The Sun.
London, England, 1865-05-13 00:00:00

THE ROAD MURDER.

The Marquis of WESTMEATH inquired if the conduct
of Mr. Wagner had been reproved in respect to his refusal
to answer the questions put to him at the trial of Con-
stance Kent, on the ground that he would be betraying
the secrets of the confessional.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said the law did not per-
mit even Roman Catholic priests to refuse to answer a
question in a court of law. There was no doubt Mr.
Wagner was bound to answer the questions put to him if
he had been pressed by the magistrate to do so. Most
likely the matter was not deemed sufficiently important by
the magistrate to induce him to visit Mr. Wagner with any
of those serious consequences his refusal laid him open to.
Lord CHELMSFORD remarked that there was some
doubt as to the power of the magistrates to compel an
answer in this particular instance. Under the Justice of
the Peace Act, if a witness were summoned or brought
before the magistrates on a warrant, and refused either to
be sworn, or to affirm, or to answer any question put to
him, they might commit him for seven days to prison. But
as Mr. Wagner voluntarily attended, he apprehended that
the magistrates would have no power to compel him to
answer the questions put to him.
The LORD CHANCELLOR observed that Mr. Wagner
had stated, in a letter to the daily papers, that he had at-
tended on subpoena.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH inquired whether
Ministers contemplated any legislation to relieve the
Church of England, and protect it from the insults which
it was at present sustaining, to the grief and injury of her
Majesty's Protestant subject; in having no power to con-
trol and punish the apostacy of various officiating clergy-
men in the Establishment. He complained that some of
the clergy were in the habit of departing from the ritual
authorised by the Book of Common Prayer, and instanced
the cases of St. Albans, Holborn, St. John's Mission, St.
George's-in-the-East, St. Paul's, Walworth, Holy Trinity,
Vauxhall, St. Matthias, Stoke Newington, Christ Church,
Clapham, and other metropolitan churches. Most of the
services on Good Friday and Easter Sunday were copied
from the Romish Church, and were not sanctioned by the
Church of England.
Earl GRANVILLE was not prepared to deny the facts
stated by the noble marquis, nor was he in a position to
confirm them. At present the Government had no
measure under their consideration for dealing with the
subject.

The Bishop of LONDON said if he were acquainted
with any distinct violation of the law in his diocese he
should not be deterred by the expense, however ruinous it
might be, from punishing the offender. There was, how-
ever, great difficulty in ascertaining exactly what the law
was, and the rule he had laid down was not to interfere
unless he was quite sure that he had the law on his side.
The Record of Titles Bill, the Sheep and Cattle Bill,
and the Union Officers'(lreland) Superannuation Bill, were
read a third time and passed.
The Isle of Man Disafforestation Compensation Bill and
the Metropolitan Houseless Poor Bill were read a second
time.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—LAsT EVENING.
The SPEAKER. took the chair at four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills were read a third time and passed.:—
Belfast Gas, Belfast New Streets, County Antrim and
Belfast Borough, and South Devon Railway.

WIMBLEDON COMMON BILL.

On the motion of Mr. C. FOSTER the order that the
Wimbledon Common Bill be committed was read and dis-
charged, and the bill was withdrawn.

DEE AND MERSEY JUNCTION RAILWAY BILL.
Lord R. GROSVENOR moved that the Dee and
Mersey Junction Railway Bill be recommitted to the
former committce,with leave to sit and proceed upon Mon-
day next.

Mr. LAIRD seconded the motion.

Mr. lIUMBERSTONE objected to the proposition.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said they
ought to view with jealousy the proposals to recommit
private bills, and he had made it a rule where he had a
personal interest in any private bill never to vote on it, but
as in the present instance his personal interest was opposed
to the course he thought the house ought to take ho would
just make one or two observations. The bill had been re-
ported against, as it would interfere with the navigation
of the river Dee, and the question for the com-
mittee to have considered was whether the public
convenience of the bill outweighed the objections raised
against it. The committee did not consider that question,
and therefore he thought the bill ought to be recommitted.
Sir R.KNIGHTLEY said when the righthon. gentleman
was examined before the committee he admitted he had
some property, and therefore he did not think that opinion
could be looked upon as impartial.
Mr. ROBERTSON said if this motion was agreed to,
and the bill passed, the navigation of the Dee would be
impeded, and the trade of Chester seriously injured. The
gradients for the bridge were all wrong, and he therefore
called upon the house to support the referees, and refused
to agree to the motion now before them.
Mr. CLAY thought the house ought to stand by the re-
port of the referees and the decision of the committee, and
refuse to entertain the proposal for the re-committal of
the bill.

Mr. BONHAM-CARTER objected to the re-committal
of the bill.

Mr. DODSON hoped the noble lord the member for
Flintshire would withdraw his motioft. The matter had
been well considered in committee under the chairmanship
Of one of the most experienced members of that house, and
as their report was adverse to the bill he trusted the noble
lord would see the propriety of acceding to his request.
The house then divided, when there appeared—
For the re-committal ... 47
Against it 144

Majority .. ... . ell
The motion was, therefore, negatived.
THE FRANCHISE.

Lord ELCHO gave notice that on an early day he should
move an address to her Majesty praying for the appoint-
ment of a royal commission to inquire how the parliamen-
tary franchise can be extended without lowering the
qualification.