The Express.
London, England, 1864-05-07 00:00:00

EVENING, MAY 7, 1864.

of the crime in tads country, and he believed if the bill were
allowed toper it would be fired that there was not that
interference with private rights which some members
seemed to think. He could only say that thousands of his
creetiessale bad requested hen to support the bill.
Yr. ROEBUCK said it was supposed to be a matter of
money that AV should allow • member to bring in • bill.
In opposing the introduction of this bill his only desire was
to protect his countrymen from what he thought was an
infruigemeat of their rights, and as to the matter of
courtesy, though this was said to be a different
bill it was in reality the same bill that was
introduced last year The ground of this bill was twofold.
There was a body of gentlemen is this country who were
called Sabbateriaaa and another who were called tor
totallers. Now them two muddy streams of sentiment had
united and formed • muddy river which it was dregremble
to see and difficult to slam. These two sets of gentlemen
had united their forces no the present occasion. Now why
did he oppose this bill! bunt and foremost it was • law
for the poor ; it was not • law for the rich. The rich
man and the well-to-do man could always have his own beer
and his wine in his own house, and he could drew his beer
and uncork his wine when he chose. But that was not so with
the poor map. The poor man had to pay a tax on his malt.
He bed 'brays voted with the Chancellor of the Exchequer
for that tax, but he always felt in doing so that he prevented
the poor man from having his own beer in his own boom,
sad that he drove him to the public-house. Every man who
went into • public-house was not • tippler. The poor man
who went into • public-house was like the rich man who
told he butler to bring him a glen of wine or a glares of
beer. If they were really anything more than canting
howites they would pass a law which would include the
rich as well as the poor. They would not only shut up
the public-houses. but they would shut up the Star and
Garter at Richmond, sad the club in London. They would
not dare to do that, but they proposed to pass • law to purr
vent the poor man going to the public-house. He spat csa such
morality. They were merely carrying out their own opinious;
they were velum; and they mid to the poor, " You shall
have no more cakes and ale. If they passed this bill they
would create great dissatidactiou throughout
And when the hon.gentletnan told him that he repreentoff
a large community in favour of this bill, he told the hon.
gentleman that he represented a larger community
_gigging
rR He Presented a petition last year signed by 30,000 per-
sons against the bill, and when be went among his °Dose-
bomb he was waited upon by a gentleman who said• The
people are entirely with us in favour of the bill." He an-
swered, "Provo that to me and I will *pm* it no more."
They had an open air meeting, and it was carried against
the bill by • large majority. A friend of his was in
Scotland • little while ago staying at the booms
of a gentleman in the neighbourbod of • waterfall.
On the Sunday morning they went to kirk, and as it
wanted some hours of the dinner time, his friend mid he
would go to see the waterfall. "Glide man," they said,
" you canna do that, it is the sabbath." He did not go, but
they sat down to tipple. This being in reality the same
bill as that of last year, he trusted the house would prevent
the dissensions and contentions which would inevitably Ye-
-1 salt from its introduction by ref using the motion of the
bon. member.

Mr-.-OLAY was sorry the bill was opposed, because there
wen modifications in A which bad been made out of respect
to tba objections taken last year.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE appealed to the house not to allow
an agitation such as the, had seen before to take place In
consequence of le&lation such as this. The compromise
made last year had been accepted as satisfactory by the
licensed victuallers

Sir G. GREY mid that last year, in deference to the
wishes expressed by many, he voted for the introduction
of the bill, and be had no reason to ra vet having done so.
It underwent a very full and ample discussion, and after
that the house rejected it by a large majority. Under
those circumstances, he thought it should not again be in-
troduced. Hs felt certain that if it were, the house would
ultimately reject it. (Hear, bear.)
Mr. HORBFALL was surptised to hear the hon. and
learned gentleman (Mr. Roebuck) stigmatise nearly a mil
lion of his fellow-sanntrymen as ranting hypocrites, sod
also to bear him say that he would spit upon the bill.
Such language was beneath the dity of the house. (Hear.)
The boo. and learned gentleman talked of standing up for the
rights and privileges of the people. Did he do so for those
poor bar men who had to toil every day in the week ! He
trusted the house would allow the bill to be introduced.

Mr. PACKE thought the bill .0 oontoundiug the
human with the guilty. He should therefore solo
against it.
The hoes* thee divid id :
For the motion R7
Against
Consequently the bill was rejected.
The home adjourned at 25 =nut's to 1 o'clock.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OF LORDS-DAY 6.
APPEALS.
GIPPS O. WPM

This part heard appta;lfrOrntheDivoros Court was re-
sumed. The tuts were fully reported in this journal after
the former hearing, and it may suffice to state that Mr.
Oipps petitioned the Divorce Court for a divorce from his
wife, on the ground of her adultery with Mr. William Pits-
'Blum Hume, M.P. for the county of Wicklow. He was
induced to withdraw this petition on payment of 3,0001. by
the co-respondent. Having ascertateed that an immoral
inteicourse bad been mobsequently renewed between his
wife and Mr. Hume, be brought a second suit, which he
agreed to withdraw on the co-resp.mident giving him a bond
for 4,5001. This bond was set aside by the Court of Chan-
cery, and the petitioner proceeded with his suit in the
Divorce Court. The Judge Ordinary dismissed his petition,
on the ground that he ha* connived at his wde's adultery,
and the present appeal woe brought.
At the former hearing Mr. MacAulay, Q C., war heard for
the appellant, and to-day Bir H. Cairns continued and one-
chided the argument, when
Their Lordships postponed their decision.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-MAY 6.

Sitting in Banco.—(Before Lord Chief Justice Cockburn.
and Justices Blackburn, Mellor, and Moe.)
a RE FITCH Alf ATIORRET.

In this ease Mr. Archibald had obtained a rule calling
upon Mr. Fitch. a solicitor practising at Southampton, to
show canoe why he should not be struck off the rolls.
Dist term Mr. Lush, Q.C., appeared on behalf of Mr. Fitch,
when, in consequence of the peculiar character of the case,
it was referred to Muter Brewer, who to-day made his
report to the court. Mr. Fitch it appeared was a young
man, the sou of &retired solicitor who formerly practised in
London, and the main facts of the moms werethese. Fifteen
boxes represented to cooled* 1,000/. worth of plate, together
with several pawn tickets representing valuable property,
were lodged with Mr. Emanuel, pawnbroker, of Southamp-
ton, as security for the lean of 1,000/. The pawn tickets
were afterwards found to be forgeries, and Mr. Emanuel
was so fortunate as to get back his money, and he gave up
the security to the owner. Mr. Fitch, sea., bad, it &p-
Lerlent a like sum upon the property, and after the
eLL ,Ae., had been given up they were taken to an
auctioseeir's at Southampton, and .opened after notice
to the owner in Mr. Fitch, junior's, mamas, when they
were found to contain a pair of boots, an old hat, a tin
coffee pot, sonic books, old hoes, half • dozen old silver
'moose, a pair of silver sugar tongs, an old silver watch, and
two plain gold rings ; the whole of which were not worth
more than 101. The owner was then called upon to re-
deem the property, but he was tumble to do so until he
procured the asaietance of other persona, who consented to
advance the money upon the owner's false representation
that the boxes contained plate of the value of 1.000/. The
charge against Mr. Fit:b, jun., therefor* was, that he, wall
knowing that the boxes did not contain what they were re-
presented to hold, stood by and said nothing whilst the
complaining parties advanced the money upon such a worth-
lees security, with which his father's claim was to be liqui-
dated, and the proceeds of which were so handed over to
him.

The Lord Chief Justine, in delivering the judgment of
the court, severely commented upon Mr. Fitch's cooduct,
sod the stigma it was on the character and professional
prospects of • young man who bad just started in life.
They. on the other hand, bad been induced to look with u
ranch leniency as they possibly could upon such clisho-
Donrable conduct, and, taking into consideration his ex.
trams youth, and that probably acting under his father's
hideous, and direction, they were disposed not to visit him
with the severest punishment by striking bins off the rolls.
In the hope that it would be •worniog to him for the future,
the antiwar of the court was that be be suspended from
practisiag in that court fur • space of three years.
Judgment accordingly.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—MAT 6.
(Baton Mr. Commiasioner Goulbani.)
Uf EX TUCKER.

The bankrupt was a bill.broker, of Old Brad-street. The
case was before the court yester.lay, on an interlocutory
application, when it was stated that Messrs. Shoolbred of
Tottenham-court...road, who had bees directed to act as pro-
secutors against the bankrupt, in the trial which bad been
appointed to take place before this court, had retired from
the proescutioo, LW would take no further part in the
matter. Thereupon his Honour expressed himself strongly
oa the aoudad of Messrs. Shoolbred, and said that it was
extremely wrong.
Mr. Sargood now, on behalf of Mean. Sboolbred, stated
that they had been very much pained by his Honour's re-
marks, which might lead to the supposition that they bad
been what miscalled '' settled with.

His Honour said be did not suppose anything of that
kind. TM position of Messrs. Shoolbred in the mrcauti4
world was too high to allow of such a supposition Wing en-
tertained.

rood said that they had ceased to take any active
part in the proseontioo, by reason of the unsatisfactory
wanner in which the proceedings had been conducted,
other creditors having the control of then.
. .

Hie Honour mid 6e remained of opinion that when the
court had ordered • tion at the instance of any cre-
ditors, if they reti from it at the last moment they did
exceedingly wrong. In putting the matter in the hands of
Hamm Shoolbred, he felt confident that justice mould be
dose to the case.

I iir.i3;;iondMid them WU 1143 doubt that was so, and
that Yemen. Sheaßeed would appear ou the out °COSMO&
All tbay wished was that it should he uoderstood that
then was no imputation as their moral character.