The Sun.
London, England, 1854-07-04 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS-(YESTERDAY.)

The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
The Lords' amendments to the following bills were
considered and agreed to :—Ayr and Maybole Junction
Railway, Perth and Dunkeld Railway, and Stourbridge
Waterworks Bills.

PETITIONS.
Petitions were presented by Mr. HORSFALL, from
Liverpool, for closing public-houses on Sundays ; by
Mr. H. MADDOX, against the 13th clause of the Mort-
main Bill ; by Lord- R. GROSVENOR, from Brentford,
with a similar prayer.
VALUATION (IRELAND).
Sir R. FERGUSON moved for returns showing, in
the counties in Ireland in which the townlancl valuation
has been completed, under the act (3 and 7 Will. IV.,
e. 84, the name of each county, the acreable contents,
the annual value, the cost of the valuation by the acre,
the cost by the 101. of the valuation, and the date when
it first came into force in each county : Of similar details
as to each county of which the tenant valuation has been
completed, under the Act 9 and 10 Vic. 110, and 15
and 16 Vic. c. 63 : Showing, in each Poor-law Union
in Ireland, in which the tenement valuation is in force,
the name of each such union, the cost (if any) of the
valuation, &c. of such union above its share of the valu-
ation of the county, the date when it first came in force
in each union, the number of revisions of each union
which have been made under the 29th and 30th sections
of the last act, and the date and cost of each
revision, with the date of payment of each by the union :
Of similar details as to any towns under the tenement
valuation. And, statement of the progress and prospect
of completion of the General valuation of Ireland, with
the average cost by the acre, and by the 1001. of the
valuation, comparing the townland valuation with the
tenement.
The motion was agreed to.
ROYAL COMMISSION.

Mr. POLMAN, the Yeoman-Usher of the Black Rod,
appeared at the table and summoned the house to attend
in the House of Lords to hear the Royal assent given to
a number of bills.
The Speaker and several hon. members then repaired
to the House of Lords accordingly. The Speaker, on
his return, announced the names of the bilis, for which
see Lords' report.
PUBLICATIONS BY POST.
Sir J. SHELLEY asked the Secretary of the Treasury
what proceedings have been taken by the Post-office or
the Treasury with regard to the infringinent by The
Athencrum, and The Builder of the Treasury Order of
1838, by which stamped publications not exceeding two
ounces in weight are alone permitted to pass free through
the post, The Athenceunt and The Builder having been
reported to the Post-office as exceeding two ounces in
weight.
➢lr. WILSON said, since the minute in question was
passed, Parliament had altered the legal size of a news-
paper, and the Secretary had in contemplation to in-
crease the weight in proportion.
SCINDE.

Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE asked the President of the
Board of Control, whether he will lay on the table of
the house the report of Mr. Pringle on Scinde, in which
Mr. Pringle expresses his admiration of Sir Charles
Napier's government of that province, and refutes
the charges brought against him in the report of the
Board of Administration of the Punjaub, published in
the Indian Blue Book.
Sir C. WOOD said there was no report at the India
House answering the description of the hon. member.
BRIBERY BILL.
In reply to Mr. LIDDELL,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated that he proposed to
take the committee on the Bribery Bill on Monday
next.
PUBLIC REVENUE AND CONSOLIDATED
FUND CHARGES BILL.
On the motion for the third reading of this bill,
Sir WILLOUGHBY drew attention to the se-
cond clause, which proposed to alter the time of pub-
lishing the annual public accounts from March to July'
which he thought would prove a great inconvenience te
Parliament, as the Legislature would not be in posses-
sion of the audited accounts until the session was draw-
ing to a close.
Hr. WILSON said, under the existing system, the
votes of the house were made for the year commencing
the sth of April. and ending on the sth of April follow.
ing, but the public audited aocounts were made up from
the Ist of January to 31st of December. The object of the
clause was to make the published accounts harmonise
with the votes of the house.
Mr. V. SCULLY did not object to the general prin-
ciples of the bill, but he complained that there were cer-
tain classes of payments which were now thrown upon
the Consolidated Fund that were intended in future to be
brought into the estimates. One of them was the
charge for judicial offices in Ireland which he insisted
ought to be exempted from the operation of this bill.
He thought the bill ought to be reconsidered in a select
committee, with a view to an amendment of the sche-
dule.

Mr. W. WILLIAMS pressed on the Secretary of
the Treasury to withdraw the clause of which notice had
been given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to pro-
tect the salaries of existing officers. The hon. member
for Warwickshire's motion was contingent on any change
being made in the schedules, and if Mr. Wilson with-
drew the clause, the hon. member would most probably
not persevere in his motion. He would appeal to Mr.
Spooner, also, not to endanger the measure by his mo-
tion, but to take some other opportunity of bringing on
his motion.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he thought his hon. friend
(`Zr. Williams) was mistaken in supposing that the mo-
tion of the hon. member for Warwickshire was at all
contingent on the clause proposed to be introduced by
his hon. friend the Secretary of the Treasury. As he
understood the motion of the hon. member for Warwick-
shire it was this, that if the house sanctioned the prin-
ciple of taking sums from the consolidated fund and
transferring them to the votes, then he should bring on
his motion. If that was so, the clause of which his hon.
friend (Mr. Wilson) had given notice did not apply to
that motion. He agreed with the rest of the speech of
his hon. friend (Mr. Williams), and he thought his hon.
friend was right in saying that the house had always
behaved with great justice and fairness to all persons
who claimed to be holders for life of salaries. He did
not remember a case where it was shown that there were
good grounds for a person expecting a salary for life, in
which the house interfered in an arbitrary manner to
deprive him of it. There may have been such instances,
and it might be necessary to introduce this clause, but it
was not rendered necessary by the proneness of the house
to deal with salaries for life in any but the fairest man-
ner. The proposition of the hon. member for Warwick-
shire went on a very different principle. The bill went
on the principle of getting accounts of all payments out
of the revenue before the house ; it was an important
financial measure, and though there might be difficulties
in carrying it into operation, it had been much urged
by gentlemen on that side of the house, and the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer (whose absence from indisposi-
tion be much deplored) had bestowed great care and
labour on the bill. The vote to Maynooth was a totally
different question of state policy, whether the vote for
Maynooth should be brought forward in the yearly esti-
mates or placed on the consolidated fund. That was a
question which had been brought before the house years
ago by Sir Robert Peel, and after warm debates and
great contests in that house and in the country, Parlia-
ment had deliberately sanctioned the grant, and declared
that it should be placed on the consolidated fund, and
not be made the subject of a yearly contest. If that
decision was to be reversed it should be done in the same •
way as the matter was dealt with by Sir Robert I
Peel ; it should be done by a bill, thus giving the coun-

try time to consider the matter, and the hou—se the op-
portunity of debating the question on the several stages
of the bill, and of approving, if they thought fit, or re-
jecting it if they thought that those who agreed with
Sir Robert Peel had come to a wise and right decision.
He (Lord John Russell) thought that a wise And right
decision, and he had supported Sir R. Peel, notwith-
standing the opposition to his bill which existed in the
country. He believed that was a wise and sound policy
and ought not to be reversed ; and he would say more,
that if that decision was reversed on the motion for the
third reading of this bill, and the grant was put upon the
votes, it would be the duty of the Government to with.
acted of
draw the bill. (Hear.) It was for the house to consi.
der, and it was for those who were in favour of financial
hadto the lion
reforms to consider, whether on the third reading of the
bill they would adopt a motion so much at variance
in-
tentionon-Ae rn.o St Po evil 0
persevere,O N
could ERr e su saidl
1 \fta;oiftraiardyonitmnfdl discussion, It
lwaittehytehaersp,rainndeipialeeswoonulwd.boinehly
gParliamentive
notice
member for 'Warwickshire that the carrying of his nlOl
Was a right
It was his tien would be fatal to the bill. (Hear.)
feelingnnm
pe l theloefd tto
le
mouldP r ° bt Protestant
tilono strong for the
ooitthwould bte
country was aroused,
against
tntgiimnge
until
rstit was absurd, for he would be de-
ecnt'tlernan speaking gGioveveurrtheilslt
voteto r efsoi
obnyt hheosnu.bjge
six o'clock on Wednesdfbeial lteudp
be what it might, h a
y
s
.
Let the result, therefore,
division ;and if e would press his motion
the bill to a
leave the responsibility were a valuable one, he would
lord. of withdrawing it to the noble

The bill was then read a third time.
Mr. WILSON then brought up a clause which was
understood to provide for the production of quarterly
accounts.
On the clause being read a second time,
Mr. HENLEY complained that the clause had not
been printed, and urged that there would be some incon-
venience in the mode of taking the accounts proposed ;
but he spoke in so low a tone that we were unable to
catch the purport of his remarks.
Mr. WILSON said there was no intention of altering
the mode of keepin4 the statistical accounts ; and the
only object of altering the way of keeping the financial
accounts was to make them connected with the years to
which they applied. The amounts would be publi,hed
on the sth of January, so that they would be in the
possession of the house at an earlier period, although
the financial year would still end on the sth of April.
With regard to the quarterly accounts, there would
be no difficulty about them, for the accounts would
still apply to the whole year, and not to those quarters
of a year.
The clause was then added to the bill.
Mr. V. SCULLY moved as au amendment, in page