The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-20 00:00:00

EVENING, APRIL 20,

GOLD MINES.
Colonel TROMPON begged to postpone his motioa
on this Fillbi,et to the 27th inEt.
PASSENGERS ACT AIIENDMENT BILL.

The House havino• said
into Committee on this Pill,
Mr. S. HERBERT said the House was aware that
this Bill was the emanation of a report furnished by a
Select Comvniv..ee, which sat last year to inquire into
the operstioo of the Passengers Alt of 1849. 1 referred
to the passage of Irish emigrants between Great Britain,
Ireland, and the United States; and in order that the
measure should be carriedi,nto cactive operation it was
:necessary to obtain assistance by referring to the United
States Passenger Act.—(Hear, hear.) The existing
United States Bill was more stringent than the British.
Act, and as the former would be put in force on the ar-
rival of the vessel, they had therein a guarantee that
the protection provided by the Act would be put in
force. But the present Bill proposed a new regulation,
which he believed would bo found objectionable. The
food was to be served out to the passengers uncooked
twice a wrek; but from sea-sickness or want of accom-
modation in the galleys the passengers could not always
cook their food. Now, he thought it Would be very ad-
visable, to procure the assentor the American Government
to modify their Act so as to mw the r-piremerts of the
case..

Sir J. PAKINGTON would have no objection to
carry out the suggestions of the Right Hon. Gentleman,
provided it could be done without any unnecessary delay
to the passing of the Bill.
After some observivions from Mr. Duncan and Mr.
Cardwell, which did not reach the gallery, and which
Mr. Goulburn complained he could not hear a word of,
the clause was agreed to, as were the other clatvcs up
to 15.
On clause 16, a conversation arose as to the power of
the tribunal of appeal between Sir J. Pakington, Mr.
W. Brown, Alderman Thompson, and Mr. Ad lerley..
Mr. W. BROWN suggested that the magistrate should
be empowered to take the opinion of seamen, provision
merchants, and other competent persons, on any point of
dispute, so as to avoid the loss of time consequent on the
appeal.
Mr. F. BARING thought it would be well if the
Government would take into consideration the pro-
priety of settling some summary and practicable power
of appeal.

Mr. S. HERBERT said an appeal might be inconve-
nient to the shipowner, but then the question might in-
volve the safety of hundreds of lives.—(Hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON said the emigrant officers, who,
undo', the clause as it stood, would have the power of
decision, were very competent, and were naval officers,
acquainted with nautical matters; and the appeal would
probably be to parties less competent to decide, and
having no nautical knowledge at all.—(Hear.) How-
ever, he would consider the question, and endeavour to
see if any practicable appeal could be suggested.
The clause was agreed to, as was clause 17.
Clauses 18, 19, and 20 were agreed to.
On clause 21,
Mr, S. HERBERT complained that the difference be-
tween the accommodation for passengers in health and
in sickness was not sufficiently defined.
Atter a short conversation, the clause was agreed to,
as were clauses up to 48 inclusive.
Clause 49 was agreed to, with a verbal amendment
suggested by Mr. W. BROWN.

NI clause 71,
Mr. S. HERBERT suggested that "rundq•b" should
be subjected to some badge by which they might be
known to emierants.
Sir J. PAKINGTON said that the necessary pre-
cautions bad been taken to ensure these persons being
known.

The clause was agreed to.
The remaining clauses of the Bill were then agreed to.
A new clause was added relating to the licensing of
porters, and the Bill was ordered to be reported.
The Exchequer-bills Bill went through Committee.
The Linen Manufactures (Ireland) Bill went through
Committee.
POOR-LAW CONTINUANCE BILL
On the order of the day for the second reading of this
Bill being read,
Lord 1). STUART said that, though he believed the
poor-law required amendment in several points, he
would not oppos3 the second reading of this Bill under
present Circumstances. The Government was composed
of Members who, when in opposition, were active op-
ponents of the poor-law, and he hoped they had only
proposed this Bill in order to obtain time to amend the
whole
,system. He, however, did not think that this
Bill 'should continue for two years in operation, and he
gave notice that in Committee he would more an amend-
ment to limit it to the period of one year only.
Mr. WAKLEY complained of the powers given to
the Poor-law Commissioners, and instanced the late
case of St. Pancras, when the governor of the work-
house was dismissed by the guardians, and notwithstand-
ing which these Commissioners, who knew nothing
whatever of the case, have stepped forward and declared
that the representatives of the parish had no authority
dismiss their officer.

to
Sir J. TROLLOPE said that the Commissioners had
merely demanded the reasons for the dismissal of the
governor, or that he should be reinstated in his situation.
The Bill was then read a second time.
The Poor Relief Act Continuance Bill passed through
Committee.
CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS BILL.
On the motion that this Bill, as amended, be con-
sidered,
Colonel SIBTHORPE and Mr. HUDSON were severally
opposed to going on with this Bill at such an advanced
hour of the night.

Sir A. COCiiBURN brought up two clauses for the
purpose of their being printed. It was proposed by
them to allow a reasonable time between the summons
and the attendance of witnesses, and to protect the
Commissioners.

Ultimately the clauses were ordered to be printed,
and the third reading fixed for Friday next.
Colonel SIBTHOItP gave notice that ho would then
move that the Bill be road a third time on that day six
months.
The House adjourned at One o'clock.