Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-08-14 00:00:00

CHARGE AGAINST INDIAN OFFICERS.

The Earl ot ifenborough adverted to the charges
against three officers of the Bengal Engineers, that, at the
siege of Mooli an, they had entered the gates contrary to
orders, .and had concealed plunder under a tarpaulin,
under thd pretence that it was engineering tools. The
noble Earl stated that he had received a communication
from Major Maxwell, to the effect that a full investigation
had disproved the allegation.
TON BISHOP, OF ST. DAVID'S CONSECRATED BURIAL GROUND'S.
The Bishop of St. David's entered into a lengthened
vindication of his refusal to consecrate the Swansea
Burial Grounds, and replied to the attacks of Mr. Massey
in the other house.
Earl Granville said the question was whether the right
rev. prelate acted legally in the course which he had
taken.
Lord Wensleydale could not help thinking that the
right rev. prelate was wrong in the course he had taken.
The House then went into committee on clause 6, which
makes provision for burial ground for paupers. A di-
vision then took place. The numbers were—

For the clause
Against

Majority
The remaining clauses ,were agreed to, and the bill,
with amendments, was ordered to be reported.

In reply to the Marquis of Clanricarde,
The Earl of Clarendon gave an explanation of the differ-
ence between France and the Porte, as to the elections in
the Principalities, similar to that previously given in the
Commons by Lord Palmerston.
The 'Municipal Corporations Bill was read a third time
and passed.
Some other bills were advanced a stage.
The House adjourned shortly after nine o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.--THURSDAY.
The Speaker took the chair at twelve o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
Shepherd's Disabilities Removal Bill was read a third
time and passed.
Lord Rivers' Estate Bill was read a second time and
ordered to be committed.

LAMBETH masurAcTonins.
Mr. E,tcanrt inquired of the Chief Commiss'oner of
Works if be had received any alswer from the authorities
of Lambeth relative to the communication he had made to
him in reference to the noxious trades carried on in that
parish on the banks of the Thames, which affected the
atmosphere in the neighbourhood of the .Houses of Perna-

went ?
Sir B. Hall said the matter was one for serious coasidera.

lion, in consequence of the course the Vestry of Lambeth
had thought it right to pursue in reference to this subject.
To show the house what a hopeless case it was of any
remedy being adopted by the parish authorities, he read a
litter sent from the officer of works, on the 30th July, to
the Vestry of Lambeth, complaining of the nuisance, and
the answer he had received from that bady,"dated 10th
August. The latter slated that the subject was submitted
to a meeting of the vestry held on the 6th inst., but they
were nct prepared to take proceedings against the parties.
The house would therefore see how unfortunate it was that
the bill of 1855 was passed without a clause imposing a
penalty on parish authorities for neglect of their dutie?.
If such a clause had been introduced into that act any
person could have proceeded against a local body that
neglected to do its duty towards the public and themselves.
It was too late this sessio] to introduce a bill to remedy
that defect, but he hoped next stssion the house would
pass a bill that would compel parish authorities to execute
the powers vested in them under the powers of the act of
1835.
The subject then dropped.
DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CALTSRS BILL.

The committee on this bill was resumed.
On clause 25, giving divorce for cruelty and desertion,
Lord J Manners moved the introduction of the
words, "or adultery committed within the conjugal resi.
deuce." _ _

The Attorney-General opposed the amendment, on the
ground that the bill was only to consolidate, and not mike
any charge in the present law. '
Mr. Gladstone 'said that the learned Attorney-General
appeared by his remarks to be wrong, both in fact and
principle, with reference to the efi.ct of this bill. 'I he
further they advanced in its ateussion, the more obvious it
became that that house should subject the measure to a
greater examination and scrutiny than it had been sub-
jected to in the House of Lords, or by her Majesty's govern-
ment, who were responsible for its production. The change
which this bill proposed in the law was patent, and when
the Attorney-General stated the contrary, it only showed
the crudity and precipitancy with which the bill had been
introduced, and the scarcely decent haste it had
been determined on, and was attempted to be
forced• through the house. If divorce was to be given
to the poor for cruelty, the same power should be
given to the rich in the shape proposed by the amendment,
because there could be no greater cruelty inflicted on a
woman than to know that,her husband was living in adul-
terous intercourse in the co- jogai residence. There was
no such cruelty in the higher classes as was known in the
lower classes, but the scandal attaching to the fact of a
man in the higher classes outraging his wi'e's feelings by
converting his house into a scone cf infamy, whilst ob-
serving all the external demands of society, was the
greatest cruelty that could be inflicted on a woman. It
should be the object of this bill to meet such cases.
Mr. Drummond supported the amendment. He con-
tended that the woman and man should be put upon an
equality in the process of obtaining divorce - and the man
who turned his house into a brothel, ought not to go
scatheless.
Mr. Huggessen also supported the amendment. He
said that woman sinned from her weakness—man from the
strength of his passions. If, therefore., the latter was
entitled to relief, the first was more se. The amendment
grappled with great social evil, and believing the amend-
ment, would tend to remedy it, he ,should .vote against the
government, although he had supported the second reading
of the bill.
Mr. Ayrton said, that es.the committee were considering
the law of divorce with a view to its amendment, it was
their duty to consider everything in reference to it, and
take care that the principle they laid down was such as
would promote morality and give relief to the greatest and
grossest form of injustice. (Heel-, hear.) Where a man
brought home a concubine, the wife ought to have power
to sue for a divorce.
Mr. Henley spike in favour of the amendment, urging
that the woman had eyed rights with the man.
Ihe Lord Advocate said that the law of Scotland, with
reference to divorce, proceeded on the principle that the
two sexes were on a looting of equality_(hear, hear)—
and he thought it well-founded both on principle and
social experience. (Hear, hear.) The wife used the
remedy as two to five, proving clearly that the remedy
was not extravagantly made use of. The law was applicable
to the whole of Scotland, and from a return be had had
made, he found that out of 174 casee, 73 only were at the
suit of the wife, and about 103 or 104 at the suit of the
husband, which he thought was not a large amount, in a
population of 3,000,000. During the last year there were
17 cases of divorce in Scotland, seven of which were at
the suit of the wife, and the remainder that,of the
husband..;" He entirely concurred in the amendment,
believing it ought to be the principle'on which divorce
should proceed. , •
Lord J. Manners addressed the committee at consider-
able length in support of his amendment.
The Attorney-General said that the bill was confided
to hint on the principle which he distinctly again stated,
that of embodying the existing law in regard to divorce.
It was true two yea's' desertion and cruelty did now give
a claim to divorce, but wi,h that exception 'his statement
Was substantially true, and he complained of the language
hat had been used against him in reference to the bill.
flee amendment would be mpst opposite if the committee
were discussing the foundation of the marriage law. but
that was Pot the case, and on the terms on which the bill
. .
had been committed to his care he could not enter onethe
latger question. He approved of the equality contended
for, but the committee was limited to the erabodying of
the present law. (Fleur, hear.) Legislation need- cot stop
with this bill, but be proceeded within a future session of
Parliament. (Cheets.) Ile replied to the censures that had
been pasted ucoa him by those who appeared to have
suddenly awakened tile woman's wrotege. He asked how
the country could place any fait'a, in those who on the
second reading of this bill'opeaceeed the dissolubility of
marriage, but were now t,-,,e hollow advocates of the
enlargement of the law Df divorce be introducing other
crimes for a divorce a vincula. The hon. and learned
gentleman test rOtnreet to what be called the gilded pro-