The Express.
London, England, 1861-02-13 00:00:00

THE. ROCHDALE WITNESS.

The SPEAKER said before he calhetlUlon the hon.
baronet the member for Tavistock, the house would ob.
Nerve that the terms of the question, as it appeared on the
paper, differed from those used by the hon. baronet on the
prelious evening, which were that the witness in the ease
had expressed her disbelief in a future state and of future
rewards and punishments. The alteration which had been
made in the terms of the question had been made at his
(the Speaker's) suggestion, by which the original words, as
used by the hon. baronet, were restored.
Sir J. TRELAWN Y said he had made the alteration of
the words " a belief in a future state and rewards and
punishments hereafter" to " a belief in certain speculative
propositions" without meaning any disrespect to the house.
He DOW be=ed to ask the Secretary for the Home
department whether he had been informed of a recent de-
cision in the county court at Rochdale by the judge, Mr.
C. Temple, who was alleged to here nonsuited • plaintiff on
account of the inability of the witness to affirm her belief in
a " future state, and rewards and punishments hilre-
after ;" and whether, on the assumption that the judge
ruled properly, the government would deem it necessary
to amend the law applicable to similar canes.
Sir C. LEWIS said this was a case in the county court
at Rochdale, in which • person named Madden sued her
' mother for the value of a pianoforte. The only witness for
the plaintiff was the plaintiff herself, and on her appeariug
in the witness box the attorney for the defendant put the
question whether she had • belief is a 09d, and in a future
state of rewards and punishments, and she answered
both in the negative—(a laugh)—aadon. that. answer being
given, the judge ruled that she was not • competent witness,
and she was nonsuited. Sineethat time a motion had been
made for a new trial. The right -hon. gentlemen here read
an extract from " Starkia on Evidence, " which stated that
before a witneen takes an oath be might be asked whether
he believes in the existence of a Oixl and a future state of
rewards and punishments. If he does, . he shall tin
admitted as a witness, but if he dues not he shall
not be admissible. That (continued the right ho-
nourable baronet) was a • clear statement of a clear
law upon the subject. The law was Dot at all liar-.
row or intolerant as to the administration of an oath, so
that • Mahommetian or a Chinaman might be sworn iu
way that they considered binding upon them. The only ease
in which an oath was dispensed with was ss regarded the
Society of Fnenda, who by a special act of parliament
were allowed to make a declaration. It was not his inten-
tion to bring before the house any bill to make an alteration
in the existing law on this subject. (Hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON moved that, to-morrow being Ash-
Wednesda,y, the house should meet at 2 o'cluok.
Sir J. TkELAWNY thought the answer of the right
hon. gentleman the Home Secretary.wss not iatisfactery.
He was quite surprised that gentlemen on the other ails of
the house should behave in suck a manner on this subject.
(Oh.) Were they not hound to do justice to persons of all
religious opieionio (Wear.) In the north of England
groat many
.persons would be disqualified front giving evi-
dence on this ground, and he thought the Home Secretary,
as the guardian of justice, should bring in • measure which
would amble all persona to give evidence in the manner by
which they could best discharge a conscientious duty.
Mr. CONINGHAM alwaye understood that the principle
of religious liiorty. MOO that, no man ahould be constmiued
alit° his religious opinions. and lie confessed he heard with
very great regret the strienient made by the Home )4nerit-
tary. He thought it deed crying injustice the beams* a
me stated honestly ha religious belief Ito was to be denied
justice by those who admisietered the law. He did not
believe that the cheers with which the statement had been
received on the other side of the house would be at all reci-
procated oat of doors.
The motion for the adjournment of the house till 2 o'clock
(this deg) was then agreed to.
CONVEYANCE OF VOTERS.

Mr. COLLUilitnove.lfe; Teavetolirinii; a bill to pre-
vent the paying of the expenses of conveying voters to the
poll in boroughs. As no great measure of reform now
stopped the way, he hoped to obtain the assent of the
house to ewe or two sun .11 meneures el reform of his own.
lie maderatesiabanwibas irMISMINIS one- law lisd,--sise

some small mounires. The government, he believed. had also
their own small measure; and all these together might form
• solution of the great reform question. The house WWI aware
how the law at present stood. It was illegal to give a voter
money to pay his own travelling expenses. but not illegal to
pay Ins expenses for him. The two things wore so similar
that he proposed by his bill to make the payment of ex-
penses of borough voters illegal. A provision of this kind
was inserted in Lord Derby's bill, and in the bill of last
session there was a clause to the same effect. That bill was
referred to • select conimittee, and they reported that so
far as it concerned boroughs they recommended it, but they
were not in favour of applying the 1111116 law to
counties. Therefore to prevent opposition to his ma-
sure he bowed to the decision of the committee.
Something was said about waiting for • compre-
hensive measure of reform on this subject, but be
was afraid of comprehensiveness. They all saw what came
of it. Nothing was done ; and he should be sorry if his bill
were postponed to another session. He should prefer its '
being paws' quickly, in case there should be a dissolution .4
parliament this year. Having said thus much he would ask
leave to introduce this bill.
Mr. MELLOR seconded the motion. .

Mr. PEACOCKE aid that as the hoe. gentleman the
member for Plymouth had thought fit to express confidence
in her Majesty's government be ought to leave this ques-
tion in their hands. lie did not intend to oppose this
motion, but he should on all future stages give the measure
his warmest opposition. There were noisy boroughs twice
and three times the size of some divisions of counties. The
borough which ho had the honour to represent was seven
miles round it, and the borough of Aylesbury was of very
considerable extent. If he should not be successful in his
opposition to the bill lie should propose to extend its opera-
tion to counties. (" Hear, hear," from the ministerial side
of the house.)
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that this subject could form part of
a bill relating to corrupt joacticei at elections which he was
about to bring in. He should not, however, oppose the
introduction of the bill.

—..---- ......-
Mr. PEACOCKE xed Mr. V. BCULLY objected to legali-
sing the payment of these expenses in counties and prohi-
biting it 111 boroughs.
Mr. E. JAMES objected to the introduction of a number
of small reform bills, thinking that the responsibility of
that question rested with the government.
Mr. DIGBY SEYAIOUR, who bad a notice on the piper
of a bill to reduce the franchise in boroughs to tit, said he
was one of those referred to as having projected small
reform bills, and, though he fully agreed that the subject
of reform ought to be left to the government, he felt bound
by • pledge be had given to test the question against a reduc-
tion of the tram:haw this session. As, however, Mr. Baines
had given notice of a similar bill, he should not press his
own, but content himself with supporting that measure.
Mr. MACKINNON assured the house that his opposition
to the Reform Bill was made without coninitudeation with
Lord Palmerston. (Laughter.) The experience he had
gaiued in the committee on the subject of councils of con-
ciliation between masters and workmen showed him that
the middle class were averse to an extensiou of the fran-
chise, and the lower classes indifferent to it.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
COUNTY RATES AND EXPENDITURE BILL.

Sir J. TRELAWNY, in moving for leave to bring in this
bill, stated that if it obtained a mond reading it was his
intention then to refer it to a select. committee.

Sir J. PAKINGTON said that although he had opposed
the introduction of former bills on this subject, it was not
his intention to do no iti the present instance. Ho was as
anxious as anyone to obtain the representative principle in
county expenditure, but the house must beware that they
did not make too great sacrifins to obtain it. He trusted
that the lion. buronet would give sufficient notice before he
asked for the second nailing.
Sir O. C. LEWIS said that the subject was by no means
new, having been already submitted to a select committee,
and he did nut see that any reason at prent existed for its
reintroduction. The satisfaction might not be universal as
to the mode in which county expenditure was administered,
but he believed the fact to be that very little complaint
existed, and that the magistrates generally were disposed to
economy. He was not unwilling that the bill should i,e in.
traduced, and should receive the consideration of the house,
but with respect to referring it to a select conunittee, he
bto say one word. If he referral his bill to a
select committee rt must be one mainly for clauses and
without power to call witnesses. If the subject required
examination the better way would be to refer it in the tint
instance.
OFFICES HELD BY MEMBERS.

Mr. WHITE moved for a return of every member of this
house holding any civil, military, naval, diplomatic or other
place, office, or pension, to which he has been nominated or
appointed by the crown, government, ministers, or chiefs of
departments ; stating the date of his nomination or appoint.
meat and the emoluments he receives, and whether the
emus be temporary, permanent, or progressive.
It was opposed by Sir G. C. Lewis, and supported by
Lord R. Cecil, Mr. Hadfield, Mr. Coninghaw, and Mr.
Beim
On •dirixion the numbers was :
For the motion
Against it
Mr. DlGPitt yR LaryMmENTouttßwYho
FithadApNlaCcedHlaSES.notlicel2Ls9the