The Express.
London, England, 1861-07-09 00:00:00

TUESDAY EVENING,

jog ia the street, and the prisoner was coming along with
• horse and cart with a load of casks at a slow
Ma The children fell off the kerb under the wheels,
and the prisoner could not see them until he had Famed
over them. As far as the prisoner was concerned it was •
pare accident.
The prisoner told bia worship that such was the fact, and
ke was truly sorry for being the cause of the accident to the
children. He had been some years in Mr. ?Utley 's employ,
and was a careful driver.

Evidence was riven to that effect, when
Mr. Bureham said that at present he was inclined to think
It was an accident, but further inquiries must be instituted
into the circumstances. He should therefore rewind him

until Monday next, andaccePiicis;CreeogiiieaiTcesin;
his appearance co that day.

IMPERIAL P.

HOUSE OF COMM oNS.--(TH IS DAY.)
The Britten took the chair shortly after 12 o'clock.
IRREMOVABLE POOR BILL.
The house went into committee upon this WI, and re-
sumed the consider•tion of claims 9.
Sir B. BRYDGES entertained objections to the whole
of the clause. He felt a deep debt of gratitude to Lord
Althorpe and the liberal party for the present poor-law
of the country, but thought that every inducement
should be offered to different pariahs to em-
ploy their poor, and on that account ob-
jected to union rating. His opinion was that the bill
should be deferred to another session; but if it was to be
proceeded with, he thought it would be improved by the
amendment of the right hon. gentlemen (sr. 8. &Mood)
to the effect that the rate should be made " upon aa amen-
meat calculated by adding to the annual value of the lands
and heroilitameuts in each of such parishes as hereinafter
described a into equal in pounds steams to the amount in
numbers of the population of such perish according to the
list censw."

Lonl HENLEY objected to the amendment on the
pound that it encouraged landlords to evict the poor out
of their parishes-
Mr. A.DDERLEY also opposed the clause, believing that
the chock proposed would be as likely to act against as for
the object sought, and would operate most unfairly in the
ease of two adjoining parishes, one possessing a large wealthy
population, and the other a small number of a poor class.
The bill would in itself be a very valuable acquisition, but
the 9th clause wee open to grave objection, and he hoped
that that clause would not be persisted in.
Mr. TOLLEMACHE did not think the amendment
would prove of much effect ; but, considering that if it had
any effect at all it would be more injurious than beneficial,
he opposed it, and supped the clause, which es it stood
be regaDENrded se • valuable portion of the bill.
Mr. T supported the claws.
Mr. BALL accepted the till because he considered
that as • whole it would be a great benefit to the country
at large, but with regard to the amendment he thought
that it would destroy the very principle of the bill, which
I was to equalise the contributions for the maintenance of
the poor.
Mr. DODSON spoke in favour of the alteration proposed
by the bill in regard to 'calomel:it— namely, from five to
tree ran.
Yr. CAYLEY believed that the remedy proposed by the
bill would be worse thee the disease. The grievance in this
Mill was close parishes, but these parishes were of different
characters--scine paying
.no poor rate!, and in which pro-
qtriahaeilterei been
curP3:74 !p...ipcsitv).no'ulbd";,VbAint case
sed
la fact this was nothing less than getting the thin end of
the wedge in, and union rating must eventually follow the
prang of this bill.
Mr. AGET supported the bill, because it encouraged
laced"' wee to live upon the estates on which they
wetted.
Mr. LYALL thought the clauses would operate very
fairly ha egualisieg the burdens of parishes, and making
contribute towards the support ofithose by whose
Ce.bo:rmithey would be benefited.
Colonel W. PATTEN believed that union rating would
increase the cost of the poor law by at least 50 per cent.
The advaatagee of this clause were in his opinion out-
weighed by its disadvantages.
Mr. WALTER supported the dame.
Mr. HENLEY thought the house had not sufficient
information for its guidance u to the effect of passing this
clause.

[rAft 'Puking.]

Oil 17_ II

xis
98i xin

sin
sin

M
•-• id