The Sun.
London, England, 1854-05-10 00:00:00

4.birb la.ittion.

CHESTER RACES.

(THIS DAY.)

(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPR.)
CHESTER CUP.

EPAMINONDAS
INDIAN WARRIOR
ACROBAT
Twenty-four ran.
HELTER SKELTER.

Cimicina
Game Chicken

vrottrtbWttett

SUN OFFICE, Seven, o'Clock.

CHESTER RACES.

(THIS DAY.)

(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.)

SCRAMBLE HANDICAP.

Bridekirk
Jupiter

Five ran.
MEMBERS' PLATE.

Defiance

Helena
Seven ran.
QUEEN'S GUINEAS.

Rataplan
Bourton

Five ran.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(THIS DAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at twelve o'clock.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were considered and agreed to, and
ordered to be read a third time :—Bradford Waterworks ;
Burnley Improvement ; Birmingham Improvement ;
Kingston-upon• Hull Improvement ; West Bromwich
Improvement, &c. ; and the Edinburgh Police and
Improvement.

PETITIONS.
Petitions were presented by Mr. Dunlop, from places
in Scotland, against the Education Bill ; Sir Edward
Filmer, from Sittingbourne and other places in Kent,
against the opening of public houses on Sunday ' - by
Mr. Brotherton, from Salford and other places ; Mr.
L. Heyworth, from Derby ; Mr. Milligan, from the
Burnley districts ; Mr. T. Duncombe, from Spitalfields
and other places in the metropolis.; Mr. Wickham, from
Bradford ; Mr. Brown (37) from places in Lancashire
and Cheshire ; Lord Dudley Stuart, from a Marylebone
burial society; Mr. Fagan, from Dublin and other places
in Ireland; Mr. Heywood, from places in Lancashire; Mr.
Hadfield, from societies in Sheffield ; Mr. Hindley (40)
from places in the manufacturing districts, signed by
30,000 persons ; Sir George Grey, fr,m Morpeth ;
Alderman Kershaw, from Stockport and other places ;
Mr. W. J. Fox, from the Oldham district ; Mr. Cob-
bett, from the same locality and Manchester ; Mr. Cob-
den, from places in the West Riding ; Mr. Adderley,
(40), from the neighbourhood of Manchester • Mr.
Hume, from places in Scotland ; Mr. Bright and Mr.
M. Gibson, from Manchester ; all against the Friendly
Societies Bill, but especially the third and fourth clauses.
By Mr. Sullivan, from Ballyouskel, co. Kilkenny,
against the Nunneries and Mr. Whiteside's bill. By
Mr. F. W. Wickham, from the members of the various
lodges in the Horton district, and other parties inte-
rested in benefit societies ; from the lodges in the Wit-
ney district ; from the lodges in the Bradford district ;
from the Bradford district of United Free Gardeners ;
against the Friendly Societies Bill.
FRIENDLY SOCIETIES BILL.
On the motion for going into committee on this bill,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE suggested the propriety of re-
ferring the whole of this subject to a committee up
stairs, where it could be fully investigated, and evidence

taken upon it.
Mr. BRIGHT seconded this suggestion, and took
the opportunity of bearing his testimony to the conci-
liatory manner in which the lion. member (Mr. Sotheron),
who had charge of the bill, had dealt with this subject ;
but at the same time he was bound to tell him that, if
the bill passed in its present shape, it would create a
revolt amongst the working classes in the manufactur-
ing districts. He therefore moved that the bill should
be referred to a select committee.
Mr. HUME approved of the proposal for referring
the whole subject to a select committee, and hoped the
Government would accede to it.
Mr. EGERTON supported the amendment, though
he believed the bill had
.been prepared in jthe best

spirit.
Mr. BROTHERTON never recollected so much ex-
citement prevailing amongst the working classes as
prevailed now with reference to this bill, and he hoped
it would be referred to a select committee.
Sir G. GREY had no objection to refer the bill to a
select committee, but he decidedly objected to referring,
the whole subject of Friendly Societies to such a tri-
bunal. He suggested that the bill should be committed
pro forma., in order that they might see what amend-
ments the promoter s might introduce into it.
➢lr. W. PATTEN did not think there was any neces-
sity to refer the whole bill to a select committee ; it
would be enough to refer the third and fourth clauses to

a select committee.
Mr. ROEBUCK remarked that the bill was now in
the hands of the Home-office, and it ought to be re-
ferred to a select committee in its entirety.
Mr. FITZROY, on behalf of the Home-office,
thought it would be desirable to refer the whole subject
to a select committee, as it was indispensably necessary
to obtain further evidence upon it before they could re•
sort to legislation.
Capt. SCOBELL took a similar view of the question,
believing that the working classes, who were members
of these societies, should be heard before a bill of this

nature was passed.
Mr. CHEETH AM, Mr. LIDDELL, and Mr. LABOUCHERE
supported the amendment.
Sir J. WALMSLEY observed that the second clause,
which limited the maximum allowance of a burial society
at a death to 201., was just-as objectionable as the third

and fourth clause.
Mr. ATHERTON, as a lawyer, gave it as his opinion
that the law on this subject was as great a disgrace to
the Legislature as it was unjust to the members of these
societies. Its tendency was to throw friendly society
disputes into chancery, which, he need not observe, was
little less than a delusion and a mockery ; and he en-
treated the house to refer the whole subject to a select
committee, who should be charged with the duty of sim-
plifying or consolidating the law.
Mr. HENLEY insisted that the duty of consolidat-
ing the law could only be undertaken by the Govern-
ment, but that question was surrounded with so much
difficulty, that he would prefer keeping the inquiry
solely to this bill. The whole subject of friendly societies
had already been fully investigated by a select com-
mittee, and he could not see what necessity there was
for going over that ground again.
Mr. HINDLEY supported the amendment. He had
moved for returns of the number of children supposed
to have been murdered for the sake of obtaining the
burial fee from a burial society, but the answer he got
was that the information could not be supplied, and,
therefore, he concluded that the suspicions on this sub-
ject were unjust.
Lord PALMERSTON did not object to refer the
whole subject to a select committee, but with regard to
the point just raised by the hon. member who last ad-
dressed them, the information he had received about it
was of so painful a character that he should be compelled,
either this or next session, to legislate upon it, for the
sake of the working classes themselves.
Mr. COBDEN warmly attacked the noble lord for im-
puting to the working classes the crime of infanticide ;
and called upon him, if he had any evidence to support
his imputation, to lay it bofore the house.
Lord PALMERSTON explained that he had meant
to convey no such an imputation against the working
classes. What he had said or meant to say was, that
the charges which had been made against the working
classes, whether true or not, were of so painful a cha-
racter, that he should feel it.to be his duty to bring in a
bill to remove the suspicion which prevailed on the
subject.
Mr. COBDEN took upon himself to deny that there
was any foundation for these insinuations of the noble
lord, and he boldly told the noble lord that any legisla-
tion of the nature he had mentioned would be taken, and
believed to be intended, as an insult to the working
classes of the country.
Mr. CROSSLEY supported the amendment, and re-
marked that though there might have been isolated
cases where children had been murdered for the sake
of getting the burial fee from a society, yet it was un-
just to suppose that the working classes formed burial
societies with the view of committing infanticide for
the sake of obtaining some 2/. or 3/. In all such
cases which had teen established in the law courts, it
had turned out the parents were of drunken and disso-
lute habits, and not provident and industrious persons
like the vast majority of the members of these friendly
societies.
Mr. SOTHERON, who had charge of the bill, an-
nounced bis readiness -to bow to the decision of the
house and-refer it to a select committee. He agreed
with Mr. Cobden in thinking that many of the charges
which had been made against burial societies were
wholly unfounded ; parents joined them not for
the base nature, which had been imputed to them,
but becanse they preferred making provision for
their own -and their children's burials rather than leave
that duty to be performed by the parish. The object of
this bill had been very much misunderstood out of doors
—it was not to discourage,but to encourage, friendly so-
cieties, and he hoped, with the aid of a select
committee, they should be able so to amend it as
to place the law on such a footing as should prove
satisfactory
.to all parties. (Hear.) The importance
of a measure like this might be gathered from the fact
that there were in existence at this moment something
like 20,000 registered and 10,000' unregistered friendly.
societies, with members averaging from 150 to 300, so
that.uppn , calculation no less than a half of the
Ole adult wale poputaii9;l, of: 914_emuttry were cod: