The Sun.
London, England, 1854-04-06 00:00:00

I MPER

AL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-(YESTERDAY.)

PULLIC LIBRARIES AND MUSEUMS BILL.
On the order of the day for the second reading of
this bill,
Mr. EWART reviewed the exertions which had been
made in France and the United States for the establish -
ment of free libraries and museums, and reminded the
house that, acting upon this experience, an act of Par-
liament had been passed for facilitating the establish-
ment of similar institutions in this country. No less
than 3,000 towns, including all the large towns in the
veuntry, had availed themselves of the provisions of the
act to establish free libraries, and he was happy to say
their effects upon the people had been most gratifying.
They had served to improve their taste for reading, and
the question had naturally arisen as to whether it would
not be advisable to extend the provisions of the act. At
present the act only
..applied to towns municipally

. -
governed, while it neither extended to Scotland nor
Ireland. Now the object of this bill was to extend the
act to towns and places governed under the improve-
ments Bill, or by select vestries, as well as to Ireland and
Scotland, with the additional provision. that
the authorities acting under the act should have
power to increase the rate to a penny in the pound, and
to purchase hooks and works of art. Such were the
main provisions of the bill, and he hoped, as they were
approved of generally, there would be no objection to
adopting them.
Mr. HENLEY objected to the rating clause, and
thought that was a question which well deserved the
serious attention of the Government.
Mr. HUME reminded the right hon. gentleman that
the bill was simply permissive, and before it could be
put in force it must receive the sanction of the local
authorities. At the same time bethought education ought
to precede the establishment of these libraries, as the
vast mass of the people, as the coroners' returns fully
proved, were unable to read.
Mr. SPOONER thought a larger limitation ought to
be placed on the power of rating, and since no Minister
was present to give his opinion, he should move that the
debate be adjourned.
Mr. BROTHERTON regretted to see this opposi-
tion to a bill which was very popular out of doors, and
which was so much calculated to improve the social
condition of the people. It was much better to prevent
crime than punish it, and the effect of the establishment
of these libraries would decrease crime, and consequently
the local rates.

Mr. MILES opposed the rating clause.
Mr. FITZROY, on the part of the Government, an-
nounced his intention to resist the proposed alteration
of the existing law which gave the local authorities power
to raise the rate to a penny in the pound without the
consent of two-thirds of the ratepayers. He must, there-
fore, oppose the bill.

gr. Si. MILNES supported the bill in its entirety,
and hoped it would be pressed to a division. Surely,
as improvement commissioners, town councils, and se-
lect vestries were elected by the ratepayers, what ob-
jection could there be to giving them power to increase
and levy the rate ?
Mr. G. BUTT opposed the bill, and wanted to sub-
stitute another amendment for the one proposed by Mr.
Spooner--viz., that the bill be read a second time this
day six months.
Mr. SPOONER had no objection to withdraw his
amendment. _ _

Mr. HUME trusted he would not, for if they adopted
the amendment suggested by Mr. Butt it would be
holding out to the country that the house disapproved
of the principle of this bill, when they only objected in
point of fact to the rating clause.
The house then divided on the amendment, when
there appeared,
For the adjournment
Against it
Majority
-130
Mr. FITZROY then moved that the bill be read a
second time this day six months.
Mr. FIUME and Mr. M. MILNES hoped if the bill wag
thrown out that another and a larger measure would
be brought in by the Government.
Captain SCOBELL supported the bill, as be had no
confidence in the professions of the Government with
regard to education.
Lord STANLEY approved of the principle of the bill,
but he could not support the bill while it contained the
fourth clause, transferring the power of raising the rate
from the ratepayers to the town-council.
Sir C. WOOD insisted that the existing act, which
had only been in operation four months, had not yet had
a fair trial, but the Government opposed this bill on the
ground just stated by the noble lord.
Mr. BRIGHT thought the town council was a far
more fitting body to decide upon the rate than the rate-
payers, and to say they were not was tantamount to de-
claring that the house had no right to decide upon par-
ticular measures until they had been first discussed and
decided on by the whole of the constituencies through-
out the country.
Mr. CRAUFURD said Scotland was favourable to
the adoption of the Libraries Act, and it was to be re-
gretted that the Government should stand in its way.
Mr. C. FORTESCUE reminded the house that a short
bill wag passed last session, extending the Act to both
Ireland and Scotland.

Mr. DUNCAN said the bill of last session had turned
out to be wholly inoperative in Scotland, owing to the
constitution of tho local bodies there. Why not strike
out the fourth clause, if that was all that was objection-
able in the bill ?

Mr. Vi. BROWN declared that the course Govern-
ment were taking with regard to this bill would be a
great disappointment to the country.
Mr. S. HERBERT said, if the suggestion of the hon.
member for Dundee were adopted, it would not get over
the difficulty, because then the ground-work of the bill
would be wholly destroyed.
Lord D. STUART said no petitions had been pre-
sented against the bill, but many were on the table in
its favour. It was quite clear, therefore, that the rate-
payers did not object to it.
Mr. EWART denied that the fourth clause was part
of the principle of the bill, but it was only part of the
detail; which could be struck out if necessary in com-
mittee.

The house then divided on the amendment that the
bill be read a second time this day six months, when
there appeared—
For the amendment
Against it

Majority
The bill was accordingly thrown out.
UNIFORM ASSESSMENT BILL.

On the order of the day for the second reading of this
bill,

Mr. PETO explained the object of the bill to be to
establish an uniform system of assessment, which should
be applicable to Queen's taxes as well as local rates,
leaving the committee on the bill to decide the basis
upon which all assessments should be made imperative.
He proposed, if the bill was read a second time, to refer
it to a select committee.
Mr. HENLEY did not think there was any necessity
for this bill, as the tendency of the existinc, mode of
valuation in respect of all taxes was to render assess-
ments as uniform as possible.
Lord PALIVIERSTON had no doubt that what this
bill proposed was good in theory, but it would be next
to impossible to establish the machinery for obtaining
one uniform system of taxation.
Mr. HUME could not understand why a tiling that
was possible in the United States should be impossible
in this country. Now, there was one uniform system of
assessment in the United States, and now that there
was a prospect of our having a permanent property tax,
he could see no reason why a similar system should not
be carried out here. There ought to be one principle
of assessment used, that should be based on the poor
rate.

Mr. V. SCULLY observed that there was a general
valuation in Ireland, and the bill might possibly be ap-
plicable to that part of the country, but there was quite
a different state of things in England, where no uniform
Government valuation had become established. He
moved that the bill be read a second time that day six
months.
34r. G. BUTT seconded the amendment, as the bill
assumed for its basis that which was not correct, namely,
that the poor-rate was levied upon a uniform scale or
rate.

dr ter. PETO, with the permission of the: house,
with-
the bill,
The motion for the second reading wa a accordingly
withdrawn,

COUNTY COURT EXTENSION AUT AMEND-
IIEN T BILL.
On the order of the day for the second :reading of this

Mr. CRAUFURD explained
that its object was to
give a power of appeal in
py cases over .540/., which had
been tried in a County Courtconsent cd' both parties.
The power of appeal did exist in reference to cases under
50/, but all cases above that amount we re exceptional
cases, and could only be tak
_ell-to a County Court by
consent.
Mr. G. BUTT approved of the bill.
Mr. PHINN asked when the report of the"'County
'
Court Commission might ,be expected,ig _the costs
i as
charged in County Courts were so hin some courts
as virtually to bring the system to a cies:.
Mr.
"HUGE said the house woul4
be
Countsurprised
to
learn the costs. paid last year in
y Couro
amounted to no less than i 6 per neut. on the amount re-
covered.
Lord PALMERSTON said the report had not yet
been received, as the commissioners were still sitting.
Mr. MALINS viewed with some apprehension the
Propos&l extension of the County Court system, as the
County Court judges had already quite enough to do.
Mr. FITZRO 1r concurred with the hoe. and learned
gentleman that too many duties were being imposed on
these •
judges, whose courts were origin all} established
simply for the recovery of simple contract debts.
The bill was then read a second time.

• PROPERTY DISPOSAL BILL:
Oa the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. PHINN said the object of this bill was to regu-
late the disposal of property by persons who had
taken religious vows. Now he did not object to place
nuns with regard to the disposal of their property upon
the same footing as married women, who were required
to make a discovery before a judge ; but this bill went
much further than that. It assumed that every disposi-
tion of property by a nun was fraudulently made ; and
that upon the convent or party in whose favour the
disposition was made, the onus of proving the deed of
transfer was not signed under any spiritual direction, or,
in fact, on any condition. The object of this bill could
be accomplished without that obnoxious provision ; but
if they passed the bill as it now stood, it would have I ilia
effect of forbidding-gifts to convents, and therefore tie