The Sun.
London, England, 1855-08-10 00:00:00

LITERATVIi E.

The Physician for All. By John Spurgin.
Whittaker and Co.

An elaborate essay, setting forth the philosophy,
experience, and mission of the Physician for All,
the author strongly reprobating the selection of
one form of disease exclusively for practice. The
physician having, he remarks, to do with human
nature as he finds it in reference to its every fa•
culty, Whether corporeal or mental, his philosophy
must have for its great object " that which per-
vades his whole professional system, and serves as
a clue to conduct him through the labyrinth of in-
finities that surround him viz., the blood "—the
healthy and morbid conditions of which " rule
essentially in every department of life, and prove
a constant source of observation as productive of
good and evil in the world." This fluid (possessing
by the way, a formative and regenerative force) he
regards as identical with human nature, that pro-
ceeding from and being dependent on it, and his
main object is "to demonstrate that selfish aims
have absolutely impaired the nature of our blood,
and disordered the constitution of our bodies, while
those which regard the welfare of others serve
as the ground upon which the great truths of Reve-
lation and the positive facts of Science can operate
for the restoration of health to every human fa.
cultyi" -- In pursuit of this object he considers at
length the nature and constitution of the blood,
on which and on its determination, continuity, and
quantity " the condition and well-being of animal
life depend." Under the former head he points
out the predilections, susceptibilities, and tenden-
cies that constitute man or human nature, which,
he states, ought not to be regarded " as a scintilla
of life, but merely a complex of organs collectively
receptive of life." The component parts of the
blood he describes as gaseous, saline, and earthy,
and he finds an analogy to its constitution in nn
impregnated egg, no apparent difference in the in-
gredients being discoverable by chemists between
the egg of an eagle and that of a dove, yet the
nature of each operating as the law that renders
them diverse. Thus, in the animal nature he insists
all is animal, and in the human all is human.
" The constitution of the blood," we may observes
heads the greater portion of the work, and, in dis-
cussing the subject, the author draws largely on
his experience and observation, interspersing the
disquisition with useful suggestions and pertinent
remarks. On the nature and tendencies of his
theory, which, we should state, embraces a vital
influence designated " nerve blood," we refrain
from offering an opinion, contenting ourselves
with remarking that if observation and reflection,
with enlarged notions of the capabilities of the
human race, and an earnest desire for its amelio-
ration and elevation, suffice to constitute a physi-
cian for all, the author has not mistaken his mis-
sion. A quotation, at once describing a curious
fact, and lending colour to his theory, and we con•
elude our notice.

"Whilst on the constitution of the blood I would ad.
vert to the effects of starvation produced upon the ani.
mal economy as it is exhibited in human nature con-
trasted with merely animal nature. I do not refer to
the mere pangs of hunger and thirst, but to a stage be-
yond this, when the physical powers are too enfeebled to
seek for food. In such a state the animal is passive, as
if resigned to its fate, retiring to die ; but it is not so
with man—he becomes mad, ferociously so in some in-
stances, and will devour his weaker fellow in misery.
and even his own offspring. No ties of nature here
avail; even the bonds of religion, however exalted and
pure, lose their power."

TESTIMONIAL TO THE LATE LORD

DUDLEY STUART.

A meeting of the committee to promote this object
was held at Sussex Chambers, 10, Duke-street, St.
James's, on Tuesday, the 7th inst., P. F. C. Johnston,
Esq., in the chair, to receive the report from a sub-
committee previously appointed to invite proposals from
the several metropolitan general hospitals, in pursuance
of a resolution adopted at a meeting on the 19th of
June. There were present, the Earl of Harrowby, Earl
Fortescue, Lord Viscount Ebrint„ton, M.P. ; General
Count Ladislas Zamoyski, Captain Townshend, R.N.,
M.P. ; J. V. S. Townshend, Esq. ; Jacob Bell, Esq. ;
Horatio J. Montefiore, .Esq. ; Edward Eagle',:on, Esq. ;
W. L, Birkbeck, Esq. ; Dr. William O'Connor ; Major
Gieglud ; F. H. Goldsmid, Esq. ; Lieutenant Charles
Szulezewski ; William Itothery, Esq. ; T. D'lffanger,
Esq. ; N. F. Zaba, Esq. ; William Pritchard, Esq. ; J.
E. Taylor, Esq. ; E. Beales, Esq. ; George Poland,
Esq. ; Thomas Campbell, Esq. ; James R. Carr, Esq. ;
Henry Hayward, Esq. ; J. H. Nicholay, Esq. ; Peter
Graham, Esq.
The report stated that an application bad been ad-
dressed to each of the metropolitan general hospitals,
with the view of ascertaining which establishment would
be enabled to effect. the greatest amount of good with the
" Dudley Stuart Fund ;" and also which hospital would
in return for the fund do most toward the object
entertained by the committee—the perpetuation of Lord
Dudley Stuart's memory. Proposals were received from
all the general hospitals with one exception ; liberal,
but various in their kind. A selection of three was
made, and a deputation appointed to visit the establish-
ments, confer with the authorities, and report their ob-
servations. In the end, University College Hospital
was recommended as, under all the circumstances, the
one most calculated to hand down to posterity the
philanthropic qualities of the noble deceased. A pro-
posal was also received from the board of managers of
the "North-west Nightly Refuge for the Houseless
Poor," an institution which was established by the late
Lord D. Stuart, assisted by Mr. H. J. Montefiore, and
a few other gentlemen, sonic three years since ; but as
the terms of the resolution of the 19th June confined
the committee to hospitals, the application could not be
entertained without the sanction of the general commit.
tee.

Mr. J. DELL moved " That the report now read be
received and adopted." He did so the more readily, as
he was most anxious that the committee should that
day come to a final decision as to the nature and cha-
racter of the testimonial.

Mr. P. GRAHAM seconded the adoption of the report.
Mr. W. L. BIRKBECY moved an amendment—" That
the resolution of the 19th June be rescinded ;" and the
committee had already by their first ♦ote decided that
the most suitable testimonial to Lord Dudley Stuart
would be the fou❑dation of an independent charitable
institution, if such a measure were practicable. He be.
lieved their funds would be sufficient for this purpose,
and proceeded to explain the plan, of which he had
give❑ notice, for erecting a►mshouses for the blind—a
class of sufferers in whom Lord Dudley Stuart bad ever
taken the utmost interest. The amount already raised
—upwards of I,2ool.—would be sufficient to purchase a
piece of land large enough for 20 almshouses, and for
the erection of several. There were no almshouses for
the blind in existence ; and there could be little doubt,
if so good a work were once commenced by securing the
land, there would be numerous contributors to it, by
testament and otherwise. He was very unwilling, for
personal reasons, to oppose the proposition brought for-
ward by the University Hospital, but he felt convinced
that, if adopted, it would by no means carry into effect
the principal object of the committee—that of establish-
ing a public testimonial to the virtues of that great and
good man, Lord Dudley Stuart. He therefore proposed
that the resolution should be rescinded, in order that
they might be at liberty to entertain a plan for an inde•
dependent charitable institution.

Mr. C. SZULCZEWSKI seconded the amendment.

Earl FORTESEUE did not agree wlth the gentleman who
had moved the amendment. He gave him every credit
for his laudable desire to couple with the testimonial to
their lamented friend a charitable institution to alleviate
the infliction of those suffering from blindness ; but he
did not think the establishment of almshouses at all Cal-
culated to effect the object he wished; he should, there-
fore, strongly oppose the amendment.
ardp,
re.aoc
h' O'Connor,
opposed the
eF F. l . G°l d
amendment,s m i da,
nadn dr eMc 0 rm.
EuPerni tduehci
those hospitals that appeared to them to be the most
eligible for the testimonial.
Mr. Zaba, Mr. Birkbeck replied, st
place, when there appeared—
,. . 141_7
After a few words in favour of thendamaedindvnimint ftrooort
........... :- .... i ilia report wanfslr
ga nst .....
there.yo.fsnowtheies
lA'or
ithe amendment.. .....
.....:.........
The motion for the adoption o
fore lost.
OITZT said, as the committee had
The Earl of If ABB'
itiataeetr:atthLwaonnr
Lord
employ
Dudley
the application
competent for them to entertain
1-liselgameinted kinsman,
Refuge
fund,when
theytl se
could
:inobottyo_dctohoneb;
committee of the "Nightly,.. ; and he thought,
now rescinded the
amountresaolnutiinoßntitouftitohl29tichhJmiutnaiie.n,
accordancean dwhinio-cfrwetas.ll:2o
ril tonstgutrhti gee i nut
usefulness
uil)
memory
guide principles so entirely inhad for
of Managers of the ' Nightly Refuge' to per.
which
hwith this
its
vie entertained
therefore begged to m0ve......“ T
Earl FORTRSCIE regretted tbitlaatthteheinpsylroposal from
introducedpatbcecerieodto.eadr.d He h not come under their notice
teaiytBtutSatu a;unra Stuart
n;t
obh
earlier::
his noble friend,
A ,r_sub-commi entirely concurred in all that had fallen from
and had much pleasure in seconding
the rao •
ti°ll ; which was carried unanimously.
sub-committee, consisting of the Earl of Harrowby,
Mr. w• L. Birkbeck, Mr. Poland, Mr. C. Szulczewskt,
Mr. P. P. C. Johnston, and Mr. Henry Hayward, was
appointed, with full authority to confer with the cora•
naittee of the Refuge, to snake the best arrangements for
perpetuating the memory of Lord Dudley Stuart 1111
connection with that charity.
On the motion of Mr. W. L. BIRKBECK, seconded by
Captain TOWNESIIIND, R.N., M.P., the secretary WWI
instructed to convey the unanimous thanks of the coin•
vnittee to the several metropolitan general hospitals
for their:very liberal offers with reference to the testis
monial.

After some formal business, and a vote of thanks to
the chairman for his kindness in presiding on the ocoa•
sion, the proceedings terminated.

THE FRENCH LOAN.—The inconvenience caused by
the delay in the apportionment of the French loan eon•
tinues to be felt in the money-market. No positive in•
formation has yet been received from Paris on the sub.
ject, but it is said the allotment to each appijaant
Will
be a little below 16 per cent, of the amount asked for,
the exact proportion named being 1512.

IMPERIAL PARLI AMEN T.

HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.)

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.
Lord MONTEAGLE presented ten petitions from
various places signed by several thousands of persons in
favour of the Sale of Beer Bill.
Lord CONGLETON presented a petition from the an-
nual conference of the Wesleyan ministers against the
sale of liquors on the Lord's-day.
LIMITED LIABILITY BILL.
Lord REDESDALE presented a petition from the
Merchants' House of Glasgow, against the Limited
Liability Bill. The noble lord took occasion to press
upon the Government the propriety of withdrawing this
bill for the session. It was obvious by the progress
made in the Appropriation Bill, it had been intended to
close the session on Saturday. He complained
of the unprecedented course taken by the Go
vernment to force on an important measure
after the second reading of the Appropriation
Bill. He referred to such measures of as urgent a cha-
racter as the Limited Liability Bill having been with-
drawn in consequence of the lateness of the session.
Even in the morning sitting of the House of Commons
on that day the Government had withdrawn the Leases
of Settled Estates Bill. lie, therefore, was at a loss
to account for the conduct of the Government in persever-
ing with a measure likethe Limited Liability Bill—a !Ilea-
i
sore which involved so serious a change n our commer-
cial legislation, and which was open to so many objec-
tions. He did not think that the Government were pay-
ing a proper deference to the character of that house in
pressing forward a measure the details of which it wai
utterly impossible to consider with satisfaction at this
period of the session.
Lord CAMPBELL thought the Government were
bound to proceed with the measure, after the pledges
which they had given and the expectations they bad
thereby raised '
but he believed the result of the bill
•
would be general disappointment.
Earl GRANVILLE deprecated any discussion on the
measure until it was regularly before them.
NUISANCES REMOVAL (AMENDMENT) BILL.
On the motion of the Duke of ARGYLL, this bill was
`read a third time and passed.
CONICAL FLOUR-MILL COMPANY.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
PUBLIC-HOUSES (IRELAND) BILL.
Earl GRANVILLE rose to move that, inasmuch as
the. bill for the Transfer of Licenses of Public-houses in
Ireland is intended to remedy a construction of the law
in relation to the transfer of licenses which has been but
recently arrived at, the introduction of the bill took place
at a late period, and as the decisions on the existing law
bare been such as to be prodnctive of much public in-
convenience, consequently the circumstances which
render legislation on the subject-matter of the said bill
expedient are of such urgency as to render the immediate
consideration of the same necessary.
Lord MONTEAGLE said the course taken by the
Government within the last few evenings was such as
to render the standing orders of their lordships' honie a
nullity.
Earl GRANVILLE denied the Government were at
all to blame for the course referred to. They had no
alternative but to press certain bills, which they consi-
dered of a most urgent and important character, upon
their lordships' attention. He would not, however, press
his resolution if there was any strong objection to it.
Lord ST. LEONARDS deprecated the conduct of the
Government in reference to the standing orders of the
house.
Earl GREY charged the Government with forcing
hills through the house against the rules of the house
and the wishes of their lordships.
Earl GRANVILLE considered that the noble earl
was not at all justified in using such language towards
the Government.
The Marquis of BATH thought that the course taken
by the Government was most objectionable.
Earl GREY reiterated his objection to the proceed-
ings of the Government.
After a few words from Earl GRANVILLE,
The motion was agreed xo, and the bill was read a
second time. _ .

PUBLIC HEALTH ACT.
This bill was read a second time.
DISEASES PREVENTION BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
LIMITED LIABILITY BILL.

On the motion for going into committee on the Limited
Liability Bill,
Lord ST. LEONARDS expressed a hope that, when
he showed how the law at present stood, and the na-
ture of the bill, the Government would see the necessity
of making the concession to arguments and facts which
they were not disposed to yield to the small number of
peers in attendance to oppose the measure. He had
never obstructed useful legislation, but this was a mea-
sure which he should oppose to his utmost unless the
Government would make such concessions as would
make it a safe bill. Should the noble lord be forced to
go into a select committee he would undertake that the
whole subject should be considered in a day, or in a few
hours, and he would promise not to offer any factious
opposition.
Lord CAMPBELL earnestly advised his noble friend
to assent to the select committee. In two hours the
bill could be considered, and he had not the smallest
doubt but in a very short time it would be rendered in-
nocuous.
Earl GREY could assure their lordships that he
would do anything to promote the bill's passing in the
present session, but he could not be so sanguine as to
think that it could be brought into the shape in which it
should pass in the course of a few hours. He should
move that the order of the day for going into committee
be discharged, and that the bill be referred to a select
committee.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY referred to the
evidence given before the commission for the purpose of
showing that a very large proportion of it was in favour
of the principle of the limited liability proposed by the
bill. He was strongly of opinion that it would be un-
wise to endanger the progress of the bill by referring it
to a select committee, and maintained that the house
was perfectly competent in committee to discuss any
suggestions for the improvement of the measure.
Lord MONTEAGLE contended that their lordships
could not in a committee of the house discuss with effect
the amendments necessary to be introduced in the bill.
The bill as it now stood admitted the principle of the
necessity of safeguards, and in his opinion it ought not
to be allowed to pass without a more complete system of
safeguards being provided.
Lord REDESDALE, after pointing out the defects
and omissions of the measure, urged the Government not
to press it further at the present period of the session.
Earl GRANVILLE said he had a public duty to per-
form, and it appeared to him after what had taken place
that it was impossible to agree to the proposition of his
noble friend. He could not understand any course by
which their lordships would more stultify themselves
than to withdraw this bill after passing a resolution
affirming that it was a matter of urgency their lordships
should at once proceed to its consideration. If those re-
strictions were to be introduced, it ought to be done
in a committee of the whole house, in justice to that
large number of the middle classes who were anxious to
see the bill passed into a law, and in order that hey
might be informed as to the nature of those restrictions.
Their lordships divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment ll
Against it 2B
Majority for going into committee.. —l7
A proposition was then made for the adjournment of
the house, which was resisted by Earl Granville and
Lord Campbell, and after a brief discussion the house
went into committee.
Lord ST. LEONARDS moved that the chairman
should report progress.
Earl GREY hoped that the motion would not be
pressed ; but again protested against the course taken
by the Government in forcing on this measure. As he
knew the Government could defeat the motion, he asked
his noble friend to postpone the motion until they saw
in what spirit the discussion was carried on by thnobre'
lords on the Government benches.
After some discussion,
Clause 1 was proposed for adoption.
Lord ST. LEONARDS handed in an amendment, to
the effect, as was understood, that 10,0001. should be
Inserted in the clause as the minimum amount of capital
to be required, in shares of not less than 251.
Lord MONTEAGLE supported the amendment.

Lord CAMPBELL also supported the amendment,
Earl GREY felt there was no good argument against
the- amendment, which was, in fact, the original pro-
posal of the Government themselves.
The Duke of ARGYLL held the opinion that there
was really no good argument in favour of the amend-
ment. They were not to dictate z.o individual men And
to companies the branches of trade to which they were
to apply their capital.
Lord ST. LEONARDS reminded their lordships
that in the measure originally introduced by the Go-
vernment themselves 20,000/. was introduced, instead
of 10,0001., which he sought by his amendment to get
ingerted.
Lord CAMPBELL supported the amendment. He
thought that every one should be bound to fulfil his en-
gagement.
i
every e LORD CHANCELLOR fully admitted that
t,hoe one should be bound to make good his engagem.mt,
question was, what were the engagements wider
this bill— whether they would not enable parties to enter
• into a limited instead of an unlimited liability.
• The committee divided._
For the original clause—Contents is

Non-contents 9
Majority against the amendment 9
Earl GREY moved an amendment to the effect that
the shareholders should not be less than twenty-five in
number.
Earl GRANVILLE agreed to this amendment.
Clause 1, as thus amended, was ordered to stand part
of the bill:
' On clause 2,
' The LORD CHANCELLORproposed an amendment
insuring that before any existing company should re-
ceive the benefits of this bill its solvency should be ascer-
tained, and, that not less than 20 per cent, be paid up.
Earl GREY proposed words more stringent than those
moved by the Lord ChanCellor to the same effect.
The LORD CHANCELLOR adopted Earl Grey's
words, and the clause was amended accordingly.
Clause 2 was agreed to.
' In clause 3 a similar amendment, and some verbal
alterations were made, and the clause as amended was
ordered to stand part of the bill.
e On clause 4,
' Lord CAMPBELL moved the insertion of words com-
pelling the bills of exchange, promissory notes, and
cheques of the companies under the bill to be noted with
. the words "limited liability." ,
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY agreed to the
amendment.

*t,

Clause 4, as amended, was agreed to.
On clause 5,
Earl GREY moved an amendment, the effect of which
was to provide that 20 per cent. of a reserve fund should
be kept as a security for the creditors.
Earl GRANVILLE objected to it.
Lord CAMPBELL said it was contrary to the prin-
ciple of the bill.
The amendment was negatived without a division.

•
On clause 6,
Earl GREY said it was unnecessary to provide an inde-
pendent audit for the accounts of the companies, in order
to prevent the issue of delusive reports. He proposed a
proviso to the effect that the commissioners for auditing
the public accounts should be empowered to appoint
auditors to examine the accounts of the companies under
this bill.
Earl GRANVILLE said it would be impossible to
have any system of audit such as the noble earl contem-
plated.
Lord MONTEAGLE thought there would be consi-
derable difficulty in carrying out the audit effectually,
but the experiment was worth trying.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY objected to the
appointment on the ground of the expense which it would
entail upon the companies formed under the act.
Earl GREY denied that the expenses of an indepen-
dent auditor appointed by the Government would be
greater than that which would attend the appointment
of auditors by the companies themselves.
Lord CAMPBELL thought if there was to be an audit
it was imperative that it should be of an independent cha-
racter, and the appointment of auditors by a public
department would not involve any greater difficulty
or expense than would be incurred by the appointment
of auditors by the companies themselves.
After some further conversation the committee di-
vided, when there were--
For the proviso lO
Against lB
Majority —B
The clause was then agreed to.
Earl GREY then adverted to the slender attendance
of peers, and moved that the house should resume.
Earl GRANVILLE opposed the motion, which was sup-
ported by Lord MONTEAGLE.
Earl GREY said that he should press the motion, for
he felt it was impossible to give the bill that deliberate
consideration which was requisite. He believed that
the last proviso was rejected by the Government, not
because they thought some such provision was undesir-
able, but because they feared its adoption would prevent
the measure being passed in the limited period pf the
session which still remained.
Earl GRANVILLE denied that any reason of the
kind alluded to had influenced the Government in oppos-
ing the proviso in question. He opposed it because he
believed it would not work advantageously, and in that
opinion he was supported by high authority.
After some further conversation, the committtee di-
vided, when there were—

Contents
Non-contents
Majority against reporting progress —lO
The 7th and Bth clauses were agreed to.
Earl GREY then moved the insertion of a clause to
the effect that if the directors of any joint-stock company
should declare a dividend after the company was insol-
vent, or the payment of which would render the com-
pany insolvent, they were to be liable for the debts of the
company to the whole extent of their property.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY opposed the clause
on the ground that it created a difference in the liability
of shareholders and directors.

Earl GREY said that a similar provision was in force
in all other countries in which the principle of limited
liability was in force.
Lord DENMAN supported the clause.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that he did not see
any objection to the clause, which was agreed to.
Earl GREY then proposed the addition of another
clause, declaring that no note of hand given by a share-
holder should be considered as payment of capital stock
—that no loan should be made to a shareholder—and
that any officer of a company making one should he
liable to the full extent of his property.
This clatise also was agreed to.
Earl GREY then moved the adoption of another
clause, enacting that no company should be allowed at
one time to contract liabilities to a greater amount that
their capital.
After a short conversation, the clause was withdrawn.
Earl GREY then moved another clause, adopted, like
the former ones, from the laws of the State of Massachu-
setts, subjecting the directors or officers of any company
to unlimited liability in case they were guilty of wilful
false representation in any notice or account given or
rendered by them in pursuance of the provisions of this
or any other act.
The LORD CHANCELLOR did not object to the prin-
ciple of the clause, but thought that the wording would
require alteration.
Earl GREY withdrew the clause, stating his intention
to propose it in an amended form on the bringing up of
the report.

Clauses 9 and 10 were agreed to.
Lord MONTEAGLE moved a clause directing the
winding up of the affairs of any company which had
lost three-fourths of its subscribed capital.
The LORD CHANCELLOR opposed the clause as
unnecessary. The Winding•up Act would meet the case.
The elapse was agreed to, as were clauses 11 and 12.
Clauses 13 and 14 were struck out.

The preamble was agreed to, and the house resumed.
Lord REDESDALE hoped that sufficient time would
be given for the consideration of the report, and with
that view he proposed that the bill should be reported
on Monday.

Earl GREY agreed in every word that had fallen from
his noble friend.

After a few words from Lord CAMPBELL,
Earl GRANVILLE suggested that the third reading
of the bill should he fixed fur Monday, and they would
then have ample time to consider the amendments.
Earl GREY protested against an important commer-
cial measure of this kind being forced through the house
without time for consideration.

Earl GRANVILLE considered that no bill had re-
ceived more consideration during the session. No bill
had been more fully discussed in detail, or with more

It was then agreed that the bill should be reported to-
morrow ',Ulla day).

The Sale of Beer Bill was read a third time.
The Militia Ballot Suspension Bill was read a third
time and passed.

The Consolidated Fund Appropriation Bill and the
Exchequer-bills (7,000,000/.) Bill were read a second
time.

The remaining orders were disposed of, and their
lordships adjourned at one o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS--(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair shortly after 12 o'clock.

NEW WRITS.
On the motion
.of Mr. HA YTER a new writ was
ordered for Kidderminster, in the place of Mr.
Lowe, who has accepted the office of Vice-Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade ; also a now writ for
Kilmarnock, in the place of Mr. Bouverie, who
has accepted the office of President of the Poor Law
Board ; also a new writ for the borough of Hertford,
in the place of Mr. Cowper, who has accepted the office
of President of the Board of Health.

CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
UNION OF CONTIGUOUS BENEFICES BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
CRIME AND OUTRAGE (IRELAND) CON-

TINUANCE BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
SCHOOL GRANTS (SECURITY FOR APPLI-

CATION) BILL.
This bill was alsi) read a third time and passed.
LEASES AND, SALES_ OF SETTLED ESTATES

BILL.

The housr4 then went into committee upon this bill.
On clailse 20,
Mr. WHITESIDE at some length contended that
this cause had been ntroduced virtually for the pur-
pose of preventing the act applying to the case of Sir
Thomas Wilson. It had been unjustly stated that that
gentleman bad wished to enclose Hampstead Heath,
when, in fact, he had only sought to obtain leasing
powers ; in repeated attempts for which object he
reti
eualladtbimeerlien a
gobstructed byT
hteh the
hon. f a ls
ande reportsleareed set
gentlemani n e i cir-
culation
a frieentdte,rwillvioernh
hSeirmTaileiotmasdWlilasoriny hehimewseeldf, Ntvhrii.sttetno
have been the case
TMhre.
57,11408 supported the, clause.
lcoaninceludcede by pointing out the
manifest injustice of'
P.Portcer thse.
clause.GENEßeALsaid
edly true that this claeufseithad. been introducewasd
uinto
o utbhte-
bill, in consequence
teaniitenwgsome clause of an
stated to him that
explicit nature it would bee°nBqaamee
unless the bill did
impossible. to carry its
so as to give to the im-
tsheceonedlaurseeaditneg.he Afrtamthede
he did net wish
pression that it was directed°
he had
ticular individlial. Having, therefore,aaint any
par-
how this difficulty could be best met,
bodied a principle in the first lines of the 41'1 era-
which the spirit of the clause perfectly accorded.wwasith
—(hear)—and he maintained that that principle
sound and correct one. With regard, however, to 'Siar
Thomas Wilson, let him renew his application to the
house, and he (the Solicitor-General) would undertake
to say that when that application was made the recol-
lection of this debate would induce it to give that gen-
tleman's claims the best and most liberal attention ; and
beyond question ParliaMent was the most fitting place
to adjudicate upon them. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BARROW said his support to the clause would
be based upon his repugnance to the general principle of
interfering with the wills of testators.
Sir J. V. SHELLEY did not approve of the kind of
side-wind which had been brought to bear upon this
clause, and supported it on the ground that to expunge
ft would endanger the further progress of the measure.
Sir J. GRAHAM was quite taken by surprise by the
debate which had just been originated. He had come
down to the house to take part in the discussion of a
measure which_ stood-a little lower on the paper—be
meant the Despatch of Business in the Court of Chan-
cery Bill—and he must say that a Court of Equity which
ibad of late been purged of many defects, would, in
Commons could
t:_se°,Peir?ion, be a much safer and more fitting tribunal for
'4 a
lesion of the claims which had been brought for-
ward the case of Sir Thos. Wilson than the House of
thought that it w
Hampstead-heath be.
He was as great an admirer of
as any person could possibly be, and
tion of the peopleaaaanoanducive to the health and recren-
that, rather than it
shouldou gbhet nothe should
o b e enclosed,adv eea e t andth e
purchase, on Crown,n, of any rights which
behalf the Crown, i
Sir Thomas Wilson might have n these lands. As to