The Express.
London, England, 1866-06-27 00:00:00

ME EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 27, 1866.

return home from the Duke of Devonshire's party.
(Loud and general laughter from all parts of the house.)
The SPEAKER—Are you able to state whether Mr.
Hibhert is in a condition to attend to the duties of the
eonuoitteef
Dr. WOANN—He is not, air.
The SPEAKER—You may withdraw.
Dr. MTann then withdrew from the bar amidst much

laughter.
Mr. WALPOLE then moved that the committee be dis-
charged ; the consequence of which would be that the
general committee of elections would have to meet on the
first day on which the house would assemble again, and
choose another committee from the panel in rotation.
The motion was agreed to.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were read a third time and
—Great North of Scotland Railwa ; Hatfielsrajleil
Warping and Improvement Railway; Banally Railway and
Dock ; London. Brighton, and South Court Railway (St.
Leonard. and Hastings Lines) ; North British and !din-
bh., and Bsthgate Railway Comthes ; South Eastern
Railway ; West Bromwich and WaWl Railway ; and the
Wolverhampton and Walsall Railway Bills.
NOTICES OF MOTIONS.
THE BALLOT.
Mr. H. BERKELEY gave notice that he would postpone
his motion in reference to the ballot from this day week to
this day fortnight. (Laughter from the opposition
benches.)
THE AUDIT OF ARMY AND MILITIA ACCOUNTS.
Sir J. FEEGUSSON asked whether the select committee
on public accounts had examined the audited amounts of
the army and militia services for the year 1864.65.
Whether their attention had been drawn to the report of
the Board of Audit dated March 12, 1866 stating certain
inaccuracies in those accounts , and when the report of the
committee was likely to be laid upon the table of the
house.
Mr. CHILDERS replied to the question. He said the
committee on public accounts had not met for some weeks,
but that they did a great deal of work in the early part of
the session. The inaccuracies referred to related to matters
of form which were well considered last year. He might
add that further inquiries were now going on.
THE INFIRMARIES IN THE METROPOLITAN
WORKHOUSES.

Mr. VILLIERS, in reply to the following questions by
Mr. FAWCITT and Mr. D. BaceLsr —Whether he intended
to introduce any measure relative to the sick poor in
the metropolitan workhouses ;and whether any steps were
being taken towards the establishment of some system
of superviaion of the sick wards in metropolitan work.
houses, whereby the painful circumstances recently
closed aught aught be prevented from recurring, pending the
result of Dr. Smith's inquiry ; and whether the result of
Mr. Farnall's visits and investigations would be laid upon
the table f—eaid that the government bad directed a very
full official and medical inquiry into the condition of
these infirmaries. That inquiry had just been completed,
and the report was on the table of the house. The subject
was one which would require very early consideration.
THE MINISTERIAL STATEMENT.—THR RESIGNA-
TION OF THE GOVERNMENT.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, who on
rising was loudly cheered on the ministerial side of the
house, below the gangway, and at the bar of the house,
then proceeded to make the ministerial explanation. He
announced at once that the Queen had accepted the
resignation of their offices which the ministers had tendered
a week ago. Her Majesty had at firrt postponed that
acceptance, thinking that the point on which the House of
Commons had given an adverse vote was one of detail,
susceptible of adjustment without breaking up the frame-
work of the bill, and being of opinion (in which all must
agree without distinction of party) that, in the pre
sent state of affairs on the Continent, this was a very
natavourable moment for a change of government.
But after hearing the explanations which Lord Russell
bad offered at the interview granted them at Windsor
that afternoon her Majesty had definitely accepted their
resignations, and the ministry, therefore, only held office
until their successors were appointed. Having given this
account of what had passed between the Queen and Lord
Russell and himself, Mr. Gladstone went on to say that
he thought it to be his duty to the house not to confine
himself to the dry details of that statement, but to enter
info some explanations which would show that be and his
colleagues had not acted without full consideration.
After the vote of Monday week the government had two
alternatives before them—an attempt to adapt it
to the framework of the bill, or resignation ;
and to show that this liberty was left them he
quoted and explained the important sentences with which
he summed up the debate of Monday week. In consider.
Mg the first branch of the alternative the government were
struck with the unequal manner in which a rating fran-
chise would work, not only in different boroughs, but in
the seine boroughs, and with the almost insurmountable
difficulty of choosing any figure which would carry out
the precise amount of enfranchisement which they had
proposed, and to which they conceived themselves bound.
To illustrate this last difficulty he stated—on the authority 1
of the electoral returns—that to carry out the intentions I
of the government as to the amount of enfranchise-
ment in 16 boroughs a rating above 61, would be necessary,
in 39 a rating of not less than 61., in 112 a rating of fit., in
21 of 41., and in 5 of under 41. He dwelt also on the
inequalities which would be produced by the different
scales of rating in the same boroughs, and all these con-
siderations, he said, had led the government to the con-
clusion that Lord Dunkellin's amendment went to break up
the framework of the bilL Beyond this they had to con-
sider the previoushistory of the bill—a consideration which
was complicated by the pledge given deliberately "to
stand or fall" by it—a pledge which the whole cabinet
was of opinion ought to be rarely given, and which he de-
scribed as the last weapon in the armoury of a government.
not to be lightly taken down, nor to be replaced until it
had served a purpose. In giving that pledge the govern-
ment had been influenced by the mischievous effects of
the long agitation of this question on the character of
parties, of governments, of parliament, and even of repre-
sentative institutions, and, having determined to act reso-
lutely, they felt they could not do it except by attaching
the life of the administration to the life of the course they
took. But along with this determination the govern-
ment, he contended, had shown throughout a desire to
ea:ciliate those who were not altogether favourable to
reform, and not to quarrel with the house on any mere
question of procedure. To prove this he contrasted the
moderate amount of enfranchisement proposed with that
of the bill of 1860, and referred to the production of the
Redistribution of Seats Bill after Lord Grosvenor's motion,
to the abandonment of the provision as to leaseholders,
to the concession to Mr. Banks Stanhope's motion,
and to his deliberate refusal, under strong pressure,
to reiterate the determination of the government
to pass a measure this session. Mr. Gladstone
then reviewed at length the history of the
bill, touching on the various amendments from
Lord Grosvenor's down to Lord Dunkellin's, and stated
that, on a deliberate review of this series of facts, the
government, having come to the conclusion that it was not
only impossible to adapt Lord Dunkellin's amendment to
the framework of the bill, but to make any effectual pro-
frees with the measure, or, indeed, with the question,
this session, had chosen the alternative of resignation.
He concluded by moving that the house adjourn until
Thursday, not with the idea that any measures could be
taken for the formation of an administration by that day,
but in the expectation that somebody might then be in a
position to propose a further adjournment.
SUPPLY.
The house having gone into committee of supply,
Mr.OHILDERS proposed a'vote of 1,450,0001. on account
for the revenue departments and Post-office Packet Ser-
vice. The acceptance of this resolution would not, he
said, pledge the house in any way to the details of the
estimates.
The vote was agreed to, and ordered to be reported on
Thursday.
Leave was given for committees to sit to-morrow (this
day), notwithstanding the adjournment of the hones.
The house then adjourned at half-past 7 o'clock.

brought • smile to his countenance, The demons.._
when Mr. Gladstone, accompanied by Mrs. Gladstone,
drove up in an open carriage, was still more enthusiastic
than that of which he was the object on Monday, and the
right hoe. gentlemen acknowledged the loud cheers,
bravos, and waving of hats, by uncovering and bowing to
the people, many of whom followed the vehicle until It
reached the entrance to Star Chambereourt.
When the hones broke up and the members rushed out
in broad streams from the hall, the crowd evinced the same
disposition to exercise their critical powers. There were
groans when Sir Robert Peel rattled off in a brougham,
mingled with a few attempts at cheering. Of course there
was a good look out for Mr. Bright, but the hon. member
took a four-wheel cab, and was not noticed until be bad
got half through the crowd, but the moment " Bright
was called out the two lines on each side of the thorough-
fare formed by the police broke away, and there was •
general pursuit of the hon. member, who was honoured
with as warm, vigorous, and continued cheering as had
been given to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Next came
the right hon. gentleman the member for Caine, surrounded
by some dozen other members, who seemed determined to
support him in the event of his having to pass through a
similar trying ordeal as that to which he was subjected on
Monday evening. However, instead of going on foot, he
enteredan open carriage which was waiting at the entrance
to the hall, and at the same time a knot of gentle-
men got up a cheer and a waving of hats, an example
which was followed by the other spectators, in the belief,
doubtless, that the individual was a good reformer, but as
icon as " Lowe" was banded from month to mouth, and
the right hon. gentleman was seen in proprid persona,
there was • general laugh M the mistake which had been
made, and • storm of groans immediately took the place
of the congratulatory exclamations, and the carriage was
accompanied fora considerable distance by a hostile but not
very angry crowd. Mr. Gladstone, as he left, again in an
open carriage, was even more boisterously cheered than when
he arrived, and, by way of contrast, Mr. Disraeli started
in his brougham, immediately in the right hon. gentle-
man's rear, and thus doubtless escaped a good deal of
the effects of that battery of hisses which the crowd had
determined to bring into play when the chief opponents
of the government bill appeared upon the scene.
The two right hon. gentlemen came so close together that
it was difficult for the people to mix up their hisses with
their cheers without giving rise to a miainterpretation,and,
consequently, the right hon. member for Bucks got off
moderately, well under the wing, as it were, of the Chan.
cellor of the Exchequer. Mr. Horsman again succeeded in
avoiding discovery, but this time he, like Mr. Disraeli,
took his departure in a brougham, while Sir J. Pakington
was also enabled to pees off quietly by taking a detour on
horseback by way of the clock tower. A great portion
of the crowd in New Palace-yard remained until half an
hour after the House of Lords had risen. Lord Russell, on
entering his carrier, was greeted with load cheering and
waving of hats, which he acknowledged by smiling and
bowing ; a crowd accompanying him with similar manifes-
tations of applause as he drove away.

titth intelifgence.

HOUSE OF WRDS.—Jurf 26.
APPEAL&
(Before the Lind Chancellor, Lord Chelmsford, and Lord
Kingsdown.)
GUM LID mum V. cowmen 07 NORNINGTON
AND
OTHII2B.—JUDGICRIT.
This was an appeal from the Court of Chancery The
appellants are the representative, of William Richard, late
Earl of Mornington ; and the respondents are the Countess
of Mornangton, widow of William Pole Tylney Long,
Earl of Mornington, father of the Earl William
named, and others. The appeal is from orders made
' in certain causes of Wellesley v. Mornington, Mornington
v. Wellesley, and Fleischman v. Momungton ; and the
substantial question involved wee as to the rights of the
appellants, the legal representatives of Earl William
Richard, to a sum of 31,7311.,residue of a sum of 462,0001.,
which was raised on the estates of hie father,
Earl William, under the trusts of deed of 11134,
and which was made applicable to the payment
of certain incunabrances and debts of Earl William
and any residue was to be payable to him.'
Certain annuities, inthewhole amounting to 10001., a year,
had been charged on the property of Earl William for the
benefit of his now widow, the respondent, the Countess of
Mornington, and the suite were brought to ascertain whe-
ther this residue of 31,7311., which was payable to Earl
William, was applicable to the payment of these annuities
with arrears. The court below decided that the residue
was so payable and so applicable, and hems the present
appeal, which was argued some little time since.
'Their lordships now gave judgment, and unanimously
decided that the decision of the court below was correct,
affirmed the decree, and dismiseed the appeal, but with-
out costs.
The

Ite in the following one wezeprooeeded with.

EQUITY COURTS.--Jinn 26.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Sir J. Stuart.)
Ix lIS THE CONSOLIDATED BANIL-IN RE VIZ cosmatnits
acr, 1862
In this matter it wee stated that the consent of the Lords
Justices and of Vies-Chancellor Kindersiey had been ob-
tained to the transfer of a petition for a winding-np order
of the above-named bank from the court of Vice-Chanoellor
Sin
r. to this court.
Mr. Malins, Q.C., and Mr. Cracknall now asked for his
Honour's sanction to the transfer.
The Vice•Chanoellor acceded to the application.

(Before Vioe-Chancellor Sir J. P. Wood.)
RS TIM lIMPIRILL WIRCANTILI cisprr Assoculunr
(taurrnu).
In this case three petitions were presented, two by
shareholders and one bye creditor of the company, praying
that it might be voluntarily wound up. A fourth petition
was presented by a shareholder, praying a compulsory
winding up, on the ground that the affairs of the company
bad been so conducted that they required looking into,
and that the amounts • through the hands of the
official liquidator wo dbe of such magnitude that they
ought to be put upon terms of giving security, which
could not be dope on a voluntary winding up.
The Vice-Chancellor was of opinion that no sufficient
ground had been shown for running contrary to the wish
of the majority for a voluntary winding up. Under these
circumstances he should order a voluntary winding up
under the supervision of the court to be made on the three
first named petitions, and the fourth petition to be refused
with costs.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—Juirs 26.
Sittings at Nisi Prins at Guildhall.--(Before Mr. BAYOU
Bramwell and Special Juries.)
COWILL V. JOICZT AND arorritrn.
This was an action by a widow to recover, on behalf of
herself and seven children, compensation in damages for
the death of her huaband, who was killed by a collision on
the Thames. near Grays, in the spring of the present year.
Mr. M. Chamber, Q.C., and Mr. T. Atkinson were
counsel for the plaintiff ; Mr. Joseph Browne, Q.C., and
Mr. F. M. White for the defendants.
The plaintiff's husband was a lighternian, who lived at
Grays, and owned two barges ; and the defendants, Messrs.
John and Edward Jokey, were shipowners at Newcastle.
on-Tyne. A screw steamer belonging to the defendants,
when coming up the Thames in the charge of a pilot, ran
into one of the deceased man's barges with so much
violence that the mast fell, and in doing so instantaneously
killed the deceased, who happened to be in charge of it
at the time of the occurrence. The defendants admitted their
liability, and the only question now was the amount of
damages. Evidence was given to show that the deceased's
income was between 3001. and 400/. a year. The defen-
dants had offered 2551., but that sum had been declined aa
insufficient.
For the defence it was stated that the deceased's income
could not have exceeded 150/. a year and that the amount
offered was a fair compensation under the circumstances.
The eldest child was 15 years old, and the youngest five
weeks.
The jury retired to consider their verdict. After a long
absence they returned into court with a verdict for the
plaintiff, with 350/. for the widow, and 751. for each of the
children—total damages, 8751.