The Express.
London, England, 1862-06-25 00:00:00

ATLANTIC ROYAL MAIL COMPANY.

Lord DUNSBLLIN tow to a ll the attention of the
house to the position is which the Atlantic Royal Nail
Company was placed by the delay of the government to
return an answer to the memorial of the company 1114 n in to
the Treasury so far heck as the 24th day of April; and
asked the isteatioss of the government with regard to the
restitution of postal communication between Galway and
North AIDIriOA. He addramed the house now, not so
meek on behalf of the company as on behalf of the
pe
ople of Indeed—of that large number of small share-
who. on the inauguration of a scheme of noticed
had Wrested the savings of bard spent life.
Vablas7meited was a definite answer from the government
whether the scheme was to be allowed to fall to the ironed
ad the money isreeted in it to remain unproductive.
Imbed, instead of hung as advaotage, u ite natural po-
whim cadged it to be, in the communication between the
east and west, was preetioallv an obsteide, sad the people
of that canary is return for flair coatribution to the im-
perial review", claimed the reeewal of • coatmot which
would lust aely hoesit them hat would prove of ountesmiel
adventage to the whole empire.
Lord PALMERSTON said be had no doubt that
in tie early part of sent week the govesemont would
be able to commenicete their deelsion. It would not he
thought maid or cemamieet est be should eintkipate one

way or the ether the decision that might-become to, and
be could only ensure his noble friend, and those who were
interested in the matter, that nothing which tended to the
interest of Ireland could fail to command the attention of
her Majesty's government. On the other baud, the house
must see that they had dation to parfaits as guardians of
the public puns, and that thoraces there were mixed eon-
miderations which they must bear is mind, with a view to
giving • teal answer to the application they had received.
Colonel FRENCH understood that the noble lord wee
prepared to give the most favourable curideration to the
clans of the company, provided they proved themselves
in • condition to carry out the contract, and under thee,
ciroucnateness, and knowing that the noble Toed was per-
fectly incapable of violating any promise that be bad made,
he was perfectly content to wait till next week for the
answer.
The motion was then withdrawn.
OATHS ABOLITION.

Sir J. TREL&W NY moved for leave to introduce • bill
to 'Row certain pergolas to make affirmations in all asses
where an oath is or shall be required. He observed that
Lest year • bill received the sanction of parliament altering
in • certain degree the law of oaths, and he was anxious
that the Jame principle should be carried • little further,
to include jurors and others who were pieced at • disadvan-
tage as regarded the present state of the law. The bill pro.
pond also to enable persons not at present competent, a
cording to the English law to give evidence, to be heard
upon making simple de !Mations in the place of solemn
affirmations, adopting in this respect • principle which
already prevailed ut India.
Mr. DILLWYN seconded the motion.
Mr. WMAIION should have felt disposed to oppose the
bill were it not for the lateness of the 1141•111014 and the im-
probability of its pair og into law.
Sir G. HOWYMi: said that his objectless to this bill were
wholly of • prettied nature. The object of judicial pro-
cedure was to discover the truth ; sod it was notorious, as •
matter of ex , that many witnesses who would nos
wimple to • lie hesitated before they committed per-
jury. That principle bad been affirmed by the practice
before committer of the home. He aoeld not agree in
thinking that the law of India sanctioned perfary ; but he
opposed the bill pimply bemuse it would remove • prin-
cipal means of obtaining the truth from • large class of
withered.
Mr. LOCKE hoped that the hones would enable the Lon.
baronet to bring in his bill, in order that they might am
how the measure was worded, bemuse a great deal depended
upon the verbiage it employed.
Mr. ROEBUCK wished to look on the question merely as
a practical one--merely as a mode of arriving at the math
in the administration of justice. Now if they doubted the
truth of a witness, what was the het thing they did ? They
examined him on the voir dire. If the witness was • truth-
telling man, be might say that be did not believe in • future
state of rewards and punishments, although he might know
that it would tell against him. The witness having thus
given proof of his love foe truth would be ordered at once
to stand down. But suppose be lied, and said that be be-
lieved in a future state when he did not, be was allowed to
give his evidence. (Hear, bear.) There were three
motives which would restrain • person from bearing false
witness. One was the fear of punishment, another was
public opinion, and the third was religion. Now what was
the value of this last standing slope? The university oaths
were an example is poiet. In that case there was no fear
of punishment or dread of public opinion. There was
nothing but the fear that Almighty God would punish
them if they did not speak the truth. Well, persons
took those oaths and broke them immediately. (Hear.)
Such being the value of the religious sanction by
itself, his hon. friend asked that a person who professed
not to be influenced by it might be allowed to get into the
box and tell his story. He trusted that the house would
allow him to introduce his measure. (Hair, bear.)
Mr. SCULLY hoped there would be ro division, and that
the hon. baronet would be allowed to bring in his bill, in
order that the house might see what it was like. His own
impression was that there were very few preens who would
tell • falsehood that would not also swear it. (Hear.)
Sir J. TRELAWNY having replied,
The house divided :
For the introduction of the bill .... PS
APIDA
Leave wee wording given to bring in the bill.
_ ENDOWED SCHOOLS.
. .

The hams arilsMa into ceon mlttee,
Mr. DILLWY moved a resolution that a bill be
brought in for the better regulation of endowed schools. Be
said it was not his intention to proceed with the bill this
session, nor wee it hie intention to trouble the bowie by
raising a discussion or dividing upon it, but be would sate
the principles of the bill. Baring endeavoured to improve
the law relating to grammar schools be found that all his
attempts at oosciliation had been in vein, he bad there.
fore down this bill as to embody the gain-
aphis which he wished to carry out. As the
house was probably aware, endowed schools were of two
kinds, those with royal foundations arid thine toadied by
pnvate individuals. A great many of those with royal
foundations were founded io the reign of Maud VI. out
of the spoils of the monasteries. and the principle he
sought to @dahlia with reference to those schools was that
they were for the nation at large, and that so oar should
be excluded a account of religious belief. With regard
to school loaded by private persons, he did not propose to
touch them when it was distinctly proved that they were
founded for any particular tact; but he proposed to make
them available when there was no such restriction.
Yr. 8. DiIITOOURT said be wished to guard himself in
consenting that the bill be laid on the table from its being
waktnthat he concurred in it.
resolution was then agreed to.
WIND9OIt. CASTLE: • •

Mr. COWPER ;04d for ieres to bring in a bill to an-
thoriae the ale of her Wiest s bakehouse, is Pesecod-
sweet, Windsor, sod the tios of the proceeds to
the parohrs of lead or to be held with Windsor
Castle.

Leave given.

DRAINAGE (IRELAND) BILL
The howls went into committee or the above hill, and
the first four clauses having been agreed to, with some
•erbal ameodments,
The CHAIRMAN was ordered to report progress.
The other orders of the day ware disposed of, and the
hewn adjourned.
•

tab inttllignue.

COURT OF 0014 NON PLEAS.—Jtars 24.

&thugs at Niel Pries is Middloom.—(Before Lord Chid
Justice Edo soda Special Jury.)
DREITLIT AND WIPI V. THZ LONDON AND BRIGHTON RAIL-

WAT 001114011%—THE curros mum. Accrue T.
The fira•named plaintiff was • working man, employed
by the Hove Gas Company, and be, with his wife and two
of her daughters, was a passenger upon the occasion of the
accident in the Clayton tunnel ; and damages were now
claimed as compensation for injuries sustained by the wife.
The defendants pleaded payment of 101. in satisfaction of
the cause of accident.
Mr. Digby Seymour sad Mr. Pearce appeared for the
plaintiffs ; and Mr. Bovill, Mr. G. Denman, and Mr. Han-
non for the defendant&
The plaintiff's case was, that soon after the accident •
medical man attended him on the part of the company,
and that three or four days afterwards this gentleman com-
promised their claim by paying 101. and taking a receipt for
it. At this time, however, the male plaintiff believed from
what the medical man told him that his wife was not hurt.
So far from this, however, being the case, it appeared that
she had received a severe shook, and she had been getting
worse and worse, until now she bad gone out of her mind.
The witness having stated these circumstances. he was cram
examined to show that the action was brought at the
instance of some one else and without his knowledge.
The Lard Chief Justice made a suggestion to the conned
in the course of the evidence, which resulted in his asking
the jury whether they believed upon the plaintiff's evidence
that the company bad paid 101. in satisfaction of the claim
of the wife as well as of the others.
The jury replied that they did ; and a verdict wee there-
upon entered for the defendants.