The Express.
London, England, 1863-06-06 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—FRIDAY, ..Irsie 5.
The LORD emainuas took his seat oh the welsh&
A in o'cikok.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills I;;;;;;;iiathird time and pared :
Gravesend and Milton Om Bill ; Inverness and Perth
Junction, and Perth mid Dunksld Railway Companies
Bill ; Peoria Harbour, Dock, and Railway Bill ; and Mid-
land Kailway (Katmai= to London) Bill.

DUCHY OF CORNWALL ILANACIEMMIT BILL.
The Duke of NEWCILTTLE, is moving that the house
shorld go into committee on this bill, reminded their lord-
ships that the bill was read a second tune shortly before the
recess, min the understanding that the discussion upon
the principle should be taken at the present stage.
The bill had received the approbation to a very greet
extent of thore interested and connected with the pro-
perty. He held in be band a letter from a very emi-
nent solicitor in Cornwall who had been very fre-
zie inent.lyuchyOs his
communilticsoil with
numerous
erosuusthoarintides
rea.
'irritable clients, and that gentleman expressed his opinion
in favour of the measure, and congratulated them upon
baring constructed a bill which embraced so fairly all the '
Irma* the duchy and likewise of the public. He (the
Duke of Newcastle) himself believed that the result of this
bill would be not only to increase the revenues of the duchy,
but greatly to benefit all those who bail property in con- ,1
notion with it.
Lord BROUGHAM mid that he felt bound, in justice to
the memory of the illustrious Prince whose lose they all so
deeply deplored, to bear his testimony to the truth of the
statement as to the benefit which the duchy bed
derived from his royal highness's superintendence. He
(Lord Brougham) had set as assessor during the discussion
of some very difficult questioes, and throughout the whole
OCKIIIIO of those diseuesiona the Pripoe s discrimination
and appreciation of the various pointa submitted were such
as to astonish him, and indeed if the Prince had been
a lawyer inetead of a layman he could not have exhibited •
greater familiarity with all the bearings of the CNN.
The house they went intocommittee, Lord RIDEBDALI in
the chair.

On clause 39,
Lord CHELMSFORD said the object of this clause was
to enable the Dukes of Cornwall to grant any building pro.
per to be used as or converted into a church or chapel, or •
parochial or district school, and any ground proper for the
mite of any church or chapel, with or without • burial
ground, and any house proper for the meidenoe of the
spiritual person who might serve such church or chapel, or
of the master or mistress of such schooL The act of 1844
empowered the Duke of Cornwall to grant to any person
any building proper to be used for • church or chapel, and
no
doubt that clause applied to buildings in which the ser-
vice of the Eetablished Church was used. But this clause
proposed to include all chapels intended to be need by any
denomination of Christiana, and to enact that the act of
1844 intended to include all other denominations, which it
clearly did not. He objected to make the alteration p
in such an extraordinary way. His 'noble friend soiree
clause merely gave to the Dukes of Cornwall • power which
all owners of property pommeed. That might be true, but
their lordships were now called upon to recognise by an set
of the legislature a power in the Duke of Cornwall to endow
ministers of all denominations. He would ask why should
they be called upon to legislate under such circumstances,
and to recognise a title in dissenters to this privilege ? His
noble friend said the Wesleyan' were of great service in
that part of the country, and that it was important to facili-
tate the grant of sites to them for places of worship.
Now if the clams were confined to the Weeleyaus there
might be no objection to it. But in its present form
it wee objeotMnable, and there was no necessity for it as
the Duke of Cornwall had already power to grant leases for
31 years, and building leases for 99 yam, and there was
power to restrain hint from making a grant to any person.
Why, then. was it proposed to extend this power upon this
occasion

The Luke of NEWCASTLE regretted that this question
should have been raised oa this occasion when their lord-
ships were settling • bill having reference to the property
of the Prince of Wales. The refusal to grant the power
proposed would have the effect of making the prince's name
and the names of those connected with the administration
of his property most odious is Cornwall. The meaning of
the act- of 1841 might be doubtful, but if their lordship*
should deprive the Prince of Wales of all power to grant
=all sites for chapels in the duchy they would shut out
the people there from receiving religions instruction, be.
came in many of the districts the whole of the population,
to a man, was nonconformist. There were many districts
in which no other property than that of the Duchy of
Cornwall could be granted for this purpose. The noble
and learned lord did not object to grants being made to
the Wealeyans. Rot why should he object to grants being
made to the Independenta, who were also to be found in that
county They ought not to be deprived of advantages
'which might be given to the Wesleyan. He hoped their
lordahipe would not agree to any proposal for altering the
spirit of this clause. If any proposal were made for that
he should certainly divide the house against it.
Fair hear.)
Lord CHF,LIIISFORD said be did not intend to divide the
lee" but be objected to the mode in which the clause was
'worded, and by whieh there was a formal recognition and
endowment of diseent. _ .

The Duke of NEWCASTLE observed that the ducky pro-
party differed in many respeeta from almost all other pro-
perty. They had had nineteen yesrs' experience of the
claws of 1844, and he believed that the object of that cisme
could not be attained in any better way teen as proposed
by the bill. If, however, before the report, an amendment
vs placed on the paper, it should receive careful considera-
tions on the part of himself and the other members of the
council. . . .

The clause with verbal amendments wan then agreed to,
Y were the remaining clauses of the bill.

REVISION OF THE STATUTE LAW.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said that u it would be
ascessary for him to trespass at some length upon their
lordships' attention, he would postpone his motion on this
subject until a futon oocsaios.
VACCINATION (IRELAND) BILL

The Earl of ST. GERMANS moved the second reading
of this bill.

The Earl of CLANCARTY said that the pretreat law re-
lating to vaccmatioa was found to work well in Ireland. lie
feared that owing to the striogebt eaters of the bill maths
penalties it provided, it would be practically icopenitive.
After a few words from the Earl of BmAsonc,
The bill was read a assioad time.
BAKEHOUSES REGULATION BILL.

Lord STANLEY of ALDEP.LEY, in moving the 'second
reeding of this bill, said that its importance would be ad-
mitted when he informed their lordship that there were
12,000 young men, bakers, in London, working from nine
o'clock at night until five o'clock in the morning. The bill
certain regulations to secure cleanliness in bake-
ootreZdand that they should be open to official inspection
during the ordinary hours of business ; also that they
should be drained, ventilated, end periodical) y painted and
whitewashed. The bill had passed the other house without
a single dissentient, and it was much to the credit of many
of the principal members of the trade that they had given
their cordial assent to the provisions of the measure.
(Rear, bear.)
Lord REDEdDALE said be did not object to the bill, but
thought that some of its regulations were too minute and
striagent to be applied all over the country. The provisions
as to repeated painting and whitewashing would not be so
- they were in the metropolis.
trried as
TANLEY of ALDEKLEY observed that some of
the regulations were doubtless stringent, but the noble lord
mould not object to the repeated whitewashings if he had
heard the statements which bad been made as to the dis-
gusting condition in which many bakehouses now were.
Ile admitted that as the bill stood, it might prove vexa-
tious in small planes and rural districts, and he was willing
to listen to soy suggestion tending to obviate that objection.
The bill WAS then read a second time.