The Express.
London, England, 1847-07-03 00:00:00

be contended with were contrary wiada and adverse tides, and
these difficulties would be directly met by the employment
of the steamers. It appeared that very little more corn had
bees imported than if the navigation laws had remained in
force, though probably the price bad bee
nn little reducedse.
He thought that in proposing a further spesn of the
laws the government ought to have removed some of the
grievances of which the shipowners complained, of which
the principal was the duty on p Aides of insurance. (Hear,
hear.) He had the greatest confidence in the impartiality
of the government, and after the pledge given by the nobler
e
lord at, its head he had no objection to support this furth

suspension.
Mr. HUDSON denied that there had been any necessity
at all for the suspension of these laws, as there were more I
ships than were sufficient to bring all the corn that could be
obtained. Still he should not feel it his duty to obstruct the
government on this occasion. He hoped that during the re-
ten the question would receive all the attention it deserved,
ana that the house would not consent to take sway the pro-
tection to the chipping interest.
Mr. FORSTER hoped that hon. members opposite (the
protectionists) would not attempt to get up a cry at the next
election in favour of protection to the shipowners, which
would probably be as hollow and unmeaning as the cry of
protection for the landed interest was in 1841. (Hear.)
Lord G. BENTINCK, after hearing the declaration of the
noble lord at the head of the government, had no objection
to withdraw his motion.
The bill was then read a second time.
CUSTODY OF OF} ENDERS BILL.
The house then, oa the motion of Sir G. Gave, went into
committee on this bill.
Lord MAHON suggested that it would be better to post-
pone the Prisons Bill until another session, as it was not a
matter of pressing importance ; and a more perfect measure
might be brought in next session.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the matter would be taken into
consideration; and, on a future day, his right hon. friend the
Secretary for the Home Department would state the course
that would be pursued.
The bill then passed through committee, the report to be
received on Monday.
STOCK IN TRADE EXEMPTION BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Sir R. INGLIS said this bill had been passed in seven
successive years without the question being discussed. These
suspensions were unconstitutional in the abstract, and inju-
rious in their application ; for they actually changed the law
without professing to do so. It was said that stock in trade
could not be rated ; but it was now knowa that stock and
profits in trade were assessed to the income-tax. By the
exemption of stock in trade from poor-rates, the burden was
made to fall snore heavily on land and the tithe-owners. In
the present state of the house (there were only about 12
members present) he would not enter more at length into
the subject.
Sir O. GREY was not prepared to deny the inconvenience
pointed out; but the origin of these bills had been in a de-
cision of the courts that a certain rate was bad, because it
did not embrace stock in trade. If stock in trade were in-
cluded, it would be impossible to make a rate that might not
be set aside ; for numerous questions would be raised as to
what kinds of stock in trade should be rated; and some
legislation would then be necessary. Still, these suspension
bills hod not been passed on account of the decision of the
Court of Queen's Bench, but fur the purpoee of harmonising 1
the law with what had been the practice for a long time. A
bill had been introduced by the right hon. baronet, the mem-
ber for Tamworth, exempting stock in trade from rating
some objections had been raised to it in the other house, and it
had been made an annual bill, and been so continued. As S.
the tithe•owners, he did nut think they were in a worse
condition than the owners of any other property ; nor
were any of them worse off than they had been before the
decisions of the court which had given rise to these bills
lie could not give any pledge that, in the ensuing session,
a measure would be introduced for settlicg all the difficulties
connected with this question.
Sir J. TROLLOPS said the proper course would be to
refer the question to a committee up stairs ; and, if the prin-
ciple were a just one, let the exemption be made permanent.
Mr. HENLEY thought if the present law was not done
away with it would lead to litigation in every parish in
I England, the expense of which would fall on the rates, and
the clergy would be sufferers to a great extent.
Mr. NEWDEGATE opposed the bill.
Mr. HUDSON said that the stock in trade of railway
companies was rateable, and he did not see why any other
stork in trade should be exempt. lie hoped the government
would bring forward a measure on the subject early in the
next parliament.
After a conversation, in which Mr. Cripps, Col. Rolleston,
Mr. B. Escott, and Sir C. Burrell took part,
Sir R. H. INGLIS said he would not press his opposition
to the bill any further at present.
Lord G. BENTINCK complained that a measure of so
much importance should be discussed in so thin a house. It
was one of the evil effects of working double time—sitting at
twelve in the day, and until one or two in the morning.
(Hear, hear.) He could not understand on what principle
the property exempted should not be rated, or why such a
measure should be discussed when only one minister was
present; and, under these circumstances, ho should move
that the house be counted.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.
There being 40 members present, the bill was read a second
time, and the house then adjourned till 5 o'clock.

The house re-asserahled at 5 o'clock.
ROYAL ASSENT.
Sir A. CLITFOIIIi, the usher of the black rol, entered the
house, and haviag advanced to the table, summoned the
house to attend the bar of the Lords, to hear the royal
assent given by commission to several bills.
The S' PEAKI:II, on his return, announced that the royal
assent had bees given to certain bills, for the names of
which see Lords' report.
CASE OF JOHN RADCLIFF.
Major LAYARD questioned the Secretary of War rela-
tive to the suicide of a private of the above name in the 75th
regiment of foot, the particulars of which event appeared in
the fMity Veen some days since. The hon. and gallant
major read an account of the suicide, and said he referred to
this subject with great regret, as the circumstauces impli-
cated • most respected officer ; but he felt it to be his duty to
ask whether this matter had been brought under the notice
of the Hone Guards, and if such memoranda as that of Col-
Halifax were justified by military law ?
Mr. F. MAULE said the position in which he was placed
was a very distressing one, especially as Col. Halifax wu
beyond all doubt a most valuable officer, and in private life
a most excellent man. The circumstances colder which the
transaction referred to occurred would leave no doubt that
the unfortunate suicide had been guilty of a very great
crime. Col. Halifax viewing with detestation the offence
committed, issued no doubt a must severe order. He (Mr.
F. Houle) would not go the length of saying that Colonel
Halifax's punishment had not been severe, but upon the
whole he was bound to say that ho thought a severe punish-
ment was deserved. He must adthat he could not,
on a review of the facts, concur in the verdict of the coroner's
jury. Radcliff was a nun of violent temper and disposition,
and had threatened his own life upon previous occasions.
IRISH LANDLORDS.
Sir D. NORREYS moved that there be laid before this
house so much of the correspondence or reports of the in
spectors under the act 10 'Vie., c. 7 (with the name, rank,
and residence of the parties referred to), as sustains the
statements made by the commissioners of relief in their third
report, condemnatory of the conduct of committees, or of
individuals, in carrying out the provisions of the said act.
Lord J. RUSSELL declined to accede to the motion, but
intimated that the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland had directed
ouch extracts from the reports of the oomminioners as im-
pugned the conduct of certain magistrates to be forwarded
to those magistrates with a request for explanations.
Sir D. NORREYS was not at all satisfied with the noble
lord's reply. He considered that the names of those land-
lords who had merited the censures of the commissioners
should be made known, in order that the innocent might no
longer be confounded with the guilty.
Lord J. RUSSELL replied that the censures were quite
exceptional cases. What the commissioners reported was,
that in 1,700 committees they had found some instances of
abuse, and these instances of abuse were now about to be
inquired into by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. (Hear.)
Nit.. B. OSBORNE hoped that the government would
make it a point to purge the magisterial bench in Ireland of
those justices who at present, in far too many cases, occupied
it without any qualification whatever.
CASE OF TAWELL.
Dr. BOWRI NG asked the Attorney-General whether the
property of Towel', who wa, executed for murder, and re-
specting which an offisial inquiry had lately taken place,
instead of escheating to the crown, would be restored to his

widow
The ATTORNEY.GENERAL said he had been wholly
surprised at the turn given in various quarters to the late in-
quisition into the property of the convict Tawell. The hon.
member was aware that the goods of convicts escheated to
the crown ; hut the widow of Tawell having petitioned the
crown that an inquisition into her late husband's property
might be made, with a view to its being vested in herself,
the petition been rented, and the inquiry had taken
place accordingly. (HeaMr, hem
ALTA.
Dr. BOWRING asked the Under Secretary for the
Colonies whether the memorials and petitions from
Malta on the subject of the grirvances of that telan i had re-
ceived the attention of the government, and whether any
measures were in progress for Chair redrew ?
Mr. HAWES said the subject was under the anxious con-
sideration of the gores neat.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.
In reply to an HON. GENTLEMAN,
Lord J. RUSSELL said he proposed to proceed to com-
mittee of supply on Monday, if possible.
SITTING OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. SPOONER asked whether the noble lord proposed
that the house should sit to-morrow (this day)?
Lord J. RUSSELL h Bat
RNEO. that moment, no such intention.
O
Mr. EWART inquired of the Under Secretary for
the Colonies what measures had been adopted for the
establishment of a settlement in the island of Labuan, on the
coast of Borneo, ceded to the British crown in December last?
Mr. HAWES replied that the government were having
the fullest inquiries madeONG KONG. into the subject.
H
In reply to Lord BANDON,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the expedition to Canton by
our military and naval forces had been resorted to by tlie
governor of Hong Kong as the only means of effectually
putting a stop to insults and aggressions upon British sub-
ects in China by the Chinese population. The expedition
ad been most ably conducted, and quite successful in its
object. When detailed information reached him, he should
be ready to lay it before parliament.
INTRAMURAL BURIALS.
Mr. RORSMAN wisbrd to ascertain from the noble lord
how matters now stood with refrrtmee to prwess ill get-
ting rid of a elofee-zoe meat obnoxious in its character : h.•

meant the practice of burying persons in crowded cemeteries
in the hea tof cities, The subject had been brought most
emphatiea'ly within the consideration of the late and of the
present government, and the members of both cabinets
had dish' ctly admitted the highlyppalling objectionalsle cha-
racter of the nuisance, the a details of
which had been elicited by the clearest evidence before a
committee of the house, but no step had been taken or re-
, medy the evil though years had elapsed since it was first
denounced. 'The
.public felt that there must be some reason
' for this—(hear); it was obvious to them that the difficultiee,
the impediments, must arise from some power unseen by
them, but strongly felt by government—the late as well as
the present. (Hear.) The power, indeed, all were convinced,
I must be very effective which could deter a man of such
strong energy and determination as the late Home Secretary
I from prosecuting that object, in favour of which he had ex-
pressed himself in such decided terms, the suppression of the
existing nuisance. The noble lord (J. Russell). on accession
he office, hal also promised legislation on the subject, but no
leOlation had come. The public earneetly desired to know
who, in this matter, was the public enemy. (Hear, hear.)
In the absence of this knowledge, their angry suspicion fell
open parties perhaps not really responsible. The clergy
were supposed to be at the bottom of the mystery. If
such were not the case, the imputation ought, without
loss of time, to be removed from them. (Hear, hear.)
He denied that the clergy were opposed to this alteration,
and one of the most zealous witnesses before the committee
which inquired into this subject was the Bishop of London,
who stated that twenty-five years ago, when he was a rector
in the metropolis, he felt convinced that some one must take
up the subject on grounds of morality as well as health.
Since then the evil had been aggravated. He hoped he
should hear from the government what was the great im-
pediment to legislation on this subject, and what that was
which stopped an improvement which was called for by
reasons of health and morality.
Mr. HUDSON said that this subject had excited much
attention in the city of York, and he had received a requisi-
tion to call a meeting to consider it, and over which he was
to preside in ten days.
Viscount NIORPETII could only state that as soon as he
succeeded in passing a bill for the health of towns in rela-
tion to sewer.sge and drainage, he would feel bound to do his
best to mature, introduce, and he hoped, to carry a hill for
preventing in:erments in towns, but he despaired of carry-
ing any suck measure unless the present bill was paased.
Mr. WAKLEY regretted that the noble lord had given
so brief an answer in reply to the question of the bon.
gentleman, the subject of which was most pertinent to that
which was be ore the house—the health of towns. The
hon gentleman wished to know where was the obstacle to
legislation on this matter. No doubt the bon. gentleman
was well informed on the point, but, it would have been
satisfactory to have had a statement of what the obstacle
was from the noble lord. It was in fact a question of money.
In this country there was a trade iu the burial of
the dead. It was a matter of pounds, shilling., and
pence. The clergy were hostile to the
of burial-groueds, and whenever a proposal was made
by private bill for the establishment of a cemetery
in a distant place, the vested interests were put into motion,
and there was En means of carrying such • bill except by an
arrangement with the clergy of the metropolis. He would
have been glad to hear from the noble lord whether there
had been any communication of an official character with the
bishop of the diocese on the subject. He hoped when there
was any legislat'on on the matter, the public alone would be
considered, and not cemetery companies and such interests.
Mr. HORSMAN protested against the manner in which
his question had been answered. He had ne wish to obstruct
the progress of the bill, and he had given the noble lord
notice of this question yesterday. The noble lord at the head
of the government had asked what this question had to do
I with that before the house. Last year the hon. member for
Lymington had withdrawn a bill to prevent burials in towns,
on a distinct pledge from the government that in the Health
of Towns Bill this session there would be a provision for
the discontinuance of the practice. Therefore, when a sani-
tary measure was brought in by the government, he consi-
dered that there .hould be some explanation of the reasons
for which that pledge had been departed from, and, at least, I
members who wished to know what had been the obstruc-
tive causes which had prevented the measure should not be
rebuked.
Viscount MOItPETH disclaimed any discourtesy to the
hon. member. If the bon. gent. wished an answer to his
inquiry, he could only say that ho was not aware of any
obstacle to the passing of such a measure. The bishop of the
diocese was most anxious for it, but there were vested in-
terests which it would be necessary to look to, as well as
sonic old associations to combat.
Mr. MACKINNON thought that there were difficulties
which accounted for the government not bringing in a mea-
sure on this subject, one of which was remuneration to the
clergy, and another the oppenitim of persons in the metro-
polls and large towns who were peasetreed of graveyards. He
thought this was enough to account for the government not
fulfilling their pledge in this session ; but he hoped they
would redeem it in another.
After • few words from Mr. BORTLIWICK and Mr. HEN-
LEY the subject dropped.
HEALTH OF TOWNS BILL.
The committee on this bill was resumed.
On clause 8 a discussion arose, as to the manner in which
notice should be riven of a town being brought under the
operation of the bill, and it was amended by the insertion of
words which increased the number of places where notices
are to be affixed.
Co! SIBTHORP said the country had a right to know
who were to be the inspectors—perhaps 100 in number—and
what was to be their salary. They would be armed with
very great and inquisitorial powers, and it was essential that
competent persons should be appointed. Unless a satisfac-
tory answer was given he should repeat this question on
every clause. ( le.ughter.) He complained of the estimates
not being brought on, and asked why the delay.,
Viscount MORPETH said he would only give the same
answer as he had done on the preceding evening—that the
Treasury would apportion the salaries according to the duties
performed. Instead of there being 100 inspectors he del not
believe that more than 6 would be necessary.
The clause as amended was then agreed to.
On clause 9, which gives the inspectors power to call for
parish books, &c ,
Mr. HENLEY objected that parties such as assistant
overseers and clerks would be required to produce docu-
ments over which they had no control.
Viscount MORPETH consented to the omission of certain
words, so as to obviate this objection.
Mr. SPOONER asked on whom the expense of making
copies of documents was to fall ? and
Mr. HENLEY took a further objection to the word
" neighbourhood," as not sufficiently definite.
The Lord ADVOCATE said it would perhaps be better
to defer the consideration of this clause lime the bringing up
of the repert, when it might be modified.
Cal. SIBTHORP repeated his question about the salary
of the inspectors, and complained that the clauses generally
were ill-concocted. It would be far better to withdraw it.
After a few words from Mr. ENTWISLE the clause, as
amended, was agreed to ; :awes clause 10,without discussion.
On clause 11,
Mr. DIVETT proposed a verbal amendment, in reference
to the notice required, which was adopted.
After a converse:ion, u to the expense of plans, &c.,
Mr. BUCK urged the withdrawal of the bill, on account
of the prevailing distress, and of the extremely lax way in
which the clauses were drawn. It would be impossible to
emery out the bill as it stood.
Col. SIBTHORP repeated his objections.
Mr. BROTHERTON said the corporate 'owns were
most anxious for the bill ; and if all the good desired could
not be ileac, let them do as much as they could. (Hear.)
The bill would have been a benefit to the metropolis;
the opposition to it had arisen from interested parties.
Mr. SPOONER said the question really was, whether the
towns wished for the bill?
Mr. TRELAWNY wished hon. gentlemen opposite
would declare at once whether they intended to wear out the
government. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. NEWDEGATE said, if the bill was a boon, it was a
great job to exclude London from it ; if it was an injury, it
was a great job to impose it on the country.
Alter a short conversation, the clause, as amended, was
agreed to.
On clause 12 being proposed,
Mr. SPOONER said that he meant to propose weeds
which would terve it optional with the towns whether they
would have the provisions of the bill applicable to them.
The words which he proposed to add were, " and upon three-
fourths of the rat -payers within such corporate boroughs."
Ile could see no reason for dialing with corporate towns on
• different principle from other towns. Then words
would tilt whether the towns wished fur the bill.
Lord eIORPFITH said he found himself unable to assent
the words proposed, plausible as they apeared. He oon•
I kneel lie was unwilling to trust te the selhffinese of indivi-1
duals, when they feared that calls would be made upon I
I their pockets. There was no doubt the commiseioners would
listen to any reseonable objections on the part of the corpo-
li
rate towns.
After a few words from Mr. G. PALMER,
Mr. HENLEY said he could see no reason why an option
should be left to towns nithout corporations, and that option
was taken sway from corporate towns. He supposed the
only reason was, that corporations were elected bodies, and
therefore. net lit to be trusted, which seemed to be the rea-
son weigned by the noble lord.
Mr. AGLION BY did not think that any distinction ought
to be made te tweeze towns with corporations and towns,
without them but for this reason—that be did not think'
either were disposed to pay attention enough to sanitary re-
gulations end the health of the inhabitants.
Mr. NEWD EC:SATE was surprised that those who were
called liberal members should support a measure which took
away from the people the liberty of taking care of their
health. He thought the people should be allowed to live in
each houses as they pleased.
Lord MORPETH aid that Iris complaint was, that in too
assay instances the people had uo such liberty as the hon.
gentleman spoke of—namely, of living in what houses they
pleased, but were obliged to live, in too many eases, in houses
where they wen compelled to die. (Hear, hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said there was no instance
in the laws of England of making the operation of any
act contingent on the petition of three-fourths of the rate-
payers. It was usually left to the inhabitants at large.
Mr. SPOONER would meet that objection by changing
" rate-payers " into " inhabitant householders."
Mr. IVAKLEY wished the committee to remember that
this was a bill for the benefit of the poor, and it was absurd
to make its operation contingent on the will of the inha-
bitant householders, who would have to bear the expense.
Col. SIBTHORP 'eked, if the bill was for the benefit of
the peer, why it was not applied to Fiesbury, where he
was sure it was much wanted ?
The Committee die ided—For th e amendment 27
Against it 73-46
The clause was then agreed to.
On clause 13, excluding tiny part within ten miles of St.
Paul's Cathedral from the operatics of the act,

clause.
Mr. H. KEMBLE hoped that the clause would be allowed
to pass. If it were, the benefits of the measure would be
such, that in another session London and its neighbourhood
would be included. He was nut willing to sacrifice the mea-
sure on account of the exclusion of London ; and, without
excluding the metropolis, it would be impossible to pass it in
the present session. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUDSON could not understand why the City of
London should be excluded any more than that of York.
(Hear, hear.) Such a distinction was extremely unjust.
The metropolitan members were too much in the li thit of
supporting the City corporation, and sacrificing th.: pro-
vinces. It was his firm conviction that the expenses of the
bill would be a great waste, and form a heavy hurdeL on the
rate-payers. If the necessary powers wore given to the se-
kveral corporations, they would carry out sanitary improve-
ments rigidly and honestly; whereas, under the measure
before the house, the rate-payers would suiter gross injustice,
I end the work would be perforated in an unsati•foctory

manner.
Mr. Alderman HUMPHERY said be had not been
asked by is conatitunts to vote for this bill. His right hon.
friend (Mrh. Hudson)e had asked why London was to be ex •
chided. He could tell him that the miles of seweraoe both
in London and in Surrey exceeded the number of miles of
railway of which his right hon. friend! had the maneirement.
((fear, hear.) There was no part of York which ceuld be
compared with the City of London. (Laughter.) Auy one
who went to York, and afterwards compared it with London,
would find that the comparison was very much again,' York.
Mr. SPOONER wished to ask the noble lord the ques-
tions : first, why Middlesex and Surrey, which first 'toed in
the clause, were now left out; secondly, why, having
first proposed four miles for exclusion, he now propoeed ten;
and thirdly, why the City of London had lieen e\ eluded
at all?
Mr. BROTHERTON would ask the honourable member
whether he would support the bill if London were imluded ?
(Laughter.)
Mr. SPOONER said he was not in the habit of an• wering
ad capfandum questions,. (Great laughter.)
Mr. HUDSON said that it the City of London ere in-
cluded in the bill, and a large majority still support, .1 it, he
would then vote for it. (" Hear," and laughter.)
Lord MORPETH stated, in reply to Lhe hon. meinber for
Birmingham, that Middlesex and Surrey would be omitted
merely to make the clause more compendious; if tle.y were
retained, Keut and Essex must also have h re-
tained. As regarded the insertion of ten miles instead four,
it appesred from representations made to him that the area
for drainage sad the supply of water were not includedwithin a circumference of four miles, and that was th, cause
of the alteration. With respect to the exclusion of London,
he begged to say that having brought forward the he was
immediately told that he was aiming at too much, stet that it
would be very difficult to include London in its pro, isions ;
and when he returned to town eter the Easter ri i.eas the
prospects of the session convinced him of the cor-
rectness of that view. Farther, a deputatio from
the Health of Towns Association had urp .1 him
not to attempt to include the metropolis in do ....meta
measure. He felt as thoroughly convinced as any that
the metropolis required sanitary legislation, and ii t- 0 had
the opportunity, he had the strongest intention, of iL troduc-
ing a bill for the sanitary improvement of London the
next session.
Col. SIBTHORP complained of the partialita of the
measure, and denied tho right of the noble lord to hi. guided
by the advice of any association.
Mr. ROEBUCK expressed his disappointment at the ex-
planation just given by the noble lord. If there wi re one
place which, more than all others, required do opera
don of a bill like the present, London eas that
place—(hear, hear)--and he even thought that if any
exemption were to be made it would have been best to com-
mence with the metropolis alone. There was no dithculty in
dealing with the case of Louden which would not le: found
equally to exist in other towns. The right hon. gentleman,
the member for York, was in the habit of laying claim to
great practical knowledge of the material affairs of life.
(Laughter.) Although that right hon. gentleman might be
able to drive a railway carriage from one end of the ..ountry
to the other, he (Mr:Roebuck) did not conclude, from the
experience he had had of him, that his opinion was likely to
govern the House of Commons on a question so material as
the cleanliness of mankind. (Laughter.)
Mr. NEWDEGATE could not admit that any satisfac-
tory reason had been given by the noble lord for treating
London as a happy oasis in a land of filth. It had been
shown by statistics that there were many parts of it from
which fever was never absent.
After a few words from Mr. W. WILLIAMS,
Lord J. RUSSELL observed that hon. gentlemen oppo-
site had argued as it it were intended to exclude th. metro-
polis from any sanitary measures. The object of the govern-
ment really was to pass a bill this year which should lordly to
certain parts of the country, and to introduce a Lis! which
would include other parts of the country and the IA trial:ells
in the next session. (Hear, hear.) Hon. gentlene a oppo-
site, who had expressed such seal for sanitary nos arms
to
various tovenswonld justly lament if a measure were rejected
which would eventually lead to the including of the metro-
polis and other towns of the kingdom.
Mr. WAKLEY believed that the metropolitan opposition
to the bill was now confined to the City.
Mr. HENLEY appealed to the hon. member for South-
wark whether every part of that borough possessed good
drainage.
Mr. Ald. HUMPHERY —Yes.
Mr. HENLEY said that that was a strong assertion. There
were, in fact, many parts of the metropolis where she rate
of mortality was greater than in any town except 1. ,erpoel.
After a kw words from Viscount MOkIPETH,
The committee divided—For the clause.. 112
Against it .... 70 -42
Clauses 14, 15, and 16, were agreed to, the latter with
some verbal amendments.
On clause 17,
Col. SIBTHORP said it was a most important clause,
which would take some time in discussion, and as he was de-
termined to divide on it, he should move that the chairman
report progress.
Viscount MORPETH said ho sPil not propose to go
further than this clause, and he hoped the hon. au, gallant
member would allow them to go on.
Col. SIBTHORP signified his intention of penesting in
his motion.
Lord J. RUSSELL acceded to the motion, and said he
should propose to go on with the bill at 12 o'clock on Monday.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and obtained
leave to sit again.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
On the motion of Sir G. Gary, it was agreed that the
hoist at its risinir adjourn till Monday at 12 o'clock.
NEW ZEALAND COMPANY.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved thet
a lean of 1:16,000/. should be advanced to the New Zealand
Company for the service of the next three years.
Col. SIBTHORP protested against such a vote being
taken at so late an hour, after the house had been 'Wag
upwards of twelve hours.
After a short conversation the resolution was agre,al to.
The bowie resumed ; the report to be received on Monday.
JOINT STOCK COMPANIES BILL.
Mr. M. GIBSON moved the third reading of thi, 'AL
After a short conversation the third reading of th, bill was

postponed.
The house then adjourned at w quuter.past one, till twelve
o'clock oa Monday.

It proigt

MAILS.
The mails fer British North America. Bermuda, ..td Undti
:totes, will be made up on the evening of the 3ril July.
3 bs overlent =die foe Gibraltar, Malts, ts, ece, the loci
ngypi., Aden, Oeylun, Inks, llong-Kong, and China, eta Southampton
will be node up on the evening of the 3rd July.
The rands for the lirmils, the Riker Plate, Monte Video, remain.
boon, Bahia, Muteira, and Buenos Ayres, will be made kp on the
evening of the 4th July.
The overland closed malls, nu. Marecilies, to the Meuanean,
Egypt, Aden, Ceylon. India, Ilona Kong, An, ash be made o rrp
on the
eninna oleic 7th July.
A mall fur the United Stater, British North America, wait*
made up us, the morningof lath July. for Ir:um:Manna by the steadier
Washington, front Nan auriploa. Lett/nand papers must be speog2l
marked, -Per Waahington."
The West India mails, excluding those for Mexico, Honduras, and
the Ilarunnali, will be made up ou the morning of the 17th July.
The mails kr New South. Wales, Van Diemen'. Land, ...ad Nev
7.ealandwill be made up em the evening of the 31st July.

TO CORILTSTON DENTS.
meat. hottaki be TheLando. evea...g payer, oat la
at Otbe• by Tab afdeek ea rig Oty at publlcadon.

11101 l RLTBB AT LONDON.B1111)0E.
TN. Peg —blaming, 13 Wm pat I, AfterAcon, 14 AAA 1.11 t•
To•Blosnow—lloeniug, train. put I, Mumma. 17 .10, P. I.

LONDON, SATURDA y, JULY 3.
AMONGST the counties likely to be contested
at the next election are Buckinghamshire and
Essex, which are, perhaps, the two districts of
all England in which the most blind and bigoted
adherence to protectionist notions prevails. Foe
this there are various local peculiarities sufficient
to account ; but it will be enough to remark
that Buckinghamshire is one of the worst, if
not the worst, cultivated county in England, and dist
Essex is, perhaps, the greatest wheat-growing county.
It is a rule amongst farmers, almost without titer
lion, that the worse the system of management par
sued by any husbandman, the greater has been his
reliance on extraneous aid from protection or ant
thing. The unfailing resource of intelligent la'
reliance seeias to be the last thing that occurs to tke
mind of a bad farmer. This supineness on theme
of farmers is far more frequently the moult of
lord-impused trammels, or of deficiency of caTitai!,
than of want of industry or activity. The systems
more in fault than the individuals ; but wherever as
blame rests, the fact is undoubted that bad fanni4
and strong protectionist longings are usually found W
prevail in the same localities; yet, uwe shall re'
sently show, protection is at a discount even in BO
inipmmehirc.
fhe wheat.growers of Essex apprehend, we dui
erroneously, that theirparticular produce—wheit—
will be that most affectedpart by foreign conipstitict
and thus many Essex farmers who, from position sai
intelligence, ought to have known better, have bed
ardent protectionists, and have thereby added