The Express.
London, England, 1859-08-12 00:00:00

(Stamped id. Additional.) [TWOPENCE.

perteedy pure lake wadi all necerory precautions against
danger. The lake could be thoroughly filtered once sem,
mosth.

lir: D. GRIFFITH raid the only care for the evil wee to
get rid of all the foul water, end to foram a oonstent reapply
of troth water. Re thought the phut proposed woo faulty Is
many respects.
The mottos for stbourapsest woo then put end negative!.
POOR OP RV 7RXIYLI3I3ONE.

Mr. HANKIIY asked Mir Plireillent of the Poe* Law
Board if hts attendee. Wpm directed to the address of the
impactor of grabbed's@ to the directors of the
poor ef et. Illtryletreine, delivered ea the Ilth of July, 1067,
so which no reply appears to hare been given.
Mr. VILLIERS wial hie attention bed been direcled to the
address. No reply had been given to it; but he under-
stood Chet great improvements bad been isnrodoced into the
workhouse, and that 430 of the children were about to be
removed to a building that was being prepared to receive
them

in the bill. He wee glad it had been discussed, but be wee
awry 'het some topics had been introduced. sad be should
have been pleased it the hon. member for the Tower Hem-
lets had not duflgured his speech by some of the affinities
which he bed made. He should have been led if the hon.
member for Sheffield had not said that a dfdaet would be
drawn between rich and poor in such • ace Let the House
of Common. decide the aunties, but not on such grounds.
He met give the commute the trouble of &skiing, es he
meld not withdraw a claim recommended by the jeilge for
the benefit of the suitors of hie court.
Er. LOCKE wished to cell enaction to the wording of
the claws The ground of the closing the court Iry stated
eo be the preservation of public decency, but the argument of
the Attorsey-Geueral wee that betides that it would re-
medy incoovecienoe which resulted practlaaly he a denial
of *aloe to suitors. This latter could aeflaGuenoe the
judge under the provision as it stood. He thought that the
system of publicity Moor courts most he
Sir M. PETO hoped the Attorney-Ctrviedwould not
prima the clause toe division. He had acted in perfect good
faith with trusted to the suggestion of the judge of the
Diverse Court. It woad ppaauta him to have to vote against
the hoe. mid learned
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that he was in the
position of Winged advocate for the chase with no ono to
support him. He awned with the hon. sod learned aerobe?
for Southwark, that the clause did not contain words which
would carry out the object he had spoken of. The niers
words, "preservation of public decency,' did not refer to the
point to which he had alluded. Under all the chcsonstatmeo
he would bow to the decision of the committee. (Hear.)
The claws was accordingly shack out.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the following
ellanse:—.. On any petition presented by a wile praying that
her maniege may be dissolved by maim of her husbeild
hat., been minty ef adultery coupled with cruelty, or of
natatory coupled with desertion, the husband and wile re-
, sportively shall be compete'. and compellable to give evi-
' dame of ter relating to such cruelty or desertion,"—which
woo agreed to.
Mr. E. JAMBS moved • clause empowering the court to
inquire late the existence deny anie.optial or poet-nuptial
settlement, la those ours la which • decree of nullity of
marriage wee granted and to make such order upon it for
the benefit of the husband and children as they might think
fit. It often beppened, he observed, that a wife had • hand-
some Monne settled apse her by her heebsad at the time of
hew marriage, end If sits were divorced on account of her own
adulteey, the ought not to be enabled to live with the adul-
terer apta that income which she bed rewind from the ger
nerowityof her husband._____ _ _ _

The ATT • ENERAL admitted the propriety of
each • provision, but thought then would be some difficulty
in investing • court of limited jurisdiction with power to
make •n order by which the istereate of peno•s who were
not before the court might be affected.
Yr. GRIFFITH said he had given notice ea clause
somewhat different from this, inatmuch se it referred sot to
cues of dirsolution of marriage, but of judicial separation. It
was to enable the court to teaks provision for the bu.bsud,
by way of alimony, out of the property which be had settled
upon his wife at the marriage.

Yr. E. 7eMEB jro;lli-ge7ee to the words "or a decree of
judicial separation" being added to his own clause with regard
to the ease of a decree of nullity of marriage,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL hoped the hon. member
(Mr. Griffith) would Dot peers his amendment. A judicial
separation supposed the possibility of the parties becoming
remedied to seek other, and awning back again; but if an
alteration were to be made in the marriage settlement, that
world be a great bar to such rewriciliation.
The original clause was then agreed to without soy amend-
ment. _ _

♦ damn moved by Mr. CRAC7IIII.I3 WU added, regulating
the right of appeal, ■nd the home resumed.
The bill, with its amendments, eras 'sported, and, on the
motion of the ATTORNIY-Gutaw., who said it had to go
up to the Home of Loda for the amendmenta to be agreed
to, the bill was read a third time and parsed.