The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-08-22 00:00:00

AGRICULTURAL PROSPECTS.

The past week, true to the character of this
extraordinary season, has done little towards the
ripening of the corm, being mostly humid. The,
sad accounts of disease among the late potatoes
daily gather strength. The tone of the foreign
trade has been universally firm. The same kind
,2.-f weather appears to have ruled in the north of
France and Northern Europe, and prices have
therefore moderately advanced. •

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS,--YESTERDAY.

- - _
The Rifle Volunteer Corps, the Landlord and 'Tenant (Ire-
land), the Fortifications, the Customs (No. 2), the Stamp
buties (No. 2) and the Defence of the Realm Bills were read a
thigh time and passed. ' • -
The Commons' Amendments to the Crown Debts and Judg-
bients, and the Excise Duties Bills were agreed to.
The Excise Duties Bill was read a second time.

The East India Loan Bill was read a first time.
The Commons' reasons for disagreeing to the Lords' amend-
-11"tp on the County Coroners Bill were considered and
admitted.
The House adjourned at five minutes to six.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-YESTERDAY

In reply to Captain Stackpool,

The CI;ANCZLLOR of the EXCHEQVEE. stated that the'Govern-
tnent had no power to distribute the funds of the Tralee
Savings' Bank among the depositors. It might be advisable
to introduce a bill for the purpose, but it was too late to take
any steps in the present'Session.
The Appropriation Bill was read a second time.
The Endowed Charities and the 'Militia ray Bill passed
through committee. _

Some progress was made in committee with the Court of
Chancery Bill, when the sitting was suspaided.

In the Evening,
On the order of the day for the reading of the New Zealand
Lord PALMERSTON said that the object of the bill was to
pretest the interest of the aborigines. It appeared, however,
that the constitution of New Zealand already gave the crown
tufficlent power for that purpose. Under these circumstances,
and at that late period of the session, he thought it best to
Withdraw the bill.
Sir J. t'AXINGTON complained warmly of the conduct of the
urov
eintrient as to this bill. It was a most objectionable
bteisUre, and the Government ought long before to have made
up their minds upon the subject. The true reason for the
Withdrawal of the bill was that the Government felt, even
'With the remaining skeleton of a House of Commons, that they
to-ald not pass their bill. A despatch had been received from
the governor of New Zealand, containing papers from the
t.
:4110P and the Chief Justice, which chewed the folly of
tae
such a measure, and yet in the face of those, against
Te Protest of most of those in England connected with New
4ealalld, and behind the backs of the colonists, the Govern-
,,,anent, UP to the present moment, declared its intention of
'as-Sing the bill. The present proceeding was trifling with a
great subject, and was unworthy of the Government.
Xr- HADFIELD defended the bill, and the conduct of the
Government in:introducing it. He urged the GovernMent not
to Interfere in ecclesiastical quarrels abroad. They had quite
entlugh in that way at home.
C. FORTESCUE said that the Government ought not to have
liven up soimportant a bill, which had passed the House of
Lords, without due consideration. .He defended, at some
I
„,_eflgth, the principles of the bill, and explained the reasons of
Government for adopting a measure which was in accord-
'trice with ,former measures, and he believed with the interests
of the colony.
Sir G. C. ',Elvis said that when the bill first came down
-Nun the Lords the Government felt some difficulty as to the
course tbey should pursue. It was only on the previous even-
ing that, after examining the powera of thelerown, they had
"hie to the decisien that those powers were sufficient, and
that they could withdraw the bill.
ADDERLY declared that if the Government had proceeded
t° Pass the bill they would have been unable to pass a measure
so dangerous and subversive of our previous colonial' policy.
After some observations from the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, in explanation of previous speeches, the order for the
second reading was discharged. • •
The House then wentinto committee on the Waval Discipline

Lord C. PAOET explained that the bill was intended to
modify and soften the naval code of discipline, in reforming
• laws now two centuries old. It was proposed to make the
presence of three ships necessary for holding courts martial
instead of five, as heretofore, and to allow .lieutenants to sit_
Upon such courts, so as to facilitate their ho'ding. After
adverting to the extreme severity of our earlier laws, and the
slow modification which had since been introduced, he ex-
taainedthat the bill limited the power of the courts to pronounce
hentenee of death to certain cases really deserving of such
Intnishments, and giving them the power of awarding punish-
Ments• of different grades. The bill left 'the definitions of
mutiny as it found them, but he hoped that in committee they
might introduce improvements on that subject. • Further, the
bill gave power to deal with offences committed on shore, the'
absence of which at present caused much inconvenience. As.
to the punishment of flogging, nothing pained officers more
than to have to inflict it. It was only from dire necessity that
they retained it. The bill, therefore, did not abolish the
Punishment, but checked it, and brought it under due control.
The navy intended to copy the regulation introduced into the
army, so that sailors placed for good conduct in a particular
class would not be liable to corporal punishment. Moreover,
When any sailor was accused, it should be necessary under the
in the, first instance, that enquiry should be made by one
°r More officers, who should report to the captain, with whom
Icouldlie the ultimate decision. 'He showed from returns that
the Punishment was decreasing year after year, and he was
convinced that, in the improved state: of the navy, it would
4terease still further. While in 1856 1 manin 39 was flogged,
m 1859 there was only one flogged in 67. This diminution was
gradual, and he fully believed that it would be carried still
further.
lair J. PAHINGTON expressed his satisfaction at the statement
Just made, and considered that the Government had only done
its duty in. bringing it forward. He was especially glad that
Steps would be taken to reform the present most inconvenient
system of courts martial (which he had himself, when at the
Admiralty, intended to attempt), he considered the main
Previsions of the bill to be extremely judicious. • ' •
_,.After some further discussion, the House proceeded to
discuss the details of the bill.
, A prolonged discussion ensued upon various points of detail,
tut the bill ultimately passed through committee, and was
ordered to be reported.
The adjourned debate on the Roman Catholic Charities Bill,
. as amended in committee, having been resumed, a division
Place on the question, whether the first clause, Which
had been introduced in opposition to the wishes of the original
trainers of the measure, should stand part of the bill. This
being decided in the affirmative by a majority of 70 against 13.
Sir G. Bowima, by whom the bill was brought forward,
ttraplained that its original import was completely altered,
e~ieytivan ua.sug.301r.et fed into a penal,„ -.se also complained of the condtict of the Government, who
had approved of the bill as originally introduced, and, never-
theless, voted for the new clause.
After some remarks by Mr. Newdegate, and a personal
explanation from the Attorney-General, which was followed
by a brief discussion, the bill was ordered for third reading
to-day (Wednesday).
The Court of Chancery Bill passed through committee.
On the motion for considering the Lords' amendments to
the Ecclesiastical Commission Bill,
Mr. B. OSBORNE referred to some recent proceedings of the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and especially to the increase
they had sanctioned in the revenue of the Dean of York. He
moved as a further amendment a clause providing that any
Proposal for augmentingthe income of an ecclesiastical digni-
tary should be laid before the House at least six weeks before
being submitted to the Queen in Council.
Sir G. C. Lmwts doubted whether this motion was strictly in
order, as not relating directly to the Lords' amendment,
Whereto it was proposed to be appended.
The SPEAKER voted that the notice was irrelevant, and after
e4nie discussion the Lords' amendments were agreed to, with
some .trifling alteration.
The party Emblems (Ireland) Bill Was considered, as
emended in committee, and ordered to stand for third reading.
.„Thi remaining orders of the day were disposed of, and the
&muse adjourned at ten minutes to two.