The Express.
London, England, 1850-04-19 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY EVENING, APRIL 19, 1850.

Ewa attributed to them. (Chili,.) H. dhl eat
believe it wee a u plawate • (kr that was the,
wed the boa- aad bond goatimen used) to no,
magistrates to Mkt ptintineat ; bat, ea the esstraty, k
war rely la the belief eat they were atlas la stria went ,
anti withbriatinZeigastowiri is tint, *swan, dad whkg
Ann to thowesine nit *ay wittand
Won, ws esavistioh.
a widergo Guth pnalebanws as ►the
imVrEßucKlutgbg.ested that If the ewe n Onfes bid
jatioiktioa um, Mg*, litesay, the oblestisa as to per
5050 iinutedWin ma Whoa lyng a hag thee to gaol
buten bid would be obviated. 1,
Mr. PAOLI, oars.. to tho quokka of publicity,
baleen the bin oad leaned asenher (Mr. Ron
band to
that the courts et petty soden were as epos se the
worts of quarto swains fit no wain own At the petty
sessions at Lima* NM Loughborough, when he Wended,
the Isar wpm palibliall is dot wany wan always row.-
sewed, and the pareoullegi WON eenpletely tiler the
public eye.
Sir J. PAZINOTON, hinny list any years setiondl
the Digest gad esuliduseo el the aegistraita with when be
send Is 'view sMpoIW Geoid Wird to beat AIN
omen of the his. and leaned swabs, kw 11118110 IL Ho
advised the boa. ea leaned somber to huh at the set of
SW, to wine ha hod veferred, awl be would Sad that it
gale power et jurisdiction to juniors of the pane
sitting et no usual where the potty sewing were
hail, vend ht epos curt.
Mr. ROISIICK admitted that there was publicity la the
lone town, but sot Is the rural distils*, where the potty
seesaw wen held in sone publialows parlour wr in the
equire's boom
Bir G. GARY hoped the question would he Amused
calmly without the iatnrlssetiou of perseaallti.s. The
house sewed to think that this proposal for "(rimy sununtry
jwisdletioa to wiagierates was new, bet it was seso, for
tba swiss of sets nand by the right hos. baronet (Slr A.
Pool) wen years ego guru extensive power of orantasowy
nriedistisa to magistrates ectiag Ia potty esesioas, and throe
years age the hos_ bareaet ((Sir I. Pahlavi.) henght I.
sad carried the Jamas Offenders Bill, which gave do
inners jwiedictioa la ones whore the puns charged
worn ender 14 wars of age—an act which net with the
narked approval of Lord Deana.. The qualm they
bad to decide was, whether they should extend that
jurisdiction hoe 14 years to 16, sad melee that to ordinary
wen, as the classing of wieners sod the pow Law relief,
16 years was taken es the sae wine the pewits wand
to be chased as nvesiles, he saw no wawa why they should
lot adept the sane principle here.
After new observation 15... Sir 1. PARIXOTON and Mr.
Lk!.

Mr. HUME was ef opinion that Intr7 moot of petty
smokes should ban the assistance of a shainasa bred to
the law, the expense of which woad be amply orapea
sated by thu meadows which would be felt in the admi-
&intrudes ad jostles. With regard to the places when
these matte were held, he found that in Worcester-
shire there were fifteen places when petty sessions were
held—four of which were la public. homes, three at the I
clerks' houses, and two at the union worktteme. (.. Bear"
and laughter.) This wee opposed to the spirit in which the
law ought to be administeted ; and if the house did not
carry oat the rotes' of justice is such a meaner as to obtain
popular sanative and approbation how could they look for
the support of the
.people ? Again, in Cambridgeshire there
were 12 petty mamas held, nine of them in public-houses.
In Buckinghamshire 12 were also held, nine of them in
public-houses.
Mr. B. DENISON objected to the messum, bewails It would
bring under the juristlicties of the magistrates a elan of
offenders between the ages of 14 and 16, who armed a very
eonsidereble portion of the riving rogues of the kingdom.
Mr. LAW, thinking it desirable to shorten the discussion,
moved that the chairman do now leave the chair.

Mr. MILNES said it was a very digl•.ult muttrr to deal
with prisoners who bad attained an ace between that of
youth and puberty. It was at that see prison contamination
effected its worst, and thereto» the house should do all
in its power to gaud prisoners of 16 from that contami-
nation. _ _

After a few words from Sir J. PAX INOTON and Mr. B
Da:41110W,

Mr. ROEBUCK said he wished to divest himself of
every personal consideration on this subject. What wculd
the bill do ? It would enable a magistrate to inflict punish-
ment upon him who had "leased to be a boy. and to brand
him indelibly for life. Was the house Frepared to gine to
two magistrates, sitting, as the bon. member /or the West
Hiding of Yorkshire (Mr. H. Denison) —himself the chairman
of a Quarter Ammions—oonfessed, in the back parlours of
public-houses, without the aid of a jury, without any one of
the bulwarks which the institutions of this cou o try had thrown
around us all, a power to degrade a young man for lifelby en-
posing him in the market lace and ordering him to be
whipped ? Whip a buy, arid there was nothing in it. (A
laugh.) If you struck your own child, which he would not
advise any man to do—and if he had a child, and struck
him, he would not be a man—but supposing
• child he be struck, no imputation would be rut upon the
boy, whereas • grave Imputation would be east upon a man
if immoral ehsatisement were inflicted upon him. (Hear.)
Hs hoped, for the mks of the due administration of justice,
that the house would support the proposition of the bon. and
learned record, r for the City of Lmdon (Mr. Law), who had
dealt with more criminals than any other hon. member of
that house, and who had told them that this was • most mis-
chievous bill.

Mr. VIVIAN ealled attention to the heavy expense
which counties had to attest at present for removing criminals
from sessions to gaols, and said that some alteration of the
law in this respect was needed.

Mr. LAWLESS intimated his intention of moving at a
future rage, that " sixteen " be altered to "fourteen"
years of age, and that Use bill be not :tended to Ireland.
Lord BERNARD said that the existing law in Ireland
had been instrumental in suppressing much of juvenile de-
linquency.
Col. THOMPSON said It appeared to him that the
knotty point tutor* the how. was—at what age posterity
ehould be whipped? (Great laughter.) Now, he was not
for whipping them at all, and upon that principle he would
endeavour to regulate his vote.
The house divided as the motion " that the chairman do
leave the chair "
_

For it

Arial* it

Mr. ROEBUCK then moved ea amendment. the effect
of which would bete restrict the operation of the bill, es far
as personal chastisement was concerned, to persons of 14 in-
stead of 16 years of age.
After a few words from Mr. Aohtosne and Mr. Hcmi,
Mr. M'CULLAOH again declared his opposition to the
bill. He observed that the Juvenilia Offenders Act bad not
been beneficial. He believed that the onetime of juvenile
offenders het greatly multiplied under that set.
Mr. DRUMMOND declared his intention of voting fur
the amendment; but be denied altogether the statement
made by the hoe. member (Mr. M'Callagle) as to the opera-
tion of the Juvenile Of Age, which, from his own know-
ledge he mild state to be unfounded.
Mr. P. HOWARD said he wt uld give his most determined
opposition to the bill.
The committee then divided, when there appeared
For the amendment 7B
Against it
On our readmission we found
Bir G. STItICKLAND stating that they had now come to
the most objectionsble part of this objectiorable measure.
The punislumert of flagging, besides being cruel, was bru-
talising, not only to theme who suffered, but those who were
compelled to behold It. lie t►ought that in this age we
ought to have recourse to moral agencies, in preference to
such a degrading practice as that of fioggiag. He should,
therefore, move a pros is*, that nothing herein contained
shall authrriae or empower any justice or justices to order
the punishment of whipping to be laflie•ed on', persons
whose age shall exceed fourteen years.
Mr. PAKINOTON said that the origins' bill was framed
with the humane intention of saving persons from the con-
tamination of the gaol, by according the pool/hottest of
whipping and immediately discharging the offender. If
that humane intention was admitted, as regarded persons of
fourteen years of age, there would be no sound objection to
extending it to persons of sixteen years of age, They should
recollect that their own sons were whipped at 9149001.
Mr. ROEBUCK said there was a wide difference. A
child was still a child at fourteen—at sixteen he was a man—
(hear, bear)—and the punishment which to a boy was mere
pain, to a man would amount to a feeling of degradation.
Why were they to apply this brutal, this degrading, punish-
ment—this last resort of a poor and pitiful jurisprudence—to
entorca their criminal cods ? Were they reduced In this age
which boasted of its civilisation to that 'tete that they could
not govern their ma without the I.sh ? Ho was surprised
to hear an hon. gentleman, a chairman of quarter sessions, my
that whipping belonged to the law of England. And so it
did, and they whipped women la the market place. But
they did not do that now, there was a distinction made
between women end men. Whipping, the boa. smile-ran
said, was in the spirit of the Euglish 11119. Uod
help U 9 if we could not get out of !kat spirit.
Mr. LAW said this law would not only be a direction to
masistnites who convicted summarily, bat It would be
guide to chairmen of quarter suuonsand to judges to fix
the limit as is whipping in future. He did think they had
arrived at the time when they should sty whipping was a
fit punishment for boys, but it was a degrading and unfit
punishment for min.

Mr. 1C1L16)7117i observed that the has. member for
Sheffield bad a right to object to a clause, and to draw a
distinction between a boy of 14 and a boy of 16, and say
the one wait a boy and the other a man ; but be bed no
right to ray that this bill bad fur ita object the degradation
of the poor. It was not the poor, it was the criminal.
(U. ar, hear.)
Mr. 'MUNDELL PALMED could not help expressing
hirthordial concurrence with the views of the hon. gentleman
who had just eat down; and, although it might he unpopular
after the eloquent denunciation of the hon. and learned
member for Sot Ifitld, yet he ehoule. not diechlrge his duty
if, thinking that this was the CrUlo of humanity, he 'brook
from saying so on the pmaeut mouton. It appeared
to him that they should rot be led away by
sentimentality, which might do very well ist
popular assembly, but in that house they must look to the
real and practical interems of satiny. They had to deal
with a chi* in which sentimentality did not prevail in the
same degree as in their own. Wh. n they talked of mining
and a degradation, it was the dtvy of the leitialtture to say
thin, wits the migma—(tiesz, hear) —and they must not he
deterred it applying the core...tithe, becituee the criminal
might for the moment hams irritated 4. line with reap, et to
the punishment. And he world Mutt ask the huute whether
that wag not the tits. punialtm• nt which combined these
qualities—the quality tit Wiry sulli-iently severe to prevent
rept:kiwi, the quality of brig c'ieep, the quality of being
quick in its operation, and of being i xpeditious in its inflic.,
Lion ? Dot not alb, punishment and personal nilostigment ,
unite all these points more than . ny other 1 Ile hoped

the hew would agree to the sham, bellevier as he did that
• at of ',hippies, whatever might be mit
•it, wee really meeetfuL
Me. HEIGHT said he agreed with all that the his. and
member for Shellel4 had mid ola Me
of eibippbx. He should eldest to 'lambs pusses
16 Mims seer, pees hely an the petted that the hem end
learee, pnthessan objeeted so It. Bet he oared to it ea
ode. giessith which made him rival et Mee apro-
ns( the hgl rbe gamut shape The hoe. baronet prepesed
that thepembiseent should be .balloted by the ceder of two
magistrates. Now, lot them omaider who magistrstes were
—how they were appointed, sad the mode in whisk *air
trashiest was sommbess ondosted. Now he believed there
were many hundreds el magistrates to wham the 'sentry
was greatly indebted; many who knew the law and
who were just and easeful judges S bat then he
know that magistrates were appointed frequently
lessees they happened to be Melt gendemee of the neigh-
boarbood, or became they bemired to he the pellucid
=al governmestomel that they were net appointed
alnquiry into their capacity or boo ledge.
And if he regarded may the madeet and the cha
neer sad the ids's** ar the magletrates themselves, he
would wars the. against main from parlienteet theee ad-
ditionalwers. and he would askthem mere than any odor
men le that house to vote decidedly against the p:opositioa
now Wore theta._

Mr. ROEBUCK said the hos. member lad put the quo-
dos en a ground which he could unierseand. He said that
whirpLagzsa cheap. Now he wail/show him that another
pun t would be quite as cheap, that would inflict •
great deal more pain. Ho would take torten. What
was this but torture ? Take the thumb-screw. A boy
had orimmitted a theft. Take him into the look-
room of a preen, sad put him tato a screw ; it
was very cheap. But if it would maim bins,
sad make him a pauper, be would nave some other
portion of his body. (A laugh.) The only real question
was that by this infliction they degraded the man. lie sok.
sowledged at once that society was perfectly justified, when
its laws were infringed, to pauish ea Individual so es to deter
other from the perpetration of crime, but only with this
proviso, that they inflicted the least possible pain end the
least possible miesitlef that they could inflict. If he could
prevent murder by the infliction of the fine of a farthing
that was the utmost that he would loftiest He had no
wegsamos to seek, he only sought preventioo. And whoa
hon. member for Plymouth would inflict pain with • lash;
but be assured that this was a rude system of legislation ;
and if they were dealing with meta they were not to inflect
on them such a degrading punishment es the. Aad when
the bon. gentleman told him that being in prism for •
mouth was a more lasting degradation than flagellation he
knew little of his countrymen, or of the feelinse which influ-
enced them; for the idea of suck an infliction was a deg's.
deities that would last for • man'slife, and no future conduct
of the boy of 16 to the man of 60 would wipe it out, but it
would haunt him like • spirit from the hour of its infliction
to tho hour in which he would breathe hie last : he would be
pointed at as a man that had been degraded by corporal
punishment, and long so degraded, be would be like the
man in Homer, he would thereby lon half hie manhood.
Colossi THOMPSON believed that there was no serious
fetishes of applying this bill to the sons of gentlemen. '
Eton boys stole geese. (Laughter.) Hs had heard them
boast that they did so. They were forced by certain rules
and regulations which placed certain children of the ariato
may over other children of the aristocrecy in a way that did '
not improve their morality or their honours. No, there was
no
intention whatever that Eton boys who stole geese should
be punished either in the market-place or in the prison.
They admitted the propriety of obtaining a power over
infants, or these a little older, in order to get that authority
which was necessary for their well being; but they absolutely
abrogated and denied the propriety of whipping everybody
or anybody. The root of all this proceeding was thatthey
were to whip at size eon or fifteen, because a law they all
ought to be ashamed of allowed whipping at fourteen.
Sir It. H. INGLIS said they had just been told by one of
the gnat orators of the house, and its greatest actor—
(laughter)—that the sufferings of a boy of 14 or 16 when
whipped were hardly to be conceived. lie had added that
the pedagogue or ectooleauter, who had dared to touch his
lured person, would —, and the hon. and learned mem-
ber bad left the rest to imagination. (Laughter.) Ile, in
common with the hon. and gallant Etun boy who bad last
spoken, had been subjected to a punishment in reference to
which he believed he might look round the house, and ask,
Who has not ?" (Laughter.) He would ask who liked
any kind of punishment ? Tile question was not whether the
punishment of whipping was lined, but, when youths had
committed a crime or an offers°e of any kind, what
was the best mode by which it could be redressed /
Mr PACKE said that whipping was the law at present
for boys of 16, when tried at the sessions. The question now
wee as to eleanging the tribunal ; but the arguments hid
been directed against the punishment altogether.
Mr HUME bad been surprised to hear the hon. member
for Plymouth (Mr. it. Palmer) advocate flogging for up.
grows men. This was a bill for regulating the punishment
of juvenile offenders. What would the public say when
they found the house so ready to degrade persons just enter-
ing on manhood 1 It reminded him of the day when the
corporal punishment of soldier was defended to the extent
of 600 or 600, or 1,000 tastes, co the ground that they were
a class of men who were not sensible to punishment, and
that wee the only wsy by which they could be kept in die
dello,. The house was by degrees convinced of the &not ity
end brutality of these punishmenttand they were abandoned.
Had not men from the ranks declared that many a good
soldier had been destroyed by the first infliction of punish.
meet—that in nice cases out of ten he was lost to the service,
and no longer fit to be trusted as a soldier ? Since the pass.
log of the act of 1827 the number of juvenile offenders had
been greatly increased.
Mr. PLUMPTHE would prefer to see corporal punish-
ment confined to the se under fourteen,
Mr. HEAULAM said that two arguments had been
brought against the proposal: first that it ought not to he
extended to culprits above fourteen; secondly, that the tri-
bunal was not a proper one. lie differed from both those
arguments. If a magistrate could be trusted with the in-
fliction of this punishment on boyeof fourteen, why not on
those of sixteen? Tne evil of the punishment had been
enlarged on, but no reference had been made to the treater
evils of other punishments. Summary punishment was the
most merciful course towards juvenile offenders.
Mr. MUNTZ said he understood a bill was to be brought
in giving the power of summary jurisdiction to a single
magistrate; this he considered most improper, and a thing
to be locked at with very great suspicion. He should have
been disposed to support the proposition before the house, to
prevent the contamination of boys in prison; but feeling the
other objections so strongly, he had not been able to screw
up his courage to that point, and had therefore voted against
the bill all the while. He regarded trisl by jury as one of
the greatest bulwarks of cur liberties, and he should ever
oppose any unapt to narrow its application. (Hear.)
Mr. HENLEY said the question before the committee
was, whether corporal punishment should be extended to
pe 'sons between the age of fourteen and sixteen. The
question as to the propriety of flogging, as a punishment,
was not before the en, and, therefore, he would not enter into
that question. With regard to the extension of the punish.
ment he would vote against it, and for this reason that
pee loss cf the age of fourteen being considered as boys were
Hinged with a rod, but in all probability that would he con-
sidered too light a mode of inflicting the punishment
on a person of signet, and the oat would be used.
(Hear, hear.) Now a person flogged with the cat
would be marked for life, and he would not
afterwards he taken into tha army. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. SLANEY said he should vote against the extension
of flogging to persons of 16 years of age, although he ad-
mitted that his bon. friend (Sir J. Pakington) was actuated
by the best inteneions in what he proposed. (Loud cries of
Divide, divide.")
Sir It. PEEL said be wished to state, in a few entering,
the grounds on which he should give his vote. At present
he found that the law established a distinction between boys
who did not 4 zee 04 the age of 14, and boys who were above
that age. In the ease of the boy who did not exceed 14, the
law tre eted him as a boy, and made him subject to corporal
punishment, under the summary jurisdiction of two wagis.
traces. In the case of the boy who exceeded the age of 14, true
it was that he was not exempted frees corporal punishment;
but they threw around him this sanction, that they required
that the conviction should take place before the ordinary
tribunals of the country. (Hear, hear.) It was now pre-
,ed to endured this distinction, and to permit the boy,
between 14 and 18 years of sge, to be subjected to corporal
punishment at the discretion of two magistrates. He appre.
bonded that before any such alteration of the law was made,
which would, apparently at least, be at variance with the
' principle which of late years dictated a milder policy in
th it criminal code, a ease of necessity should be made out.
(Hear, hear.) He bad heard none such. (Hear, hear.) Ile
thought it much better that the distinction recognised by I
the iodation law should be maintained than that they should
confound that distinction without any allegation to the '
necessity of so doing. (Hear, hear) He apprehended that
there was a growing conviction that corporal punishment
ought not to be inflicted except in oasis of grave necesaity—
(hear, henr)—sod although adults were subject to corporal
punishment, yet, upon their conviction, the judge. generally
seta on the principle of selecting some other punishmeut
than that degrading one. (Hear.)
The committee then divided—

,r the proviso
Against it B9-81

The eatearden of corporal punishment to persons between
fourteen and sixteen years r (age was consequently rejected.
Mr. BO U VERIE moved that the Chairman report pro.
gnat.
Mr. ROEBUCK wished to know from the hon. member
(Sir J. Pakengton) whether, after the decision ea huth the
house had just come to, it would be worth while to proceed
with the bill env further. (Rear, hear )
Sir J. PAKINOTON said that though he very much
regretted the decision to which the committee bad just
arrived, be would still persevere with the bill, curtailed as it
war, becalm the other tarts of the measure would enable
these, at least, to preserve juvenile offenders from that con.
lamination in gaols which was the frequent cause of their
ruin in after years.
Mr ROEBUCK did nut think the bill could have any
such eff.e., because the magistrates must 113 W either dia.
inir the es offenders without any punishment at all, or send
them to gaol.
Mr. AOLIONBY said the hon. and learned gentleman
had mialsken the bill, beeause it prod, sten as it now
stood, it woull enable the magistrates to pod juvenile
offender, to prison for a few days, as a punishment fur their
offence,. But if the measure was given up altogether they
would be commuted to poison, and wham remain in gal
previous to trial ler three montu. (Hear, hear.) He
there/.re I,(pe I the hon. gentleman would persevere with
ths bill as it stood
Sir It PEEL slid he could not eenceive a stronger proof
than that given by the hen, end ►earned member for Cock-
mouth, that the sense of the house was decidedly
agtinst the bed. The hon. member said: " Rae have bees

isimbm dreg/slag la who have not been subjected to the
ssubmiegise and seadasesent of the house—(iaaghtee)—
sad see alter fasether they have expreeeed ea epi-ion ad-
verse Si the proposed jneistbetioa." (.. Rear, hear." sad
laughter.) This was so very recoadits question; it
was simply whether t►e Jarbdisuas of fllgging should he
uteMled to boys between kourtson sad sixtooo.

Mr. RUMSadd that la two divisions the majority was ria
or seven and il the cabinet had beat taken ant the mead-
neat Weald I. tea cow haat bees carried.

lir. IiTELLLOR said the hon. member for Droitaiieh
bad, sins the last division, frankly admitted that the great
object of the bill was to metre the power if the lash over
those who oases under the jsuisdieties. If the hon. baronet
were determined to premed he wu disposed to divide the
house against that coarse.
Sir G. GREY said tke house bad already decided oa the
principle ofeammary jurisdiction on the question that the
Speaker Austad leave tbe chair. It was gait* competent to
the house to extend the jurisdiction after deciding against
the prapend punishment.
Atter a few words from K. BZIONT and Sir I, PALIXO-
TON,

Claus I was agreed to.
Mr. LAWLESS moved the Insertion of a clause exempt-
ing Inland from the operation of the bill. The hon.
member stated that his principal reason for doing so WM
that in Ireland there wee net the power of appeal which
existed in this country.
Lord NAAS thought the bill was more required In Ire-
' land than in any other part of the United Kingdom, Willi'
that so much contamination had arisen there from the over-
crowded state of the gaols.
Sir J. PAKINGION said that when he introduced the
limeade Offenders Bill in 1847, he was strongly appealed to
by Irish members to extend it to Inland. He declined to
do so et the time; bet in the following year a bill for that
purpose pared ananinimuly.
Mr. ROEBUCK said what the hon. gentleman (Mr. Law-
less) complained of was, that there was no unitornsity. He
said that Ireland differed from England, inasmuch uthe
I accused had not the power of appal.
Sir J. PAKINOTON did not know what the hoe. gea-
amass meant by a power of appeal He wee not aware of
the existent* of may such power.
Mr. LAWLESS hed not the book before him.
Sir J. PAKINOTON said that what the bon. gentleman
called the power of appeal was no appeal at all. If the hon.
member thought the distinction between the two arts of so
much importance he scald propose a clause on the report.
Mr. LAWLESS said he would bring it tip on the report.
The preamble was agreed to, and the bill was ordered to
be reported to the home with amendineuta.
TENANTS AT RACK RENT RELIEF BILL.
This bill wait through committee.
MARRIAGES BILL.
Mr. S. WORTLEY promoted petition in favour of this
bill; Mr. F. MAULS, petitions against the bill, from Roth-
say, B.shops Wearmouth, and the ministers and elders of a
preabyterian congregation ; Mr. COWAN, two petitions from
Glasgow, against the bill ; Mr. LOCKHART, two petitions
from the synods of Glasgow ar d Air.
Mr. S. WORTLEY having moved that the houses go into
commit ee on the bill,
Sir F. THESIGER hoped the hon, and learned gentle-
man would not attempt to force on the pill at this late hour
(a quarter to 12 o'clock). He had been expecting the bill to
come on et an early period of the night.
Mr. S. WORTLEY said that the present regulations of
the house were such that it was almost impassible for a
private member to proceed with a bill. He believed it was
for the convenience of toe house to proceed.
Sir F. THESIGER begged leave to move that this debate
be now adjourned.
Mr. RUME said that really the house ought to be pre-
pared to decide one way or the other.
Mr. ROUNDELL PALMER thought it was not doing
justice to the melees which &nutted thou on the other side,
in wishing for an adjournment, as if no question was to be
discussed which had net been discussed already.
Mr. F. MAULE said that he had a motion that Scotland
be excluded from the operation of the bill. This question
which he had undertaken to move was the only question
upon which he could really say that he believed Scotland
was almost unanimous. He believed there did not exist a
difference of opinion to any extent on the subject, and
Scotland would be disappointed if the matter would be taken
without full discussion.
Sir B. HALL said it was very seldom that a bill of great
importance aas brought on at this late hour; and, looking
at this bill, it was the very last which ought to t e taken
as an exception to the general rule. One thing he must
ray, because he felt it most strongly. It was said, in re-
' (creme to this proposition, that this bill was brought for-
ward for the advantage of the poorer and humbler classes.
He denied that. Looking at the former act, which was
the precedent for this. acei looking at the expense which
had been gone into, he believed that this bill was not for the
tooter classes, but it was for persons of a higher grade. He
would not mention names, but he hussy the parties who
paid the expenses of this act.
Mr. COCKBURN said he did not understand why this
hour should he considered a late hour. If this were an
imp aunt polit c.l matter it would not be considered a late
hour. He hoped that his hon. and learned friend would
po rest in pressing on this matter, and getting into com-
mittee.

S.r R. H. INGLIS said that he would join issue with
the hon. member who had splken. He did not think that
any advantage would be gained by their going into commit
tee at that late hour. He held with the h3n. member for
Anis/doe, that they should not go into committee.
Mr. HOU VERIE agreed that no advantage would be
gained by the it goine into committee at that hour.
Mr. S. WORTLEY trusted that the house would so
into committee, and then they mild adjourn its con-
, sid,ravon.

Sir G. GREY thought that that prof sition was a reason-
able ono.

Sir F. THESIGER said that he had no objection to their
soing through one rags of the bill, if the hon. gentleman
(Mr. S Wortley) would then agree not to discus the merits
of the bill

Mr. QOULBURN said that he wished it to be understood
thatithere were many who had remained in the house in the
expectation of this bill goinx into committee.
After a few winds (rum Mr. Fox Mat:Ln and Sir R. R.
Imous,
TIN house divided—

For adjourning
For going iwo committee 152-63

Captain BOLDER() begged to more that the house do
then hear.)
Sir F. THESIOER said they were not going to discus
the principle of the bill at that moment, and therefore be
could ate ne objection to their going into committee. All
that was then intended to be done was to take a stage on
the bill. (Hear. hear )
Mr F. MACKENZIE saicrtbe;right hon. and learned gen.
tleman expected to gain something by pressing his prop ni.
Lion, or he did not. (Hear, hear.) If h- did not exp ut te
gain anything, why persevere? (Hear, hear.)
Mr. F. MAIILE stated that be iris there to oppose the
bill on every stage, at no person felt more strongly on the
matter than be did. However, ke would not oppose going
into committee at present.

Mr. PLUMPTItE thought full opportunity should be
given to discuss the principle of the bill.
Mr OSWALD and Mr. WALPOLE declared themselves
in favour of going into committee.
Mr. R. PALMI3It thought the bill might be. advanced
a stage by going into committee.
Sir R. INGLIS said • great deal of time had been
wasted in discussing whether or not they should go into
committee. if farther divisions took place more time
would be lost, and therefore he recommended the with•
drawal of the propoaitiin for going into committee.
(Hear, hear )
Captein BOLDERO wes determined to oppose the in
every shape and form. He considered this bill the mist
obnolioue ever introduced into that house—(hear, hear)—
and he therefore would not give up a single point of opposi-
tion to the bill which the forms of the house allowed.
(Hear, hear.)
The house then divided—
For the adjournment
Against it
On our return to the gallery we Sound
Mr. FORBES moving the adjournment of the debate.
The house divided—F.r the motion 4B
Against it
Mr. WORTLEY appealed to the house to allow the bill
to be committed proforma, promising to defer discussion to
• future occasion.

After a few words from Mr. llnsithr.
Sir G. GREY deprecated the oppasPion with which the
hen. and learned member had room encountered, but
thought that it would be futile to persevere further with the
bill that evening.
Mr. J. 8. WORTLEY withdrew his motion, and the de-
bate was adjourned.
PARISH CONSTABLES' BILL
This bill went through committee and was ordered to be
reported.
The other orders were gone through, and Um house ad-
journed at one o'clock.