The Sun.
London, England, 1864-06-08 00:00:00

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Chittenden's Disabilities Removal, Bolton and St.
Helen's Road, North British Railway (Abbey Helms and
Seagate Branch), Southampton and Netley Railway, Bod-
min Railway, Solway Junction Railway, Scottish North-
Eastern and Scottish Central Railway Companies, and
Wisbeach Water Bills were read a second time.
The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Moira and Gresley Roads—North Western Railway—
Halifax and Ovenden Junction Railway—North British
Railway (Perth Branch)—and North Cheshire Water.

UNION ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE ACT
AMENDMENT BILL.

Lord WODEHOUSE moved the second reading of this
bill, the object of which was to remedy some slight defects
in the act passed in 1862.

After a short discussion, in which Lord St. Leonards and
the Earl of Romney took part, the bill was read a second
time.

PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.
On the motion for going into committee on this bill,
Lord BROUGHAM expressed his strong approval of the
bill, because it brought the convicts released with a ticket
of leave under the supervision of the police. Such a system
had acted very well in Ireland, where it had been in opera-
tion for some time.

Lord LYTTELTON approved of the bill, and also of the
conduct of the Government in respect to what they had
given and what they had refused the colonies.
The house then went into ommittee.
Clause 1 was agreed to.
On clause 2 being read,

Earl GREY moved an amendment, providing that every
offender who had been previously twice convicted of felony
should, on a third conviction, be sentenced to penal servi-
tude for not less than seven years.
Earl GRANVILLE objected to the amendment, think-
ing that it was better to leave the amount of the sentence to
the discretion of the juges.

After some further conversation the amendment was
adopted, and the clause agreed to.
Clause 3 was agreed to,

Oa clause 4,

Lord HOUGHTON moved the omission of that part of
the clause which required a ticket of leave man to report
himself once a month to the police, and to give notice to
them of every change of his residence. He thought the
principle of this clause was bad in itself, because for the first
time in the history of this country it proposed to invest the
police with functions of tutelage and direction.

The Earl of CARNARVON did not understand what
alternative Lord Houghton proposed to substitute for the
clause as it stood. The noble lord's position was most in-
consistent and illogical, for he did not abandon police su,
pervision altogether, although he proposed to strike out thy
provisions which were required to make it effective.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said it was quite right that
some authority should have the power of knowing where
men with tickets of leave were, and of keeping before
him the fact that the eye of the law was upon him. But it
seemed to him that the clause as it at present stood was
very loose. uncertain, and unsatisfactory. He would sug-
gest that the clause should be so modified as to make it run
that a ticket•of-leave man should report himself to the
police once a month, if the condition of the licence should
so require it. He would leave the mode and manner in
which a ticket-of-leave ;Ilan should report himself in the
discretion of the officer who was charged with hie sup6r-

vision.
The committee then divided, when there were--
For the amendment
Against it
Majorit y
The clause was then agreed to, with some unimportant
amendments.

The remaining clauses and the schedules were agreed to,
and the house resur.vati.