The Express.
London, England, 1860-07-20 00:00:00

THE EXPAESS,
_FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 20, 1860.

jastly applied to loth traders and non-traders. By the tests
of ins ilvency he meant those which were commonly de- I
n .minted acts of bankruptcy. The first test of insolvencyl
was abseoteliug from the country, moaning abroad with
intent to defeat or delay the claim of the creditor. Now ho I
thought there wan no member of that house who would not
say that the individual guilty of such conduct should be de- 1
paved of his property, and that it should be takes by the
Jew for distribution ailioug his creilitore. The other test of 1
iasolvency proposed by the bill wu the debtor having his
property taken in execution, and sold and disposed of under
o weak] permit
No man who was possessed of mosey or credit
permit that to be done, and permitting it to be o
done. therefore, was • pretty 7 proof if iro
solo/secy. The other proposal in the bill was that if a o
judgment were obtained against a non-trader, and after a
certain interval of time he was summoned and examined as
to his mean• of pitying that judgment debt, if he were
unable to show that he had the means of satisfying the
judgment—well, then, he the (Attorney.Cenenal) thought
it would he confessed) y right that the estate of the debtor
shouldbe taken from him and divided among his creditors.
There remained am/thee test proposed by the bill, which, as
it was ant generally understood by the house, and bad been
tloz subject of totteh misunderstanding out of it, perhaps the
house would allow him for a moment to advert to. He
pro opesed to apply to the case of the non-trader the clauses
which existed in the present Bankruptcy Act, and which
were commonly denominated the debtors clauses—that was
to may, clauses which enabled the creditor to summon the
debtor before the Bankruptcy Court and to call
upon him either to pay the debt or to satisfy the court that
he had the means of doing so. But he had te,ken care not
to in lode those clauses in the bill in the naked manner in
which they canted in the Bankruptcy Act, and accordingly
the committee would °beery°, if they turned to schedule K
of the bill, th it wo opportunit was afforded in the bill to
any creditor to make a d of this kind against a person
win, woe not a trader, unless he was in a condition to prove
to the court that the individual was in insolvent circum-
stances, aid unable to meet his enurement'. He should
have had no difficulty, if the bill had proceeded, in consent-
ing that these clauses should be confined entirely to the case
of traders, and that non-traders should be exempted
from their operatiou. If that had been the result,
the bill would have assumed the form that no
Person who was not a trader would have been subject to
its operation, utileos he had absconded, or unless he was a
judgment debtor without the means of paying his debt, or
unless his property woo actually token from him. He had
no doubt, therefore, if the deism-mice had proceeded, the
committee would have been satisfied with the precautions
introduced awl professed to leo introdueol in the bill. But
reflecting on the anxiety manifested by the house, it ap-
incumbeut on him to consider whether, supposing
reVeeeded in utilising the committee, supposing the
bill remained untouched as regarded the case of the non-
trader, and supposing the subsequent provisions of the bill
required such a period of time to be expended
in their consideration that he could not carry
this bill up to the Hoene of Lords until
the first or second week in August, he considered whether
it was coexistent with ordinary decency at that time of the
year to carry a bill containing such important provisions to
the other house of partiusent, and require the other house
to take these pross-akar at so lets • period into considers-
Hoe, and he felt himself obliged to come to the conclusion
that the House of Lords ought not to be placed in that mai-
, thin. On the other baud, if he was unfortunateenough not
to carry with him the opinion of the committee, and if
tho-se clauses were taken out of the bill, then it would be
, requisite entirely to recast the bill and to give it • different
form, because hon. members would recollect that
Le had been encouraged to go on with the bill
upon the supposition that the house was favour-
able to this extension of the law, for with a
view to raising the question the second section of the tell
proposed the abolition of the Insolvent Debtors Court, and
had the committee bees unfavourable to that proposition, one
would naturally have supposed that the discussion would
have been taken on the consideration of that clause. He
was the more encouraged to hope that this extension of the
law would meet with the favour of the house, because it
was a proposition contained in the bill introdued by Lord
Derby s government, and therefore he expected there wouhl
be a general concurrence in that provision. The home
however had thought it right to make this pro-
vision a subject of great deliberation. Being in this
difficulty, he thought that if he succeeded he could
, ant hops to carry the bill to the other house of
I wheeziest with a request that they would consider it,
and if he felt it DOOOYDry to alter the bill there would be
no time to bring it forward again. He had therefore come
unwillingly to the coachision, with the approbation of the
vernment, that it was necessary to absodon the bill.
Hear, hear.) He hoped and trusted that the time that
ad been spent upon its discussion would be found not to
have been thrown away. He had gained considerable ex-
perience from these discunione, and he should hope, if he
retained office—and if not that the task would fall on some
one more able—to present a bill in soother session with
more delicate proportions—not so gigantic, not so for-
noAslole in appcarince containing sill the principles of the
present bill inn IMO* condensed form. And he hoped that
he or his succeneor would be able to introduce the Lill at
such an early period of the seseiou that it might receive
that coonsioleratioon, and he hoped that support, which un-
doubtedly it. importance to the country, and the great
necessity for legislation on the subject, demanded from the
house. He had only to express his regret if,
in lois earnest desire to pass the bill, he lad
es or eeeloord to be impatient with the haw.
He natursllv hoped that lie should be able to carry the
measure m this session, but circumstances had prevented it.
He did not know that he could complain of anything except
that which nobody could prevent. He trusted the house
would admit, however, that he had lost no fair opportunity
of trying to hying the matter to • successful issue ; and he
would now move that Mr. Deasy leave the chair, with a
view to the order being discharged. (Hear, hear.)
Sir H. CAIRNS suggested that, instead of a consolida-
tics of the whole law of bankruptcy, it would be better to
bring in at first a simple measure for • change of the law.
Mr. MAINS thought the Attorney-General had exer-
cised a sound discretion in alandoniug the measure at the
present time.
Sir J. PA KINGMAN complained of the intention of the
government wit being sooner made known.
Lord PALMERSEON said the government had been ex-
, tie:4 reluctant to give up all hope of carrying the bill
through, and had clung to that hope to the last.
Mr. ENLEY congratulated the Attorney-General upon
' II his coming to the couchision to abandon the bill, and re-
commended hint, in cry future bill, to leave out the non.
trading part, which involved • vast change of the law, and
• against which good reasons might be urgei
o The motion was agreed to, and the chairman left the
chair.

Sir 3. PAKINGTON sold the hon. and gallant member
for Southwark had done no more than his duty in bringing
this matter before the house. The reasonable construrtion
of the MOWN was that the Admiralty should do till
that was reasonable. When at the Admiralty, he con-
educed that an inquiry should be made into Greenwich
Hospital, and the repel before the house showed that •
very full inquiry had taken place. He thought the noble
lord the Secretary of the Admiralty had met the motion
and the subject in a fair spirit, for he had
stated that the Board of Admiralty would take
the report into serious consideration and see how far it
could be carried into effect. At that moment it would be
impossible to pledge themselves as to the extent to which
' they would go. When at the hoard, he was shocked at
Ending that the wives of many sailors were receiving
, parish relief, and he thought some remedy should be found
for such • state of things.
Mr. LINDSAY felt that there ought to be great changes;
but he did not think it right to bind the government down
to the report at present. He proposed to move an amend-
ment, that the motion should be varied by leaving out the
words, " carried into effect" and adding to the end of it
the words " taken into consideration in such manner as
would be most conducive to the public interests."
The SPEAKER said an amendment could not be moved
to the motion of the hon. and gallant admiral.
Mr. LINDSAY said he offered the amendment as a sug-
gestion to his hon. and gallant friend with • view of pre-
venting a division. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HENLEY said he should be sorry to hind the go-
vernment to carry out the report without further considera-
tion. The whole thing was laid bare, and it would be in
the power of the Admiralty to place the seamen in a better
position. The board might go beyond the report or fall
short of it. The two reports which had been laid before
the house in reference to the navy showed that there was
plenty of room for amendment, and the government ought
to have free action to make it. If they did not do so, then
would be the time for the house to express an opinion on
the reportaand the conduct of the government.
Lord PALMER.STON said he thought the speech of the
right hon. gentleman expressed the good sense of the
question, and he hoped that the house would now be per-
mitted to pass into • committee of supply. (Hear, hear.)
If this were • owe in which the house supposed hat the
government bad no intention of acting upon • report of a
committee or commission, it might be desirable that the
house should pass • resolution urging upon the government
the necessity of action. But this was not a case of that
kind. The Secretary to the Admiralty had expressed his
intention of taking into consideration the report, and he
hoped under these circumstances the house would at once
pass into committee. (Hear, hear.)
Lord LOVAINE said he quits agreed in the course which
had been suggested by the noble lord. He only rose to
press upon the government the necessity of taking into
consideration the question of pay and allowances to sailors,
so as to put them ou the same footing pari passu with the

army.
Admiral DUNOOKBE aid he quite agreed in the re-
commendation that his hon. and gallant friend should with-
draw the motion.

air TEEViiaSTONE uked whether the Secretary of
the Admiralty would lay upon the table the opinions of
certain gallant officers on the state of Greenwich Hcepita4
particularlya report of Sir James Gordon, which he believed
was very valuable.
Lord C. PAGET was understood to reply in the affirms•
ties.

Sir e. NAPIER then, by leave, withdrew hio motion,
and substituted another : • That in the opinion of this
house the report of the commission on Greenwich Hospital
should be taken into consideration by her Majesty's govern.
ment, with a view of considering the recommendations con-
tained in that report in the manner most conducive to the
s"
public interests.
Lord PALMERSTON hoped that on the several grounds
he hail stated the hon. and gallant admiral would not pram
his motion. (Haar, hear.)
Lord J. MANNERS said that the gallantadmirars motion
merely expressed what the government had already under-
taken to do, and he saw no necessity for pressing it.
The motion was then negatived without a divioion.
SUPPLY.

The house went into committee of supply.
A vote of 12,000 t. for naval retirement was moved.
Sir C. NAPIER and Sir J. Eummotrome objected to and
opposed the plan of retirement for which it was required.
An animated discussion followed, after which the vote
was agreed to.
A vote of 33,0001 for seamen and marines employed in
China was thou put.
Mr. B. COCHRANE objected to the inadequacy of the
sum, which was in the nature of a reward for the service@
of the men between 1856 and 1858, and amounted only to
about 21. a men.
Lord C. PAGET said that it was calculated at the same
amount per day as the army, but it was only calculated for
twelve instead of eighteen months, as was the case with the
arni_y. It was irrespective of the certain bounty.
The vote was agreed to.
WAYS AND MEANS.
_ .

gradTM report of if;ya sod Means was brought up and
to.

liiinewer to Lord J. MAmmes,
Lord PALMERSTON maid that he proposed to take the
Irish bills thisfulty) evening.
P NS (SCOT'L JeD) BILL.
On the report el amendments. the first of the new
dames inserted in the committee wee etyma oat, and some
alterations were introduced into the schedules.
_LONDON CORPORATION BILL.

The ord;riOrHieconiiitaloitii.7.. discharged.
HERRLNG FISHERIES (Ss PMAIM) BILL.
The report of mewl/cents was considered, and some
farther amendments were ;weed to.
TENURE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LAND (IRE-

LAND) BILL.
This bill was reed a third time end panned.
HERITABLE SECURITIES, Re., (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This bill peened through committee.
GUNPOWDER, Re., BILL..
Sir G. C. LEWIS moved the second reading of this bill,
which was intended to regulate the sale of gunpowder,
lucifer matches, and fireworks. He had brought in the bill
at the petition of several public bodies that were &meat's-
fled with the present state of the law • but at • future stage
he would insert several important ainudaissts.
The bill was accordingly read • second tires, was °Dm.
mitted pro forme, and ordered to be reprinted.
CLEARANCE INWARDS_AND LIEN FOR FREIGHT

lab, Intel(foam.

. -
given in a matisfactory manner received a certificate of in-
demnity against any criminal inquiry being preferred against
them. Amongst others who were examined was the defen-
dant, and after he had made a statement before the com-
missioners they declined to grant him a certificate of ill-
demnity, his examination not being deemed satisfactory.
Any person, therefore, placed in the position of the defen-
dant was liable to all the pains and penalties provided any
action were brought against him ; but there was this guard
or proviso namely, that no statement made by any
person shill be used in evidence against him in the in-
stitution of any legal proceedings. Mr. Leathern,
however, having given an account which was not
approved by the commissioners, he was unprotected
by soy certificate ; but he had that fair and just pro-
tection afforded to him, that the statement he had made
could not be used in evidence daring the present inquiry.
In addition to the defendant, other parties were examined
before the commissioners, and although it was clear that
they were concerned in the bribery that took place from
their own statement, the commissioners believing, to make
use of a common phrase, that they "had made a clean
breast of it," acquitted these persons from the penal con-
sequences which attached to them by granting them certifi-
, Fates, and they would be called as witnesses le the present
investigation. The Solicitor-General, after a review of the
leading facts of the case, contended that Mr. Leathern bad
knowingly expended a large sum of money in exams of what
was legitimate and proper—au amount which had never
come before the election auditor. Mr. Leathern never in-

sinuatedtbat the election was an expensive one, he never COM-
plained of what had been expended. The present informa-
tion was preferred against Mr. Leatbam not with any spirit
of undue upon that gentleman. He asked the
jury if ey should he of opinion that the evidence which
would be adduced was sufficient to bring home the charge of
bribery to the defendant, to find their verdict to that effect,
and not be deterred from fulfilling their duty by considering
the position in life and the respectability of the defendant.
He did not believe that they would deal with him in •
different way to what they would with a man in humbler
life, and if by the evidence they should be of opinion that
he was guilty of the corrupt practices alleged they would he
had no doubt nay so by their verdict.
At the close of the case for the crown, Mr. James ad-
dreesed the jury for the defendant, who, he said, was
charged with an offence which lie could not help character-
ising as one of the must degrading character, and one, he
was justified by Mr. Leatham in stating, his entire soul
abhorred. He thought he should satisfy them that he was
charged with this offence under cireunt.tances that cer
tainly did not reflect the very greateNt credit upon the
parties who bad instituted these proceedings, although he
admitted the Solicitor.Ckmeral had conducted the case
like • christian and • gentleman. These proceedings were
of an oppressive character by reason of the Attorney-
General having, by his own mere motion, thought proper
to.placethe ease on the record,without any prior inquiry, any
prior information,and without :my intimation to Mr. Leathern
what was the nature of the evidence to be brought against
him ; and he asked the jury to weigh well the charge, and
unless they were beyond all doubt satisfied that Mr.
Leatham knew the object with which he handed over the
money, and intended to do that which his soul abhorred,
he celled upon them to vindicate not only him, but others
who might have a charge of this nature brought against
them.

---
The Solicitor-General then replied.
The jury retired, and, after an absence of twenty-three
minutes, returned a verdict of Guilty.
There are yet seven other cases of this description to dis-
pose of, three against persons on the liberal side at Wake-
field, and four against persons on the conservative aide,
and two against persons implicated in charges of bribery at
the Beverley election. Saturday being the commission-day
at Durham, it is impossible to predict what is likely to be
done.

NORFOLK CIRCIIIT.—Jens 19.

CROWN Comer. —(Before the Lord Chief Jtuitioe Erle.)

Samuel Wirer, aged 46, with Ave aliases, was charged
with sacrilege, in •mingg and entering the parish church
at Diddington, andsttealing therefrom Church Services,
Prayer Books, &c.
Mr. Metcalfe was for the prosecution.
Upon the prisoner being called upon to plead, he flatly
refused, and still persisting, his lordship directed a plea of
not guilty to be entered.
On the 6th of June it was found that an iron stanchion in
one of the church windows had been removed, the glass
broken, and a great number of Prayer Books, Bibles, Church
Services, &c., stolen. Shortly after, the prisoner, who
had been seen near the church, was selling the books in
the neighbourhood at a penny each, or fora pint of beer.
The jury having returned a verdict of Guilty, a previous
conviction was proved against him ; and it was stated to
the court that he had been convicted five times of felony,
and upwards of twenty times summarily.
Sentence, six yeah' penal servitude.
John King, 18, pleaded guilty to a charge of feloniously
killing a sheep, and to another indictment charging him
with feloniously maiming a cow. The acts were ac-
companied by circumstances showing the most revolting
cruelty, and
His Lordship, in passing sentence, said he had seldom
looked upon a criminal at the bar with a greater feeling of
repugnace.
Sentennce, 15 years penal servitude.
Mr. Stephenson for the prosecution.