The Express.
London, England, 1851-03-07 00:00:00

SECOND EDITION.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

THIS EVENING.

Lord J. RUssitti. gave notice, for Thursday week,
of a motion for leave to bring in a bill for the
better administration of Justice in the Court of

Chancery.
Sir DE I..tex EVANS inquired as to the sources
from whence the expenses of the new Kaffir war
were to be defrayed, and whether the House of Corn-
mons would be allowed anv opportunity of express-
ing an opinion upon the subject.
Lord J. ItussEtt. explained that no addition, save
that of the reinforcement of a single regiment, had
been as vet considered necessary to the forces at the
Cape, and before any further expense was incurred
the sanction of the house would be asked.
In reply to Sir W. Molesworth, Mr. HAWES pro-
mised that all papers relating to the disturbances
should be promptly laid on the table, and meantime
deprecated any undue importance being assigned to
the affair. No despatches, he added, were as vet
received by the government, though such were hou'ily
expected, Sir 11. Smith having extricated himself
with great gallantry from an environment of insur-
gent Kaffir'.
Lord J. RUSSELL gave the promised explanation
as to the dates when the government intended to
bring on various public business. The Home Secre-
tary would presently state the alterations proposed
in the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, and as these were very
extensive he should ask them to postpone the second
reading until Friday next. On 'Monday he should
propose that some votes should be taken in com-
mittee for the naval service. No vote upon the in-
come-tax would be asked until Monday, the 24th,
but on Friday, the 21st, the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer would state in full the new arrangements of
the finance scheme for the ensuing year.
The order for the second reading of the Ecclesias-
tical Titles Bill having been put, a multitude of pe-
titions for and against the bill were presented by
various members.

Sir G. GREY then stated the effect of the alterations
which it was proposed to introduce into the mea- '
sure. Reviewing various suiggestions that had been ,
offered to the government, he combatted the argu-
ments that had been urged in favour of the
appointment of a committee of inquiry, and
contended that proposal of mere resolutions
in both Houses of Parliament would have
excited just as much debating as the bill itself, and
at the same time would have been mere waste
paper for any practical purpose. And if the
committee were appointed, their inquiries would
prolong indefinitely the animosities which it was of
so much importance to allay as speedily as possible.
Another suggestion was, that Ireland should be ex-
cluded from the operation of the bill; but after a
renewed consideration the government persisted in
the conclusion that the assumptions of papal ambi-
tion should be repelled by a like enactment in all
sections of tho United Kingdom. Such an omission
would have soothed much of the opposition with
which they were threatened, but It was not a
step to be conceded consistently with the prin-
ciples by which the ministry. were prompted to act.
Admitting that the bill might possibly interfere
with some hierarchical functions which had ob-
tained a quasi sanction in Ireland, the right
honourable baronet contended that the prohibi-
tive force of the second and third clauses had
been much exaggerated, and examined minutely the
phraseology of those clauses to show that they did
not circumscribe the privileges heretofore enjoyed
under the existing Bequests Act. Some interference,
however, he allowed to be possible in an indirect way,
and through a circuitous process of legal induction,and,
after detailing several hypothetical instances of such
interference, Sir G. Grey proceeded to explain the
L modifications in the clauses by which they were to
be removed.
(Left speaking.]