The Sun.
London, England, 1864-07-15 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

ROUSE OF LORDS—Last Evening,
ROYAL ASSENT.
The Royal assent was given by commission to the fol-
lowing bills :—Tlnion Assessment Committee Act Amend-
ment—Coventry Free Grammar School—Superannuation
(Union Officers) Government Annuities Act—Divorce and
Matrimonial Causes—Greek Loan—Life Annuities and
Life Assurance--Worcester, Bromyard, and Leomins-
ter Railway Settled Estates Act Amendment
Durham University—Sunningdale and Cambridge Town
Railway—Argyllshire Roads—lndependent Gas Company
—New Quay and Cornwall Junction Railway—Midland
Railway (Bath and Thornbury)—Leeds, Bradford, and
Halefort Junction—London and South Western Railways
—Oswestry and Newton and other Railways (arrangements)
—Llandidlo and Teiffe Valleyßailway—Bodmin Railway—
London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway—(Tunbridge
Wells)--Scottish and North Eastern Railway—Southamp-
ton and Netley Rai iway—Rammell's Patent—Furness Gas
and Water—Hayling's Railway—London Docks, St.
Katherine's Docks, and Victoria Docks Amalgamation—
Stockport and Ashton Roads—Wisbeach Water—Grand
Western Canal and Bristol and Exeter Railway—
Newry and Armagh Railway—Carnarvon and Llanberris
Railway—Fleetwood Docks--Vale of Crickhowell Rail-
way—Crieff and Methvin Junction and Branch Railway—
Finchley, Willesden and Acton Railway—Londonderry
Improvement—Cheddar Valley and Yalton Railway—
Wersum Valley Railway—Pembroke and Tenby
Railway—Wellington and Drayton Railway—Helston
and Penryn Railway—London and North Western Rail-
way—London, Chatham, and Dover Railway (No. 2)—
Shrewsbury and Welchpool Railway—Charing-eross Rail-
way—Peeblesshire Roads (IN o. 2)—Belfast Improvement
(No. 2) _Kingston and Eardeley Railway—Southern
Railway—Ardrossan Harbour—Bolton Improvement—
Great Northern Railway (Barnet Branch)—Wallasey
Embankment—Llanelly Harbour Improvement—Maccles-
field,
Bollington, and Maple Railway—Watford and Edge-
ware Junction Railway.
The Lords' Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor,
Viscount Sydney, and Earl St. Germans.
Their lordships adjourned during pleasure.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the woolsack
at the usual hour.
PERILS OF RAILWAY TRAVELLING.
Lord BROUGHAM called attention to this subject, and
said it was exceedingly desirable that some steps should be
taken to insist on some arrangement by which the pas-
sengers in railway carriages should have means of com-
municating with the guard. On foreign railways the sys-
tem was universal. He concluded by asking whether the
Government intended taking steps to compel railway com-
panies to effect such a desirable object.
Earl GRANVILLE said the subject was engaging the
attention of the Government. His experience of foreign
railways was, that whilst the guard could communicate
with the passengers, the passengers could not communicate
with the guard.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were read a third time :—Whitby
Water—Bourton on the Water Railway—lsle of Wight
Water—Hamilton and Streathern and Caledonian Railway
—Clyde Navigation—Bristol Port Extension Railway—
Stockport Distrist Water—Blyth and Lyme Railway—
Torbay and Brixham Railway—Midland Railway—North
London Railway (Additional Powers).

PENAL SERVI JUDE.
The Commons' amendments to this bill were then taken
into consideration.

The Earl of SHAF TESBURY moved that their
lordships insist on their amendments. Clause 4
provided that the ticket of leave man should report
himself once a month, but their lordships were
of opinion that such an arrangement would be pro-
ductive of mach evil, and accordingly altered the clause so
as to make it compulsory upon the ticket-of-leave man to
report himself after leaving the prison, and after that as
often as might be agreed upon. The bill went back to the
Commons, where their lordships' amendment was objected
to, and the clause was restored to its original state. He
moved that their lordships insist on their amendment, as he
would rather imperil the passing of the bill than agree to
such a cruel and unnecessary provision. The result
of making a ticket of leave man report himself once a month
would in effect be to prevent him ever obtaining honest
employment, and under such circumstance the only course
open to him was to relapse into crime. He contended that
if these unfortunate men were taken by the hand at the proper

time it would be the means of making them honest and in.

dustrious, bul if they were thrust back into their old courses,
by having to report themselves, as the bill now stood, evil,
and not good, would be the result.
The Earl of CARNARVON supported the amendments
of the Commons. _ _

Earl GRANVILLE said that he thought there would

be great danger of losing the bill if their lordships insisted
upon their amendments. Ile should therefore reoommend
them to accept the measure in the form in which it had
come up from the Lower House.
Lord HOUGHTON should prefer the bill to be lost
rather than that it should be carried with this objectionable
provision.
The Earl of LICHFIELD objected to the indiscriminate
application of the system of supervision provided by the
clause to all criminals coming out of a convict prison. He
did not think that police supervision over the discharged
convict had succeeded in Ireland—it had certainly failed in
France. He would rather the bill should be lost than that
such a clumsy piece of legislation as that embodied in the
present clause should be adopted under the name of police
supervision.
The house then divided upon the question whether they
should insist on their amendments from which the Com-
mons had disagreed. There were—
C entente
Non-contents
Majority —37
The Commons' amendments were therefore agreed to.
THE PUBLIC AND REFRESHMENT HOUSES
BILL.
This bill was read a third time.
On the question that the bill should pass.
The Earl of DONOUGHMO RE moved an amendment
for the purpose of rendering the application of the bill com-
pulsory throughout the country. If it was good for the
metropolis it must be good for other places.
Earl GRANVILLE opposed the amendment.
The house divided, when there were—
Contents
Non-contents
Majority ..
The amendment was therefore rejected.
The bill was then passed.
The Railways (Ireland) Acts Amendment Bill and the
Drainage and Improvement of Land (Ireland) Bill were
read a second time.
THE FACTORY ACTS EXTENSION BILL.

Earl GRANVILLE moved that the house should go
into committee on this bill.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY expressed the satisfaction
with which he had witnessed the change which had taken
place in public opinion with regard to this t-übject since the
Ten Hours' Bill passed. He believed that this bill would
have the happy Effect of affording the protection of the law
to more than 100,000 children, and of affording them the
opportunity of obtaining a good education. The roll earl
then eulogised in high terms the conduct and character of
the working classes of the country, adverting especially to
the admirable manner in which the Lancashire people had
conducted themselves throughout the cotton famine, He
believed that the fact that, under so severe a trial, there had
been no sedition, nor any disturbance of the peace, was
greatly due to the protection which had been given to the
people by the passing of the Factory Acts.
The bill then passed through committee.
The Indemnity Bill passed through committee.
The Civil Bill Courts (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time and passed-
The India Stocks Transfer Act Amendment Bill, and the
Defence Act Amendment Bill, passed through committee.
The India Office Bill was read a third time and passed.
THE GOVERNMENT OFFICES.
Lord RE DESD.,A.LE called the attention of the house to
the line of frontage of the new Government offices in Down-
ing-street and King-street, and asked whether there was
any intention to acquire other property in that neighbour-
hood for other offices and the improvement of the approach
to the Houses of Parliament. He thought the Government
ought to purchase the whole block of houses between
George-street and the new Government offices. He wished
to know whether it was intended to widen King street.
Earl GRANVILLE said it would be rcquisite to buy the
block of buildings between King-street and Parliament-
street in order to give a decent approach to the new build-
ings. That purchase was now under the consideration of
the Government.
The house adjourned at twenty minutes past seven
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—Last Evening.
The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock.

NEW MEMBER.

Sir M. BEACH took the oaths and his seat onhis election
for East Gloucestershire.

ROYAL COMMISSION.

Sir A. CLIFFORD, Deputy Yeoman Usher of the
Black Rod, summoned the members to the bar of the
Upper House to hear the Royal assent given by commis.
sion to several bills for which see Lords' report.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Albert Bridge and Approaches —Erith Tramways—Water-
ford and Limerick, Limerick and Foynes, and Rathkeale
and Newcastle Junction Railways—Waterford and Wex-
ford Railway and Rosslare Harbour—West London. Docks
and Warehouses—North Western and Charing-crass Rail.
way.

STANDING ORDERS REVISION.
Colonel W. PATTEN moved for a select co/ nmittee to
revise the Standing Orders :—Mr Massey, Lori I Stanley,
Mr Edward Pleydell Bouverie, Mr Milner G ibson, Mr
Sotheron Estcourt, Mr Gathorne Hardy, Lo rd Robert
Cecil, Mr Ingham, Mr Edward Egerton, Mr Scourfield,
Mr ilassard, Mr Adair, Air Lime, Colonel French,

and Colonel Wilson Patten. Power to send for
persons, papers, and records ; Five to be the quorum.
The hon. and gallant member said that it had been custom-
ary at the close of the session to reconsider the standing
orders with a view to their improvement, availing themselves
of the experience of the session. There were no less than 505
private bills this se-sion to be decided el iring; the session,
and it was impossible to get through them in the com-
mittees of the House of Commons so as to
enable them to be dealt with in the other house
in time. Of course they hal as much right in the House
of Lords to have their standing orders adhered to as they
had in this house in regard to private business. It had
been proposed to have a tribunal external to this house to
deal with the facts of any private bills, and to have the
merits considered by a committee of the house. He did
not feel, when this proposition was made, that he could
accede to it. A proposal had also been made
to reduce the number of members of committees to 'two.
He was also opposed to that proposal, because ho thought
it would disturb public confidence in the decisions of com-
mittees. He thought it would be advisable to have the
number of committees reduced from five to four, and to
give the chairman a double vote in cases of difficulty.

Sir J. SHELLEY said he thought more time should be
given to consider this question. He gave notice that to-
morrow he would move that the hon. baronet, the member
for Eversham (Sir H. Willoughby), and the hon. and learned
member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr Ayrton) be added to
the committee.

Sir L. PALK drew attention to the unnecessary number
of witnesses that were called. to prove a particular point,
notwithstanding the intimation of the committee that they
were satisfied with reference to that point. The reply vir-
tually of counsel was that the committee would take the
conduct of the bills into their hands. He thought that
this subject should be one of the subjects on which the
committee proposed should decide,
After some remarks from Sir J, FERGITSSON and Mr
AYHToN,
Mr M. GIBSON said he thought this question should
be referred to the select committee of standing orders.
Mr HODGSON and Mr WHALLEY made a few observa-
tions.

Lord STANLEY advocated the subject being referred to
a select committee, and he considered that reducing the
number of members of a committee to three would give the
members greater responsibility, and be attended with benefit.
There was no necessity for any new regulation relative to
the admission of a number of witnesses to particular points,
as that power was vested in committees. He contended
that the real remedy to meet an evil which was manifest in
regard to private bill legislation, was to extend the hours in
the day on which committees sat, which at present were
about three hours and a half.

Lord E. HOWARD drew attention to the hardships
inflicted in certain districts by bills being promoted for
railways which it was never intended to construct, but
which were intended merely to embarrass landed proprietors
in the neighbourhood.
Lord R. CECIL said that a committee of the house
should have the power to impose costs in the event of
frivolous objections being made to an undertaking.
Mr MASSEY agreed with the noble lord (Lord R. Cecil)
as regarded the infliction of costa, and he thought the ex-
periment by the hon. and gallant member (Col. W. Patten)
was entitled to an experiment, although he saw serious dif-
ficulties in dealing with the subject. He thought the house
should have sufficient confidence in the standing orders
committee to allow the subject to be referred to that tribunal,
in order that a national scheme might be agreed on, which
from the zeal and intelligence of this committee might be
expected to obtain the sanction of the house.
Mr SOTHERN ESTCOURT wished his name to be
withdrawn from the committee, which was agreed to.

PRIVATE BILL REFEREES.
On the motion of Col. W. PATTEN, that it was expe-
dient that referees should be constituted under the autho•
rity of this house for the more speedy and econo-
mical decision of certain questions of fact com-
monly arising in the proceedings upon private bills,

the resolution was ordered to be an instruction to the
Standing Orders Commitee.

CAPTAIN DE BURGH.
Mr HANBURY asked the Under Secretary of State for
War, whether Captain Da Burgh should be allowed to
command the Uxbridge Yeomanry Cavalry when charges
which are preferred against him are still unsettled ; and
whether the order for the annual assembling of the
yeomanry can be countermanded until the matters pending
be cleared up ?
The Marquis of HARTINGTON explained that Captain
De Burgh had satisfied the Lord Lieutenant of the county
in reference to the complaints made of him.

NEW ZEALAND LOAN BILL.
On the order for reading the Now Zealand Guarantee o
Loan Bill a second time,
Mr A. MILLS moved as an amendment that the bill be
read a second time that day three months. The hon. mem-
ber said that he had good authority for asserting that, if
the present war lasted until the month of April next, it
would cost the English taxpayer not less than a million and
a half sterling in the course of the year. It further ap-
peared that Mr Ward, the agent for the colony, and the
negotiator of the proposed loan, had frankly confessed that
he had no power to bind the New Zealand Legislature,
either in respect of the repayment of the loan or the con-
tribution of the colony towards the military expenditure.
The question then was, whether the House of Commons
ought, under these circumstances, to guarantee this million
loan. It was said that the revenue of New Zealand
amounted to £700,000 a year, and that nine-tenths of it
were derived from customs. If that were so, why did they
not go into the open market and raise a loan, without
coming in forma pauperis and asking for a guarantee from
Parliament, of whose interference they were always so
jealous, in order to enable them to carry on a war with
reference to the righteousness of which the people of Eng-
land had serious misgivings, and the real cause of which
lay in the greed of the colonists for the acquisition of land.
He hoped the house would not consent to a guarantee, the
consequence of which must be to impose upon the mother
country a heavy burden and check that spirit of self
reliance and national vigour which our colonal communi-
ties could only realise when they had been brought to the
conviction that the burden must be shared by those who
claimed and enjoyed the privileges of freedom.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
the proposal had been carefully considered by the
Government from a financial point of view, and there
could be no doubt as to the solvency of the _olony and its
disposition to fulfil its engagements. The policy of the
war had been approved by the Imperial Government, and
we could not, therefore, justly throw the expense exclusively
upon the colony. New Zealand was the first of our cold
nial possessions that had made any large contribution to-
wards the cost of a war—and the: inducements to the Go-
vernment to take part in the loan were, that one-half the
amount would go immediately into the Imperial Exchequer
to pay off existing debts, and that a great improvement
would be effected in the future regulations of the charge for
military assistance.
Mr WHITESIDE contended that in asking Parliament
to guarantee the loan, the Government were bound to ex-
plain their policy, and state whether the war was to be con-
tinued to maintain the honour of the country, or if it was in-
tended to exterminate the natives and distribute their lands
amongst those who were engaged in the accomplishment of
that object.
Mr ROEBUCK reiterated his well-known and oft-ex-
pressed views with respect to the natural repugnance exist-
ing between the white and the brown races, and the inevit-
able disappearance of the latter before the advancing tide of
civilisation, the cupidity of the whites, and the introduction
of those potent agents of Christian colonisation, fire-water
and tobacco. If we persisted in the endeavour to maintain
the colony of New Zealand we were also bound to guarantee
this loan and face the direful necessity which had now come
upon us of utterly exterminating the natives—for it was
quite impossible that the European and the Maori could
exist side by side with each other.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY objected to the house mixing
itself up with the financial transactions of New Zealand,
and observed that he understood the gentleman who had
negotiated the loan was connected with a local government
that was no longer in power.
The amendment was also supported by Mr ATTOVN.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE hoped, if the loan were agreed to,
that the mother country would be set free from the system
of making advances to New Zealand out of the Treasury
chest. He would like to know what exertions the colonists
themselves had made in their own behalf for the services of

the war.
Mr CARDWELL said he could not subscribe to the
ideas of Mr Roebuck on colonisation. So far as the Maories
were concerned, he thought they were an example that the
brown man need not necessarily disappear before the white.
As to the efforts which the colonists had put forth in their
own defence, in the first place the entire male population
of the province of Auckland capable of bearing arms had
abandoned the profitable pursuits of industry to defend their
homes against the natives ; and, in the nest place, the New
Zealand Assembly had agreed to raise 5,000 military settlers
in that province, and to obtain a loan of three millions for
the purpose upon the guarantee of the Imperial Parliament.
This proposal had come recommended by the approval of
the governor, accompanied by the statement that the
colonists had made all the exertions that could be expected
from them. Of this amount the Government had consented
to ask the Imperial guarantee of one million, and they did
so after having satisfied themselves that the security was
ample and indisputable.
Mr ADDERLEY thought that, on the whole, the pro-
position was one which the house might fairly sanction.
The case, however, was altogether exceptionable, and he
trusted it world not be regarded as a precedent. The colony
was perfectly solvent, and the Government seemed to have
taken every possible precaution, by providing a sinking
fund, to prevent ultimate loss to the Imperial treasury.
Sir J. TRELAWNY considered that it was her Ma-
jesty's Ministers, and not the colony, who were at fault fur
the present state of things ; and he held that it was an un-
dignified course on their part to make war against the
natives simply because one or two officers and a company
of men had been led into an ambush and attacked. He
hoped the house would reject the bill.
The debate was continued by Mr J. B. Smith, Colonel
Sykes, lair Whalley (why attributed the New Zealand