The Press.
London, England, 1857-08-22 00:00:00

-THE PRESS, AUGUST 22,1857.

On the question that the clause as amended stand
part of the bill,
Mr. MONSELL, objecting to the principle that
divorced persons should be allowed to remarry,
stated his intention of taking the sense of the house
against the clause.
The committee divided ;—For the clause, 88;
against it, 21—majority, 07.
The clause was accordingly agreed to.
The house then resumed.
The Consolidated Fund (Appropriation) Bill, the
Probates and Letters of Administration (Ireland)
Bill, and the Jurisdiction in Siam Bill, were read a
third time and passed.
The Customs and Excise Bill and the Customs
Bill were considered as amended, and ordered for
third reading.
The sitting was then suspended until six o'clock,
when the house resumed.

THE MERSEY CONSERVANCY AND DOCKS DILL (No. 2).
Sir J. GRAHAM brought up a report of the select
committee appointed to inspect the Lords' Journals ;
and moved for leave to bring in the naw bill, which
(the standing orders being suspended) he further
proposed should be read a first and second time.
After a short discussion, in the course of which the
Speaker was appealed to, and offered no objection to
the proposed course, the standing orders were sus-
pended, the bill was introduced, and read a first and
second time ; and it was further ordered that any
petition against the measure should not be presented
after two o'clock on Wednesday, it being, moreover,
understood that any opposition would cause the loss
of the bill.

INDIAN BUDGET.

Mr. V. SMITH, in reply to Lord C. Hamilton, said
that the practice of making an annual statement upon
Indian finance had arisen from a desire on the part
of the house to direct its attention during one day in
the session to the state of affairs in India, and the
wish to hear the President of the Board of Control
explain the prospective estimate of Indian revenue
and expenditure. During the present session the
unfortunate events that had occurred in India had
awakened the attention of Parliament, and upon two
or three occasions the house had been occupied in
discussing the affairs of India. Owing also to the
confusion that had taken place in the north-western
provinces, any estimate of Indian finance prepared
before the recent mutiny must of course be perfectly
fallacious. Under these circumstances, and con-
sidering the lateness of the session, and the unlikeli-
hood that members would remain in town to hear
any statement be could make, the Government had
determined not to bring forward this year the usual
statement upon India.

In the 52nd clause, which sanctions an appeal to
the House of Lords, the limitation of the appeal to
questions of law was expunged.
The next clause, enabling parties to a marriage
dissolved under the act to marry again, as if the
prior marriage bad been dissolved by death, gave
occasion to many notices of amendments.
Mr. ROLT, who had given notice of one to disable
the party by whose adultery or other offence the
marriage shall have been dissolved from marrying
again, moved, however, in the first instance, an
amendment, of which notice had been given by Mr.
Napier, to restrict the permission JO remarry to the
party on whose petition the marriage shall have been
dissolved.
Sir G. GREY resisted the latter :proposition, and
a fortiori the former.
Upon a division, Mr. Napier's amendment was
negatived by 110 to 50, and this vote virtually de.
cided the fate of Mr. Bolt's. _ _

The Chairman was then ordered to report pro-
gress.
The Trustees Relief Bill was withdrawn.
The Judgments Bill was committed pro forma.
On the order for going into committee upon the
Crowded Dwellings Prevention Bill,
Mr. RIDLEY moved to defer the committee for
three months.

After some discussion the house divided, when the
amendment was negatived by 44 to 23.
The house then went into committee, but the
Chairman immediately reported progress.
The house adjourned at two o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS—TUESDAY.
TRUSTEES RELIEF BILL.
Lord ST. LEONARDS, referring to the rejection in
the Commons of his Trustees Relief Bill, said that
on a former occasion he had framed a measure which
he hoped would have met the exigencies of the case.
That measure had met with objections on the part
of the Loid Chancellor, who said it was impracticable;
it was now before the public and the profession, they
would form their opinion of it, and he begged to give
notice that he would reintroduce it next session.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, in reply, denied that he
had said the proposed measure was impracticable.
Their lordships' house was not the proper place to
discuss the matter. He was ready to give his most
anxious attention to any bill in the next session which
Lord St. Leonards might introduce on the subject.

DIVORCE BILL.
Lord ST. LICONARDS asked what course the Govern-
ment proposed to take.
Lord GRANVILLE said, that as Lord St. Leonards
bad not given notice of his question he was not able
to give him a decided answer.
Lord CAMPBELL hoped that however the session
might be protracted it would not be closed until full
time had been afforded to their lordships for
considering the amendments made in the other
house.

Lord REDESDALE did not think there was time to
consider the alterations during the present session.
Lord GILANVULE declared the Government would
certainly not adopt the implied suggestion—that the
bill should be postponed to the ensuing session.
On the order of the day for considering the Com-
mons' amendments to the Probates and Letters of

Administration Bill, the LORD CHANCELLOR made a
brief statement of the nature of the amendments
made in the bill in the other house, which after a
slight opposition on the part of Lord WEXFORD were
agreed to.
The house adjourned at ten minutes to seven
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—TuzsDAT.
DIVORCE BILL.

The house, at the early sitting, went into com-
mittee upon the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Bill,
when certain resolutions were agreed to for imposing
stamp duties, and then resumed the consideration of
the bill at the point where the discussion left off on
the preceding evening—namely, the 53rd clause.
That clause, enacting that, on the dissolution of a
marriage, " it shall be lawful for the respective parties
thereto to marry again, as if the prior marriage had
been dissolved by death," was opposed by Sir W.
HEATHCOTE, who, in the absence of Mr. Gladstone
through a domestic calamity, moved an amendment,
of which Mr. Gladstone had given notice, to leave
out the words "as if the prior marriage had been
dissolved by death," and insert "in the office of the
registrar." This alteration, he said, would obviate
conscientious scruples and prevent Parliament from
exceeding the functions of a civil Legislature, thereby
avoiding what he regarded as one of the great evils
of this bill.
The ATTORNEY•GENEBAL observed that the question
whether it should be made matter of legal obligation
upon clergymen of the Church of England who did
not desire to perform the ceremony of marriage
between parties one or both of whom had been
divorced to celebrate such a marriage was a most
important one, and should be approached in a most