The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-05 00:00:00

LON DON, SATURDAY EVENIN JUNE 5,

Sir J. PAKINGTON opposed the admission of the
clause. .

Mr. BROWNE considered the clause of vast import-
ance, and as each should be admitted. The Hon. Gen-
tleman moved the following proviso Provided always,
that whenever the owner, charterer, or consignee of the
ship shall be dissatisffiAl with the decision of the emigra-
tion officer, in any matter in which such decision is
rendered authoritative by the provisions of this Act, then
and in every such case it shall be lawful for the owner,
eharb,rer, captain, or consigk,ee to apply to two justices
of the peace having jurisdiction in the port, and such jus-
tices or one of them shall by order under their or his
hand appoint two disinterested persons having acquaint-
ance with the subject-matter in which such decision may
have been given, to hear the appeal of the owner,
charterer,c
or consignee against such decision;
a Cum shall return their determination
d such t
wc captain, acirn3
upon such appeal in answer to such order, and upon such
determination the justices or justice shall make such
order as to them or him shall in the premises seem meet,
and such order shall be final end conclusive.'
Mr. HENLEY said the clause wc.,s brought forward
on very extraordinary grounds, because he had brought
forward no cases of difficulty that had arisen under the
existing arrnrigement. He believed the giving such an
appeal as that proposed would be- a groat curse to the
shipowner.

M. A. HASTIE and Mr. MOFFATT supported the pro-
viso; and the House divided—
For the proviso ... 25
Against it ... 73
Majority against the proviso ... —4B
Amerdments were then agreed to, and the Bill was
ordered to be read a third time on Monday.
The Turnpike Trusts Arrangement Bill was read a
third time and passed.

Mr. ANSTEY moved the second reading of the Cor-
rupt Pr:ctices at Elections Bill (No. 2).
Mr. ADDERLEY objected to a measure of so much
importation being discussed at so late an hoer, and
moved that the debate be adjourned.
Mr. KEOGH said it was a very reasonable arrange-
ment that the present hour (half-past one o'clock) wad
too late a❑ hour for discwsing important business. He
should be glad to know what was the opinion of the Go-
vernment upon this point.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
think any stated rule could be observed iu such cases,
and at the present period of the session they must make
some sacrifio.e in order to get through the business that
was estential. As the measure Proposed by the Hon.
and Learned Member for Youghal was likely to create
discussion, he thought it would Ise quite right to post-
pone it.
Mr. SADLEIR complained of the unreasonableness
of the Attorney-General for Ireland in not fixing some
time for the discussion of the Irish measures he proposed
to bring forward. Many Hon. Members had been in
attendance since twelve o'clock the previous day.
The debate was then adjourned.

The Suitors in Chancery- Relief Bill was read a third
Btimiliew;
,assomtheenclapuassesead. w ere added by way of rider, and the
repTohreteTd.rustees Act Extension (Stamp Duty) Bill was
The Trustees Act Extension Bill Went through a Com-'
mittee.

(Ireland) Bill was road 14 second
iroTehe Savings Banks .

Mr. KEOGH moved tho adjournment cf the House,
and took that occasion to complain of the discourtesy of
the Right Hon. Gentleman the Attorney-General
for Ireland, who would not give any promise as to the
time when he would proceed with what he must con-
sider a Coercion Bill for Ireland, the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman having stated that he would proceed with it a",
any hour of the night. He could assure the Right
Hon. Gentleman that he would neither expedite public
business nor promote his own dews or the interests or
vi
his party by acting with such discourtesy towards Hon.
Members for Ireland. He could tell him that he would
be met with opposition at every step. Without mean-
ing the least offence, he could assure him that they
would insist on being treated with the same courtesy as
other Mt ethers, and that he would not be allowed to
proceed with important business at that hour of the
morning. The Bill, besides, was one that ought
not to he entrusted to a provisional Govcsnment.
Mr. NAPIER said the Bill in question was to con-
tinue an Act at present in force, and he was therefore
surprised when he heard that the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman meant to oppose it. Ho had distinctly told
him that it was his intention, at any hour the House
would allow him, to go on with the Bill. When the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman mentioned the arrange-
ment that hiad been made with the Chancellor of the
Excliecier, as the leader of the House of Commons, he
of course submitted. This he could say, that he
would treat every parson in that House as
a gentleman, and neither threats nor anything else
would divert him from doing what he believed to he his
duty as the first law officer of the Crown in Ireland.
Mr. ANSTEY said the complaint his Hon. and
Learned Friend made was, that having applied for in-
formation as to the purpose of the Government with re-
gard to this Bill, they had not given it ; and he believed
they were fishing for a night when they would have a
majority to enable them to carry the measure through
its stages. He thought it would be better for the Go-
vernment not to attempt to make a show of carrying a
measure which they would never be able to pass.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
they had no intention of advaacina the Bill a stage, as
it had been already postponed. He must say that it was
not to the honour or credit of the House to allow their
discussions to close every evening with these unseemly
brawls, which had now become almost chronic.—(Hear,
hear.) It would be much better if they would give
themselves up to the transaction of public business with
good temper.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned
Member for Youghal had not
the slightest ground for
the remarks ho had made; but he must say he was always
prompt to introduce eomething unpleasant He believed the
Hon. and Learned Member tor Athlone's complaint was
misconception, and that he had no good
o home when Ze
the use of continuing the
discussion at that time of the morning. g If Irish Mem-
gf oruonudnedd
for upon
fit,
nora
dfd h esee
missing, and English Members to go to bed when Irish
business was on, that would glieh business was dis-
not be the proper way of
carrying on the business of the nation. The measure
hers were .to E
would not be brought forward at a time when an oppor-
tuni'y would not be afforded of fairdiscussion.
Mr. SCULLY agreed that it was a great waste of time
to discuss matters that could not be that late
advanced at
hour of the eight.
Lord NAAS reminded the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber for Athlone that when the measure was originally
brought forward in 1847 he had
t e suppor d in every
stage.
The House then adjourned at T
Two o'clock.

other tGENCE.
LAW INTEL 4
(Before the LORD CHANCELLODS'
HOUSE OF Lo
June 4.
Peers,)
Lord BROUGHAM, and
THE DUKE OP ATHOLL V. e.".)
First Divieion of the Court
This Repent is from an inVrienniE AND OTHERS.
-ofceUtory judgment of the
title of the respondents to nary Session, sustaining the
tor to establish their right to us'Y °xi an action of deehera-
lies between Blair Athol!, in
in the county of Aberdeen, which erthshire, and Braemar
't," 4.public highway,which,
through Glentilt, the propeety,, in its course passes
the appellant. The point involved °' ;the Duke of Athol!,
tench the merits of the questiono7 in the appeal does not
to travel by the Glentilt-road, 6- the right of the public
a preliminary technicality raisedut was in the nature of
to defeat the action, by denying
public by the noble appellant
dents to sue. the title of the respon-
The material facts to the point
counsel on both sides having h and the argument of
The LOAD CHANCELLOR, in et?. concluded,
the House, remarked, that in th"ieg the judgment of
went at the bar, considerable stress Course of the ergo-
legal difficulties of the case, but after
had been laid on th®
after all the House
would find that it did not turn out
P 'The ha to be one of real am.
oisinotroifs
notlaw. a
I:s'its of the case, whe-
therin question. The simple
question lOway, was cot now
suers have the right to sue in the chargelos whether the pur-
taGelenitnilpt
presented themselve to thee court
..
ters in which they
of contention had arisen as to sele,leow ? A good deal
averments made by the pursuers in their"st was the effect of
elarator. It was batedstronglyin that summons of do-
te prove the use of the road the it was necessary
them to maintain their right of ac, Pursuers to enable
terlocutor of the Lord Ordinary, and that the in-
of the First Division, was -in effee_rtued by the Lords
question egsinst the appellant. That a decision of that
derable discussion at the bar, though •
„led to very consi-
admitted on both sides
..(that is the now seemed to be
doubt, the other admitting) that 'that° one side did not
concluded by the judgment, but that th(eluetion was not
by their own declarator averred that. they having
road through Glentilt, they will have Y had used the
to
in the course of further proceedings,
which that feet
in the court below. 'That relieved the mouse
be taken
c.'nsiderable difficulty, and he believed cane from a
been admitted at the bar was the law of stchat what had
judges in the court below may decide thatotland. The
necessary in such an action of de.clarator as it was not
that there should be any use of the road by
the present
suers, and he apprehended that that cineabY the pur-
suers,
not be at all concluded by the.pilese tioa of law
As the case now stood, thd House was reliXdlidgment•
difficulty; and then came the question whether,from this
the averments as they stood on•thesummons, these taking
aver-
ments showed a title by which the pursuers
Referring to the description in the summons
sue?
found that Alexander Torrie was an „
advocate mons he
siding in Aberdeen;" Robert Cox, „
write, re-
Signet,' residing in Edinburgh; '' and Chid:. to the
" merchant, residing in Perth.' Take the name Law,of a
the
latter, for example; be resides in the very count
through which this" road pines; and it was moreover
oreovery
averred that he had himself paid conversion of
statute
labour money under the Act of Parliament for
regu-
lating and converting the statute services in the hounty.
Assuming, for the sake of argument, that there tvas n
law egainst their right to maintain the action it wouldo
seem that a right was stated: The statement of the c°n
deseendenee excluded any question; for in tte .
cone .
seeneence they positively state that they have all used
the road, end that they cannot proceed from one ter-
minus to the other unless they go round by a eircuitou
route of some miles: Supposing these facts to be proved,
there was a very different case from that which was the
subject of contention at the bar; for there it was made
an abstract question, namely, can any one of her Ma-
iery'e subjects Maintain an action of declarator not
having used the road? If the averments were proved,
the present case would really come so much within all
the authorities which had been cited, that he apprehended
there could be very little question. The whole difficulty
arose from the diffeiesece of the laws of England and Scot-
land le reference to questions of this-nature. In England
1 no difficulty can arise like the present, because here we
,
have remedy by indictment; any person can proceed
b _
y. a .
,laclictraeut to try a right of road on behalf of