The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-24 00:00:00

TWE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 24, 1854.

authorities of Hertford; in favour of the Poor Removal
Bill.

Mr. MILLIGAN presented a petition from the me-
dical botanists of Bradford against the Medical Registra-
tion Bill.

Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from the Society,
of Friends in Ireland, praying for the abolition of mi-
nisters' money.
Mr. CRAUFURD presented a petition from a place
in Scotland, praying for an amendment of the law of
partnership.

upon by the prase in the right spirit. The Government
had turned their attention to it and, after due considera-
tion, he thought it clear that tie cause of the constant
defeat of the law was the dificulty of obtaining legal
evidence. (Hear, hear.) Nthody doubted that these
houses did exist; they were known perfectly well to
the police ; they were known as well as the hotels or
taverns in the same street, audit was notorious that they
were frequented by regular ganblers and by persons who
inveigled young men into thenito gamble. The keepers
of them mocked the law. It vas most desirable that the
law should be asserted. The first difficulty in the way
was the means they used of shutting out the police.
If the police could, as the act authorised them, enter at
all times into these places, they would very soon detect
the gamblers, and bring the keepers of such establish-
ments to justice. As long as this barring out was
allowed they could do nothing. He proposed, therefore
to make it a substantive offense wilfully to take means
for excluding and preventing ;he entrance of the officers
when they demanded admission on the authority of the
law. (Hear, hear.) It might at first seem objeciionable
even to make the barring If a man's own house an
offence, but hon. members would see the distinction be-
tween the ordinary precautions of a householder and
this absolute fortification against the law, and the ma-
gistrates might fairly be alloyed to discriminate between
these two cases. He proposed that where an informa-
tion was laid, and a magistrate issued his warrant,
unusual and unnecessary means employed to keep out
the officers from the inspection they were entitled to
should be a substantive ()fence, and should render
liable to a penalty as such. (Hear, hear.) Next he
extended the principles of the act relating to gam-
ing. By that it was provided that where any cards or
dice, or other ,implements of gaining were found, it
should be competent to the magistrates to suppose that
the house in which they were discovered was used as a
gaming house, and to throw the burden of disproof upon
the persons accused. He proposed to extend that prin-
ciple to cases in which houses were thus unnecessarily
fortified, and to make their keepers prove them not
gaming houses, in spite of the suspicious circumstance
of their being so defended. He also proposed to let
the magistrate—who ordinarily could judge which of the
prisoners brought before him were dupes and which
were hackneyed gamblers, select in each case those whom
it would be proper to prosecute, and those who, less
culpable, might be admitted as witnesses. There were
in what was called every "haul" some who would not
perjure themselves, and whose evidence it was desir-
able and necessary, for the carrying out of the law,
that we should have. Believing, also, that nothing
would deter young men more than publicity; he pro-
posed to make it an offence to give a false name and
address. (Hear, hear.) These provisions, he thought,
would remedy the evil at which they aimed. The
house had legislated successfully against the betting-
houses ; it would now be doing an equally salutary
work in putting down the remnant of the gaining-
houses that: still existed in this country. (Cheers.)
Sir J. V. SHELLEY,„as the representative of West-
minster, thanked 'the lion, and learned gentleman for
having proposed this reform in the law.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
GRAND JURY LAWS.

Mr. MACARTNEY moved that the following hon.
gentlemen should be the select committee upon the Irish
Grand Jury Laws :—Mr. Macartney, Sir J. Young,
Lord Stanley, Colonel Caulfield, Mr. G. H. Hamilton,
Mr. Wrightson, Mr. Gould, Mr. Napier, Sir R. Fer-
guson, Colonel Dunne, Mr. H. Herbert, Mr. George,
Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Davison, and Mr. Roche.
Mr. F. SCULLY moved, as an amendment, that the
order for the appointment of the committee be discharged.
After a brief discussion the amendment was agreed to.