The Express.
London, England, 1865-05-12 00:00:00

DEFENCES OF CANADA.

Kr. If. a7kii U. fiZetTry s( Mete for
the Colosimo whether the rommunkatiors which had
passed betweeu her Isieety's government and the 0011111141.
&Mee from Canada had led to aoy cheap of view rap**
log the sweat to be &speeded ors tertifiretiona In oar
North Americas eoloeles?
Kr. CARDWELL said that as sore as the oommtitications
had arrived at • result no time would be lost is makiog that
result known to the how. In the meantime it would sot
be desirable that any itateinest should be made cc the sub-
ject.

LAND TENURE OF OUDE.
Lard STANLEY asked the Secretary of State for ladle
whether be had remind say resist reports relative to the
iovestigation into the land tenures of Oude ; end if so,
whether be was able to state the substance of such report;
or to lay them upon the table.
Sir C. WOOD said that the noble lord yea aware that
whatever rights bad existed would be preserved. He bed
made bigwigs for the purpose of ascertaining to what ex-
tent the investigation had been going under the direction of
the officers appointed for that purpose, sad who. he was
quite astiseed, were as impartial as men could be. He bad no
exhilor•Prtfli aeon the subjects, bat as far as hia private cam-
municatioes west they were is anaidaaas with the noble
lord's views.

-
CEIATHAM AND PORTSMOUTH DOCKYARD&
Mr. CORRY asked Use Secretary to the Admiralty
whether the bill to authories the goverment to ester ism
metracts Wood the vote of the year, for the extension of
tbeChatham sad Portsmouth Dookyerds, would be printed
before the estimates for those works were proposed in oom-

mitres of supply.
Lord 0. PAGET wild tint the bill would be laid Os the
bible, 'ad would be ;whited before the estimates were

BANKS OF MITE.
Mr. NEATE asked the Chatuellor of the Exchequer
whether, in his opinion, the state might justly withdraw
from banks, other then the Bask of England, the right of
lone they now enjoy, without ;riving them pecuniary own-
pulsation for the loss of that right.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the
question wee in the nature of an abstract declaration of
opinion, and he begged to postpone any answer until some
proposal was laid before the home which would lead the
government to co eider the subject.
INDIAN TRANSPORT SERVICE.
Mr. A. MILLS wished to ask, fa reference to the subject
, Nish had been mellowed by the hon. member for Forte-
' mouth (Sir J. Elphinskine) whether the 1,000,0001. which
was to be expended in budding the steam transports to cos-
vey troops. to India was to be charged epos the Indian
revues or to the hoarser unditore.
Sir C. WOOD replied that the 1,000,0001. we admitted
by the government, but the annual charges would fall upon
this country and upon India in proportion to the serviceseach

.
required.
UNION CHARGEABILITY BILL
On the order for going into committee on this bill,
Mr. BENTINCK rose tenons that i 1 bean instruction to
the committee, with a view to rendering the working of the
system of union chargeability more jest and equal, to facili-
tate in certain cues the alteration of the limits of existing
miens.
Mr. VILLIERS submitted that ample powers were is
possession of the Poor-law Board for the purpose referred
to. and there was therefore no oxalic* for the instruction.
The SPEAKER said that the question raised was whether
the subject of the boa. member's motion was relevant to the
subject matter of the bill. in hie opinion it was not relevant,
and therefore it would be necessery for the hon. member's ob-
ject that he should move an instruction to the committee.
The hon. member wee clearly therefore in order in making
his motion, and as it was a gaieties of instruction It wee
entitled to precedence over motions which came forward is
the shape of amendments to the bill, as the object was not
tort rid of the bill, but to widen the subject of discussion.
Mr. BENTINCK, in moving the instruction, said the
bill would produce an enormous change in the burdens
to be levied in the rural parishes el the country, and
such a measure was far too crude to be hastily passed.
The motion was wooded by Mr. PACKE.
Mr. NEATE opposed it, meteorites that the toll would
be a measure of justice to the ratepayers sod wafer boos-
fit upon the poor.
Mr. E. EGERTON spoke against the proposed 'introit-
tioo, one gave a worm support to the bill, ea • long.deo
toyed act of justice to large towns and parishes, and as the
prelude to the abolition of the law of settlement.
Mr. VILLIEES said that the objections to the bill and
the amendonat seamed to be aimed at obstructing the
measure. There had hardly been a word said upon the
ameedruest, the die:maim having been limited almost
entirely to the merits of the bill. Ile contended that under
the 7th sad Bth Vic., there wasample power for revising the
boundaries of unions, and if not it would be easy to
confer a power for that pupa* in committee.
If the statements about the inequalities is rating which
would arise in particular townships if the measure pawed
motet saythisg, it was that they should be withdraws from
the unions, but if they were to be empowered to withdraw,
where would that end? (Beer beer.) It would lead
directly to the re-eitaldishment of the parochial system.
Hon. geetlemeu' supposing that the towns would benefit by
the measure, and that some rural parishes would suffer,
would separate the towns from the rural parishes, butes soon
se that was done the rural parishes would begin to quarrel
amongst themselves. What, then, was the purpose of this
obstruction 1 Wu it a mistrust in the future of the exer-
cise by the Poor Lew Board of the ravisher power give n by
the 7end 8 Viet.? ("Hear, hue," from Mr. Addialey.)The bon.
member far North Staffordshire said " hear, bear.' He had
given very good reason for mistrusting the Poor Law Board,
if he expected them to trust his facto—(a laugb)—because
the right hoc. member had repeated statements which had
evidently struck and interested the hoe" and teemed
to be conclusive to them against Hie operation of
this meseure. He said that a very large district
of Birmingham, the pariah of Astco, was joined to three
or four rural parishes!, which under this bill would be enor-
mously rated for the support of the poor of Birmingham.
That statement the right hon. gentleman bad made before
is the boon, and he (Mr. Villiers) had received an inti-
mation from the district correctiog that error, the fact
being that every one of those agricultural perishes would
be benefited by the measure. (Ministerial cheers.) While
on the subject of accurate statemeate, be most allude to
what had fallen from the bon. member for Haverfordwut
(Mr. Sconitield), who had referred to a scheme proposed by
Sir Edmund Head, to secure equality of assessment, with-
out mentioning that the pamphlet in which that scheme
was propounded was published as far back as 1848,
when the mode of levying contributions in diffe-
rent parishes was on an average of three years.
As regarded the *vision of Sir Edmund Head, be would
accept the first pert of it. He would again refer to the
single object which the bon. member for West Norfolk had
in view, and that was, that if parishes objected to
pay a certain rate they might be separated from the
union. Now, at the present time the Poor-law Board
had power to remedy any inconvenience which might be
felt, if the guardians would point it out.
The house divided.
For the motion
Against it 193-75
Mr. THOMPSON then rose to move that the bill be re-
ferred to a select committee. He said that the large ma-
jority by which the seoood needle; of the bill had been
carried had decided the question of principle, and pledged
the hones to the adoption of union rating. Looking at it
from this point of view the question to which be wished to
attention was the question of the division of unions.
Mr. FEktEAND, is secoodisg the motion, observed that
he had placed upon the paper notice of an amendment
which the Speaker bad informed him would be irregular,
and which he therefore could not propose, namely :
"That poor rates in aid of manufacturiog wages have been
and are still systematically levied in the manufacturing dis-
tricts on agriculture, with the sanction of the Poor-law
Board, whereby the bonbons on land are grievously in-
creased, sod the wont features of the old poor-law are
maintained ; that the Union Chargeability Bill will greatly
extend the area of this unjust taxation, impose ruinous
berths= upon agriculture for the benefit of manufactures,
and create serious &montane"
Mr. W. E FORSTER said that the principle upon
which the bill was based was that the burden should be
put upon the right back. (Hear, hear.) He thought the
0:11111.011)11109b1 prove an irresistible precedent for improving
the state of things in London itself, and he trusted the
right hon. gentleman would speedily madder the position
of the metropolis, with the view of placing it under •
more complete management than it had at pre-
sent with regard to the equality of its rat-
ing. The house had not done much this session,
but he trusted hon. members might be able to go back to
their coestitneute and say they bad, at least, passed this
bill. (Hear, bear.)
Mr. HUBBARD supported the motion, as' be saw no
*titer way of making the bill work so as to give satisfac-
tion to the country.
Mr. HIBBERT gave a general support to the bill.
Mr. KNIGHT spoke at great length in favour of refer-
ring the bill to • ailed committee, but wee met with con-
tinuos internmtioes and calls for a division.
Sr R. KNIGUTLEY (at half-put 11 o'clock) moved
the adjoarnmect of the debate, a proposition which was
seconded by Mr. R. LONG.
Mr. VILLIERS thought that the list person who ought
to have moved the adjournment was the hon, baronet, who
had eel, just come into the house. He feared there was •
premeditated attempt to throw obstacles is the way of the
bill.
Mr. HENLEY did not ociesider the moths for adjourn-
meet umeasosable. as the house had been segued for es-
veral hoary 000sideriog the bill, sod was evidently not in a
temper to proceed further.
Os *divisive, the notice far adjournment was aeptived
by 174 to 80.
Mr. LYGON thought that • great deal of injustice bad
been dome to the sonmeate of his boo. colleagneiilthuse
fire he hawed to move the odious-among of the
Mr. FERRAND @wooded the meths.
Sir G. GREY said that he bad observed that the greatest
iatenaptime to the hoe. member foe Wormetenhise bed
come from his owe side of the home.
Lord J. MANNERS mid the intremptiono were of the
meet meessily sharomer, sad he believed Ropy IMO from
below the gangway on 1.1;• miahterial side of the home.
Sir R.lO IGHTLEY Awed the smut disorderly siembor
in the hosedmieg the time the hoe. member for Worse.
caddie was speaking was a lumber of the government
(Name, aims.) The noble lad the member for Wick
Asisagbe.