The Sun.
London, England, 1855-06-13 00:00:00

I AIPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

7, HOUSE OF COMMONS-(YESTERDAY.)

METROPOLIS LOCAL MANAGEMENT BILL.
Clause 116 was agreed to with a few verbal amend-
ments.
Clause 117 was adopted without discussion.
On clause 118 being put, which gave protection to the
water companies of the metropolis, some 'discussion took
place, and several amendments were proposed.
Mr. Alderman CHALLIS objected to the clause, con-
sidering that the water companies of the metropolis were
sufficiently secure, and required no protection. If the
clause was persevered in as proposed to be amended, he
should certainly give it his decided opposition.
After some further discussion the amendments were
withdrawn, and the clause as originally proposed was
ordered to stand part of the bill.
Clauses up to 123 were agreed to without material
amendments.

On clause 124 being put,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said that it was objection-
able, inasmuch as it would call upon all parishes to pay
their rates in a lumping sum.
Mr. WILLIAMS was afraid that the clause would
greatly interfere with the rights of electors.
Sir B. HALL said that he bad been advised that the
clause would not interfere with the rights of electors,
inasmuch as the public officers of any parish might, if
they chose, make these rates payable at a time that
would not interfere with the rights of electors,
The clause was then agreed to.
The home then resumed.
The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and obtained
leave to sit again on Thursday, at 12 o'clock,
The house adjourned shortly before four to six o'clock,

The house resumed at 6 o'clock.
PETITIONS.
Mr. Cowan presented a petition from two places in
Scotland, in favour of the Lord Advocate's Bill for Edu-
cation. Petitions were also presented by Capt. Scobell,
from Bath, in favour of the Sunday Trading Bill ; by
Mr. Schelefield, from the working-men of the metropo-
lis, in favour of opening the National Gallery and Bri-
tish Museum on Sunday ; and by Mr. Williams, from
the clergy and architects of Lambeth, in favour of the
repeal of the Beer Act of last session.
OYSTER FISHERIES.
On the motion of Sir G. B. PECHELL, copies of the
several letters from the Board of Trade of the 28th day
of April, 1847, to the Commissioners of Customs,
and of the 31st day of July, 1849, to Messrs. Royston,
Alston, and Gibbs, on the subject of the oyster fishery
in the seas on the east coasts of England ; and a return
of ail British and French fishing vessels that have
been seized under the provisions of the act for carry-
ing into effect the convention with France concerning
the fisheries, since the Ist day of January, 1852 ; with
the date of such seizure, were ordered to be laid upon
the table.

Capt. L. VERNON, adverting to the intention of
placing the Ordnance Military Corps under the Corn-
xiander-in-chief, to the pressing necessity for keeping up
the effective strength of the corps of Royal Engineers,
and to the present half•pay list of that corps, asked the
Under Secretary for War whether it was the intention to
make any arrangements whereby officers of the corps of
Royal Engineers on half-pay, who are able and willing
to serve, but who, from its being a seniority corps, are
barred from returning to its effective strength, may,
equally with other half-pay and unattached officers be
employed on the staff of the army, or be appointed to
such civil positions under Government as are now held
by officers of Royal Engineers on full-pay, who would
then be enabled to return the duty roster of the corps,
whereby the State would have the services of every avail-
able officer of Royal Engineers, whether on full pay or
half-pay ?
Mr. PEEL said it was not necessary to make any
arrangements on the subject. There was nothing in any
shape in the regulations which prevented officers on half-
pay from getting employment.
VICTORIA GOVERNMENT BILL.
Mr. J. BELL gave notice that on the second reading
of the Victoria Government Bill he should move that it
be read a second time that day six months.

ADMINISTRATITE REFORM.
Sir E. B. LYTTON wished the house to come to some
understanding as to the course of business on Friday
next. The hon. member for Aylesbury had given notice
of a motion, on the order of the day for going into com-
mittee of supply, on the subject of administrative reform.
Now, according to the rules of the house, no amend-
ment could be moved on that motion, and as there were
many hon. members who were favourable to adminis-
trative reform who could not accept the terms of the
hon. member's motion, it would be obviously unfair to
the house and to hon. members in connection with
their constituents, to be compelled either to appear in
hostility to a principle which they advocated, or
else accept with the principle the positions con-
tained in a motion which they believed to be inaccurate
er unsound. He would suggest to the noble lord at the
head of the Government the propriety of permitting the
question to be brought forward as a substantive motion,
in which case he (Sir B. Lytton) would submit an amend-
ment to the house which, he believed, would embody
the views entertained by many hon. gentlemen, and
which might meet the general acquiescence of the house.
Lord PALMERSTON said he had already stated that
the hon. member for Aylesbury should have precedence
on Fridsy, and it was his intention to move the post-
ponement of the orders for that purpose. He could as-
sure the hon. baronet that the Government had no wish
except that the question should receive the fullest discus-
sion, and be considered in such a manner as to enable
every hon. member to express his opinion if he should
think fit so to do. If the house thought it desirable the
hon. member should bring forward the motion as a sub-
stantive motion, he should have no objection to make
such arrangements as would enable him to bring it on in
that shape. (Hear.)
Mr. LAYARD was willing to leave the matter in the
hands of the house. He was ready to bring forward his
motion either on the house going into supply or as a
substantive motion on Friday, or some early day.—
(Cries of " Friday.")
Mr. DISRAELI hoped there would be no mistake as
to the arrangement. It appeared to be the opinion of
the house, as well as of the noble lord, that the motion
should be brought on on Friday in a substantive form.
Mr. SCULLY trusted that if the hon. baronet pro-
posed any amendment it would be a substantial one,
which might lead to some beneficial results. He had
himself given notice of an amendment which, without
blaming any one for what had occurred, would, he be-
lieved, lead to some substantial improvement.
Lord PALMERSTON said that if the hon. member
for Aylesbury would give notice to-night of his intention
to submit to the house a substantive motion on Friday,
he would engage to move on that day that the orders be
postponed. lie trusted that any amendments which
might be proposed would be placed on the books in suf-
ficient time. (Hear.)
Mr. LAYARD then gave notice that he would bring
the subject before the house as a substantive motion
on Friday.