The Express.
London, England, 1851-02-21 00:00:00

TIIE CUSTOMS.

Mr. MITCHELL, fur that day, fortnight, to mow an
addn-f. to the crown fur a connuisbio
n to inquiry into the
management of the eut.torns.
MOIL LAWS.

Mr. BANK ES postkro4 until this day his question re-
verting the rating un CT the poor law.
INTEILMENTS IN TOWNS.

Sir I)E I.ACY EVANS wished to know from the noble
lord the chairman of the Ikurd of Health whether any
steps were Ia inu taken, in pursuance of the art of hut nes-
.iott prohibiting intramural interment, and when it was
likely to he in full operation.
Lord SEYMOUIt said that the Board of Health had
Ind no time in taking the act of last session into considera-
tion. but there were a great many provisions and details
whirl' minimd much care and caution. lie hoped that it
would in a very short time be in operation.
ISUTY ON CAILItIAG ES.

Sir DE LACY EVANS 84,11 the Chme. Ilnr of the
Ruh...pier whether hr had any intention of repealing or
altering the duty on carriage. i
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCIIEHt ER—lt is not
my intention to make any alteration in Ow duty un cur-
riairev.

APAL AGGRESSION.-EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF

SCOTLAND.

Mr. STUART asked the First Lord of the Treasury
whethi r any of the 4iw Offiell, of the crown fur England or
Scotland Maud had gisi it any opinion to the ttfect
that, in miler to the vindication of the supremacy of the
cross a against the aizirrissiou of the Pups. of 'tome, it is
...try or esp.-di-lit that the enactment of penalties and
intainst the protestant bishops of the Scotch
episcupul church should he submitted Mr the sanction of
\V hethe r, in nisi, any curt. opinion has been
virtu, them was any objection to lay a ropy of such opinion
I room tilt house.

Lord J. It 1. vsk:Ll. It is usual for government to tisk
the olnmf..o oot the law ollieo IN of the crown as to the state of
thc lAN when a question arist, us to whether it would he
ilesinilde to imtinite a pro-erution, but it is not usual to ask
do. npinimf of the lus loft" v.* of the crown so, to meaontr."

to Is limught before parliament. We did, however, ask
the oputim, of the law Oh" n of the crown, as littv utheen,
un 11w point in question.
tor !tor OF CHANCERY.

The Norte Limo then asked whether it was the hon.
and learned member's intention to bring forward his mo-
tion relative to the Court of Cha RCM on Tuesday nest.
Mr. J. ST l'A f and that his notice stolid too late on
the paper. Perhaps the noble lord would give him another
day ? (A laugh.)
Lard J. RUSSELL hoped to bring forward a measum
himself ea the mutOcet on au early day.
Mr. J. SICAIi I' would, under any circumstances, bring
forward his motion.
NATIONAL GALLERY.
Lord J. RUSSELL, replying to Mr. Chieteria, stated
that the government hid in contemplation 14W steps in re-
tire., to the National Gallery, either by the appointment
of a select committee or otherwise; adding that he hoped
to give a • particular statement of his itteutions some
time leaf re Easter.
tor l'Y COURTS (SCOTLAND).
Mr. HUME askisl the Secretary of State whether there
was any intention of bringing in alxill to extend to Scotland
the eounty marts fur the easy and speedy recovery of debt.
under •al/. ?

Mr. F. MACLE said that the Sheriff's Courts in Scot-
land haul a twofold jurisdiction. Small debts could be there
recot entd without the inten claim of an agent, and iu the
ordinary jurisdiction where questions were tried with the
asstistsuire of a jury, all ea., for sums not exceeding 2.11.
might be decided without appeal. Where the turn ex-
ceeded that amount there was an appeal to the Court of
St ..ion. Ile belieet d that the system worked well in Scot-
land. there not having hero an, complaint. on the subject,
and therefore is was not the intention of government to
interfere. (Hear, hear.)

COL:1(T OF CHANCERY (IRELAND).
Mr. KEOGH asked the Attorney-General of Ireland
if any general rules have been franica in pursuance of the
Chancery Act of last session, and if not, what has caused
the delay, and whether there is any likelihood that they
will he soon published?
Mr. 11 ATCII ELI. said he had written to Ireland for in-
formation on the subject, and had not as yet received the
answer.
WINDOW TAX.

Mr. MAST}RMAN u•ked when it was intended to
prop...tan alteeution in th.• window tax?
'lhe• CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the intvine tax niu,t tint he derided. (A laugh).

_
dueler OF PETITION.
Sir It WILLOUGHBY called the attention of the noble
lord the member for Bath, to a statement imputed to him
in the public paper*, Misfire to what It'a• alleged to be an
invasion of the right of petition hithi no enjoyed by the
British people.
Lord DUNCAN, while acknowledging the general aecu-
racy of newsilaper reports. said that the word, he had
actually made use of on the occasion alluded to, were
•• 1 w.1.1t called to order by the Speaker, and RAI
told that the people of England had no right to expre“
surprise en regret on a subject under debate in the house, and
accounts of which had only reached them by report., un-
authorised by the house.- (A laugh.)

LAW OF PARTNERSHIP.
Mr. SL.VNI:V moved the appointment of a select com-
mittee, to consider the law of partnership, and the means
of limiting liability so as to encourage enterprise, and
stimulate the employment of Labour. Rapidly sum-
ming up the anomalies of the existing system, where vast
remurcvs were allowed to waste, valuAle labour to lie
idle, and vast capital• locked up almost uselessly, and the
maluetire powers of the land only partially developed, the
bon. member d.elareil that the chief cause of these ono-
Mahe* to be found in the absurd fetters that were
upon capital, forcing it into unnatural channels,
and almost prohibiting the safe employment of his modest
savings by the labouring man. Among the fetters upon
capital he reckoned the complication of the titles and the
cost of the conveyance of land; and the prohibition of local
improvements, except under an set of parliament. But the
principal disability arose from the law of partnership, which
comp..% d every co-partner to risk his whole fortune upon
the sum r* of an enterprise or the honesty of a haunt of
diri sloes. Ile referred to clubs, railways, Joint-stock com-
panies, and various other instances, when• the combination
of capitals amorist the rich hail worked such wonders, and
coot, soled that, if a law were passed by which the liability
of partners could be limited, the labouring man would be
eneouraired to practise economy by the opportunity that
would be given (or the profitable tovestment of his small
savings.
The motion wa, seconded by Mr. EWART.
Mr. LABOUCHERE confessed himself unable to deride
between the conflicting opinions expressed by high legal
and commercial authorities as to the probable effect of •
change in the law of partnership, such as had been
iodi-
cated he Mr. Raney. There were many dancers to be ap-
prihended from any. violent change in the present law; but
the yuestion was cat importance, and it was probable that by
cautious measures many facilities might be given to the
Sc, umuletive investments of small capital,. He therefore
consented to the appointment of the committee, but hoped
I that no change would be recommended that would Miami