the
Court to Ireland; the sth clause, which authorised the
Court to hold its sittings in cases involving topsider-
, atious of public decency with closed doors; and the 7th
clause, providing that petitions for the dissolution at
marriage be referred to the Attorney-General, with a
, view to prevent collusion.
On the motion of the AMR:CST-GC:MAL, • clause
was added, providing that, on any petition presented by
a wife, praying that her marriage may be dissolved by
reason of her husband's adultery, coupled with cruelty
I or with desertion, the husband and wife shall be com-
petent and compellable to give evidence relating to such
cruelty or desertion.
A clause was likewise added empowering the Court to
I make orders with reference to the application of pro-
perty under ante-nuptial or post-nuptial settlements.
The Bill was read a third time and passed.
The House was counted out at half-past 1 o'clock.