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

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—YESTERDIYa

Lord CHELMSFORD moved the third reading of the Sunday
Trading Bill.

Earl ST. GERMAINS objected to the bill as legalising Sunday
trading within certain hours. It would compel certain classes
to open their shops till ten o'clock on Sunday mornings. lie
moved as an amendment that the bill be read a third time that
day six months.
Lord TEYNHAM supported the amendment.

Lord CHELMSFORD defended the measure, which would stop
the disgraceful trading on Sundays in the public thoroughfares.
Earl GRANVILLE opposed the bill.
After some furtker debate the House divided, when the
motion for the third reading was car►ied by 40 to 29.
The bill then passed.
The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Bill was read a second
time.

Some bill were forwarded a stage, and the House adjourned
at half-past seven o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-YESTERDAY.

The Speaker took the chair at four o'clock.
In reply to Mr. Wyld,

Lord PALMERSTON said that the Government was ready to
furnish ships to survey the Northern Sea in order to test the
possibility of laying a telegraphic cable to America by way of
Scotland, the Faroe. Islands, Greenland. and Labrador.

Mr. LINDSAY moved for a select committee to enquire into
the organisation and management of those branches of the
Admiralty, War Office, India Office, and Emigration Board,
by which the business of transporting by means of shipping
troops,.convicts, emigrants, materials of war, stores, and any
other similar service, is now performed, with a view of
adopting some uniform system by which such services may be
economically and efficiently conducted under the authority of
one consolidated and responsible department. As the. motion
was not, he believed, to be opposed, he would not occupy
time in argument.
Sir N. SEYMOUR seconded the motion.

Lord C. PAGET said that he had no objection to the motion
of the honourable member, but he feared that there would be
great difficulty in the way of the success of his plan.
Mr. BAILLIE advocated a separate department to be charged
with the control of the transport setvice.
After some discussion,
Sir J. PAKINGTON declared his satisfaction at the consent by
the Government to the enquiry, and deprecated further dis-
cussion under the circumstances.
The motion was then agreed to.
Mr. B. COCHRANE moved, that for the future the Civil Ser-
vice Commissioners shall publish, with their annual report,
all the examination papers submitted to candidates, specifying
the proportion in which the maximum of marks assigned to
each branch of knowledge is divided among the questions con-
tained in each paper. He attacked the entire system of
examination, which deprived the Crown of many valuable
servants; but if it was to be carried on, it should only be
under complete publicity. He complained that the absence of
publicity had led to many instances of individual hardship,
some of which he detailed.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed the motion, as
directly levelled against the competition system. That system
checked the spirit of jobbery, wh'eh was still rife in the
country, and often indirectly encouraged by members of
Parliament.

Sir F. SMITH made some observations as to the manner of
distributing the marks allotted to candidates.

Mr. BENTINCR declared that examination was more neces-
sary fdriiiteMbers of the treasury bench than anywhere else.
So long as the Treasury exercised its patronage without
responsibility, there would be that feeling of dissatisfaction
which gave rise to the present motion.
Lord STANLEY defended the present system, entering at some
length into the advantages of competitive examinations in
bringing out the merits of the several candidates. Those who
had been rejected had failed in the lowest elements of the
examination, in spelling and arithmetic. He opposed the
motion, as a committee on the entire subject had just con-
cluded its labour, and was about to issue a report which would
throw much light upon the subject. The information that
report would furnish would enable them to discuss the matter
to much greater advantage.
Mr. BOWYER entered into details to prove the imperfection
of the present system, which constantly demanded knowledge
from the candidates totally inconsistent with their future
duties.

Sir G. C. LEWIS said there was no attempt to adopt the
examinations to the future duties of the candidates ; the object
was, in a general examination, to ascertain that they had a
liberal education.

Lord R. Czcir. objected to the high pressure aystera which
brought in clever and worthless men to the exclusion of per-
sons really fitted for these duties.

Sir S. Noaracorn urged the House to wait till the evidence
of the committee was brought forward, whose inquiries bad
been searching and extensive. • •

Mr. B. COCHRANE replied, declaring that he had heard no
valid reason against his,niotion ;" still, as the report of the com-
mittee was about to issue, he should not press it.
The notion was negatived without a division.
Mr. Dr-viaav moved for leave to introduce a bill for the
amendment of the proceedings on trials for felony and misde-
meanour, the object of which was to assimilate the criminal to
the civil law in enabling the counsel for the prisoner to
comment upon the evidence after it had been given.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought that the bill deserved con-
sideration.

Leave was given to introduce the bill.
; Captain Jervis was making a motion against, the Wakefield
prosecutions, when the House was counted out, at twenty-five
minutes•past seven.

LIVERPOOL POLICE COURT.-YESTERDAY.

(Before Mr. CASTELLAIN.)
STABBING BY AN OLD WOMAN.

Mary Gibney, an old woman who keeps a small eating-house
in Gascoyne-street, was charged with having stabbed a young
female named Mary Keith. Mr. Bluck defended: The com-
plainant said at 4 o'clock the previous day she, with another
female, went into the shop of the. prisoner to get something to
eat when the prisoner, without any provocation, struck her
with a knife on the nose, inflicting a long wound on that organ.
Mr. Bluck endeavoured to show that the girl went in and was
making a blow at the prisoner, who had a knife in her hand,
and on raising that hand to protect herself, the knife struck the
girl by accident. A girl, who was with the prosecutrix, cor-
roborated her statement. Mr. Bluck called two witnesses to
sustain the view of the case he had pot before the court, and
having proved his point, the'prisoner was discharged.

PLUNDgR.
A well-dressed female, named Mary Williams, who refused
to tell anything about herself, was charged for having stolen
nine waistcoats from Miss. Cheshire, .a vest maker, living in
Leeds-street. It appeared that Miss Cheshire had six of the
vests from Messrs. Watson and Lord-street, and three
from Mr. Davis, of Great Howard-street, to make, as she
Worked. for these shops. She had them safe in her place at
ten in the morning, and missed them at six hi the evening;
but she knew nothing of the prisoner, nor had she ever seen
her before. The property was worth 50s. A woman named
Ford, who keeps a broker's shop in Greetham-street, said she
stopped the prisoner, offering some of the property for sale ;
she had already disposed of some of the vests. The owners
of the property having proved to it, the prisoner was sent for
trial.