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

THE SUN. LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MAY 5, 185 4,

ways affect the pecuniary-interests of the company, your
committee feel that its exercise must be carefully guarded.
• • %. . . The constitution of the executive govern-
ment is unfavourable to the determination of such ques-
tions; and your committee recommend that the fact of
wrong having been done by the company should fint be
substantiated before a public tribunal, and that the aid of
the executive department should be afforded to that tri-
bunal in forming its decisions." In the bill as originally
proposed, and as it now stood there was no attempt to run
counter to thii recommendation of the committee; but
there was a proposal in exact conformity with the lan-
guage of that recommendation,—that when, by statutory
enactment, it had been declared that the companies should
afford facilities, and when by legal investigation it had
been established that they had failed to do so, then the exe-
cutive government should afford its assistance to the tri-
bunal in determining the matter. On behalf of the great
railway companies, Mr. Beckett Denison and others had
requested an interview with him at the Board of Trade ;
they had expressed their readiness to co-operate with the
Government in carrying into effect the great public object
which it had in view of securing all reasonable facilities
and intercommunication; but they preferred that the ap-
plication should be a very summary one to a court of law,
which should have full power to refer it to any compe-
tent person ; and promised that they would assist in afford-
ing the most stringent remedies to enforce the right on the
part of the public. He should have acted most unreason-
ably had he not considered the full effect of such a pro-
posal. He did so, and came to the conclusion that the
public object in view would be as effectually attained by
the bill in the mode in which they were willing to accept
it as in any othor form of language. Reference had been
made to voluntary arbitration. So far as that was con-
cerned, no enactment was required, because it carried with
it no power. The Board of Trade was in the daily habit
habit of conveying to the various companies such coin-
plaints as they received from the general public, and the
board was always ready to promote the carrying out of
such voluntary arrangements. But the house knew that
this voluntary arbitration did not effect its object when
people's pecuniary interests were on the other side. A
more stringent mode of arbitration was now required, with
compulsory powers. The bill would give relief to any per-
son without exclusion or limitation, who was aggrieved ;
and if the Attorney-General were instructed on behalf of
the crown, he could apply, without costs, for any indivi-
dual, for the sake of remedying a great public grievance.
No complicated form was necessary ; the simplest was suf-
ficient. If the facts were not disputed, there would be
an immediate decision ; if they were disputed, the
bill gave pcwer to refer the matter to such en-
gineer or after competent person as the court might
(beide. Those were the two main provisions of the bill ; a
distinct statutory enactment that every company should
afford to the public all reasonable facilities, not only with
regard to its own line, but all those other lines with which
it intercommunicated, in order that the public might have
the full benefit of the whole system of railway communi-
cation throughout all its network, from one end of the
kingdom to the other ; and a provision of the simplest,
most efficient, and least costly mode for enforcing and
carrying out that remedy. Let the house go intocoun-
inittee on the bill, and those hon. members who had talked
with a disposition to sneer at the difficulties would not
find that the case was one so easy to dispose of. (Hear.
hear.) The committee in their report gave an enumera-
tion of the various means that hod been resorted to by the
'Muse fur dealing with railway questions—a proof of the
difficulties with which the subject was environed. Bear-
1-ng these facts in mind, the-house •would allow be was
justified in saying that they must first define the
duties before they appointed the tribunal. As to
amalgamation they had thought it better that Par-
liament should assume some control over railways
first, and then carry out amalgamation afterwards.
This was the first attempt to carry out a reference
to the constituted tribunals of alt disputed questions, at
the smallest expense; anti thus to ensure a benefit both to
the companies and the public at large. He doubted not
the willingness of the companies to co-operate in this ob-
ject ; anti this harmony, so far from being an objection to
the measure, ought to recommend it to the adoption of the
house. Should the bill pass, it would not only increase
the value of railway property, but what was of far more
importance, would contribute largely to the convenience
of the public. (Hoar, hear.)
The SPEAKER then left the chair, and the bill passed
through com u,i t tee pro forma.
EXCHEQUER BILLS BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
CONVENTUAL AND MONASTIC INSTITUTIONS.
Mr. T. CHAMBERS moved to postpone this debate till
the 18th inst.
Agreed to.

time, consisting of the younger and more ardent spirits,
who held peculiar opinions which he wished to check, by
bringing to bear upon them the larger body of the univer
city. The younger member; if they joined with them the
professors, of whom the right hon. gentleman had given 4o
graphic a description, would have an undoubted majority.
Tho members of congregation might be divided into two on
three categories. There were first the young men from 21
to 35 years of age. At the latter age they began to leave
the university to fill livings or to marry. When these parties
left the university, and spent eight or ten years in the.
world, would they be less qualified to pass judgment of
improvements in education than persons of 25 years of age
who were just begitning to teach? (Hear.) Was the
right hon. gentleman opposite, or the hon. and learned
member for Kidderminster, who stood high in the univer-
sity, less competent to give an opinion on improvements
in education because they were non-residents of the uni-
versity? (Hear.) In 99 cases out of 100 the decision
would be left to the resident body ; it was only on some
particular and strong case that the non-residents would be
brought up. Such cases might arise, and then it would le
unwise and unsafe to leave the decision to the resident bode
:done. By this proposition of the Government they were
creating a narrow oligarchy, instead of setting up a free
representative system. (Hear.)
Mr. H. DRUMMOND said that whether it was from a
want of apprehension on his part, or from an improper sus-
picion of others, he could not help thinking but that in this
matter both parties were fighting with gloves, and that there
was something at bottom which they were unwilling wholly
to acknowledge. He had a suspicion that each party was
endeavouring through this bill, and especially through this
clause, to strike at some party which they would notname.
He thought the mere number could not be of such great
importance. One right hon. gentleman said that if the
body was composed of a greater number they would be
divided into two factions. But was it not clear that whether
composed of 10 or 1,000, there would still be two factions,
who would be brought into continual collision ? It seemed
to him that far more important than the question of teach-
ing was that of the moral discipline of those who were sent
to the university. And for this purpose the board, as pro-
posed by the Government, was far more likely to be effi-
cient than if the non-residents who could not devote their
time to the subject formed part of it. (Hear.)
Mr. NEWDEGATE said all the members of convoca-
tion, having been educated at Oxford, were perfectly com-
petent to term a judgment on questions of discipline ; and,
as most of them had sons to be educated, they were not
likely to be in favour of a lax discipline. It was not merely
that a veto was given by the clause—the resident body
were to decide whether or not convocation should express
an opinion on any subject. There was nothing in the pre-
vious history of the university to justify such a provision.
its history showed that the resi• lents were liable to great
party bias and strong sectarian feeling, and that the
remedy for that was to be looked for in convocation.
Lord R. CECIL said, as convocation existed at present
and as it would exist if the amendment were cars led, the
effect was to leave all matters of rainier detail and all ques-
tions of scholastic discipline to those who were best able
to deal with them, namely, the residents, and there was
no reason to fear thet clergymen would come from Corn-
wall or Northumberland,to take such matters out of their
hands. (Hear.) He might appeal to experience in support
of this view. Two months ago, when the important question
of the reform, or, as soma called it, the destruction of the
university, was mooted, only 209 members assembled; and
at the late election for the university, out of 3,000 members.
barely 2,000 could be induced to vote. It was not on ques-
tious of detail that he wished to see convocation have the
power of interference; but surely on such a question
as that of the introduction of the study of the physical
sciences, noblemen and judges were as well qualified to
pronounce an opinions as the resident members of the
university. It wars a-mistake to suppose that the tutors
were 'the most talented morn belonging to the university.
There were many men of great talent among them, but the
body did not include the highest talent of the university
at large. lie should certainly support the amendment.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, said it seem-
ed to him that the house was in danger of forgetting what
was essential to a right apprehension of the point to be dis-
cussed: The hon. member for North Warwickshire (Mr.
Newdegate) had spoken as if they were now discussing a
proposal to put into the hands of the congregation the full
powers projected and designed by the bill. That, however,
was not the case. The principal part of the electoral power
hed, by a vote of the committee, which he much regretted,
been taken from the congresestion ; and the question now
was, whether a small portion of that power should not be
placed in the hands of the congregation. The speech of the
noble lord (Lord R. Cecil) was also calculated to create mis-
apprehension. The whole tone of that speech, as well as its
language, was adapted to produce an impression that a pro-
posal had been made by the government to deprive the con-
vocation of powers which it at present possessed. Convoca-
tion was to be deprived of no power whatever which it pos-
sessed. He might be told that it was to be subject to a veto
—that the congregation was to determine whether any
question should come before it or not. That was perfectly
true. But was there anything new in that proposal ? The
Hebdomadal Board had hitherto exercised precisely the
same power, What was the difference between the exercise
of this power by the Hebdomadal Board and its exercise by
the congregation ? Which was the most favourable for the
university, tai have an absolute veto placed in the hands of
the irresponsible heads of private societies, who did not
carry on the discipline of the university, or to have it vested
in an assembly which included every working man in the
university ? -:.(Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman the
member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) had complained of
the animadversionsof the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) upon
his, speech ; but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) must
say that he thought they were deserved. (Hear, hear.) He
had never heard from any gentleman in that house a speech
so disparaging to the university; and he must add so un-
worthy of one of her sons. (Cheers.) It was true the right
hon. gehtl&, an spoke, not of the convocation, but of the
resident body. For every working purpose, however, the
resident body was the university. (Hear.) Who were to
educate their children? Who were to exercise discipline
over them 2, On whom were their children to be depen-
dent ? Was it on the bishops on the bench, or on the judges
in the courts? No, the working university was the resi-
dent university. (Hear, hear.) It was the resident uni-
versity that was engaged in the work of tuition. And how
did the right hon. gentleman describe it ? He said, that
among that body every question was carried according to
party, by religions hate and animosity • it was always in
one dangerous extreme or another. Hei said that for the
last fifteen years it had been in the Tractarian extreme,
and he supposed that for the next fifteen years it would be
in the Rationalist extreme.
Mr. HENLEY said he would not be misrepresented in
that way. What he said was, that it had been in the Trac-
tarian extreme, and that the right hon. gentleman knew
better than, he did. (Opposition cheers.) He also s aid
that the hon member for Stroud ha I stated that it was
now in the Rationalist extreme, but that he (Mr. Henley)
did not lbelieVe it. That IV4B what he sail, and the right
hon. gentleman might misrepresent him as much as he
pleased: (Opposition cheers.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
right hon. gentleman had no right to say that he wilfully
-misrepresented him. He apprehended that he had a right
to appeal to the Speaker for protection against the angry
taunts of the right hon. gentleman. (Laughter from the
Opposition.) The right hon. gentleman had no right to
tell any member of that house that he might misrepresent
him if he pleased. It was the first time in his experience
in that house that he had heard any member, especially a
member of the right hon. gentleman's age and gravity, im-
pute to another member wilful misrepresentation. That
'was what the right hon. gentleman had chosen to impute
to him. He trusted he did not require to defend himself
against such an imputation. (Ministerial cheers.) He main-
tained that: he had not misrepresented and not misappre-
hended tharight hon. gentleman. His statement was that
for the last fifteen years the resident university had al-
ways been in one extreme or other and that if this power
were granted the same state of things would exist. That
was the whole pith of his speech, and if that were not its
meaning it had no meaning at all. Having had seven
years' acquaintance with the members of the university,
he ventured to say that the right honourable gentle-
man knew--; within; of their character, or he would
never have made such a statement respecting them.
The spiris -of party which unfortunately prevailed to so
great an extent in the Church. of England did not prevail
with half so much virulence in the University of Oxford
as it prevailed out of it. The reason of this it was not
very difficult to divine. These gentlemen at Oxford had
something else to think about than party disputes. A
more laborious and hard-working body could not be found
in any pert of the country. Surely also something was to
be ascribed to the humanising and alleviating influences
of their literary and civilising pursuits. For these reasons
he did not hesitate to say that the spirit of party, whether
political or. seligious, was less strong at that moment in
the 'Tniversity than out of it. They had just been told
that the tutors of Oxford were not a very distinguished
body, and that they did not fairly represent the members
of thecongregation in point of ability. He admitted that
the tutors were at the present moment not equal to what
they would be ten years hence if the house pissed this bill.
(Laughter from the Opposition, and cheers from the Mini-
sterial tide.) There were certain colleges in Oxford which
were oiled close colleges, and when these were made open
the tutors would represent the very elite of the university.
As the roble lord had made these remarks, he felt bound
to say t1:10 he received the, other day a statement—from
whom it came he knew not—ewhich gave in detail a
result which was rather curious. It gave in three classes
the heaths of houses at Oxford, the tutors and the pro-
fessors. Of the heeds of houses there was a certain
portion ofdistinguished men who were never examined
in schools, having passed through the university course be-
fore the examination was instituted. It appeared, how-
ever, that sit of seventeen heads of houses who were ex-
amined, six took first-class honours ; out of pixteen pro-
fessors who were examined, twelve took first-class honours ;
and out of twenty-one tutors who were examined, fourteen
took first-class honours. Under these circumstances, he
thought the noble hird ought not to have made any state-
ment disparaging to this body of men. The noble lord
(It Cecil) seemed to think that the leaving of the choice of
the members of convocation who were to till up the num-
ber of the Hebdomadal Council to a body necessarily resi-
dent would lead to party feelings and factious doings
(hear)--ancl he almost intimated that Government had
taken no step whatever for securing the University from
those evils. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) begged
to point out that the proposed measure left out two classes
of persons, en the very ground of their liability to be in-
fluenced by local considerations The noble lord would
find that the Government bill extended neither to the pa-
rochial clergy nor to the chaplains of colleges. (Hear.) He
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) dissented strongly from
those who said that the decision of Convocation would
be better thin that of Congregation ; he could not but
recollect that all the reforming movement in the univer-
sity had been on the part of the younger bleaches of the
university. There were many, very mazy, able men and
honest refonners in the ranks of the university ; bat they
were atnongst the junior, not the senior branches. There
had been a eery recent' instance of the resident and non-
resident feelings in the university. There was no need to
go back to 1834 to test the matter. Upon two occasions
during the present year appeals had been made to convoca-
tion. In tht first place, an appeal was made in order to
get up an address to the Crown on behalf of a new consti-
tution, projetted• by certain parties, for Oxford—a consti-
tution Whichhad folind no one in that house.hardy enough
to bring it fetward. That address would most surely have
been thrownover had the matter depended upon-the resi-
dents at Oxford. So ilso would the petition which had
been presented to that house against the present bill--a
petition by the way adopted by the majority of two only.
(Hoar, hear.), He should much like to know whether,
upon the oceisions which balled men to Oxford, it was the
quiet and teseperate, those unbiassed by party feeling, who
went there? Certainly not They would be found to be
the men of the strongest political and religious party feel-
ings. He ventured to say that an appeal to the facts upon
the two ocenaions only to which he had adverted, would
fully testify the truth Of this statement. There was one
more point which he thought conclusive on- this ques-
tion. The house in its wisdom had decided ,npon
adopting a reeresentation by classes ; it Bald said the heads
of houses dull select the heads of houses, the profeesors

the professors, who are to form part of the Hebdomadal
tioard. Surely it was only just and fit to carry out the
.ame principle In this instance, and leave these members of
the board to be chosen by congregation. Common justice
i.nd fair principle required that some portion of power
ihould be given to that class who did the work of the uni-
veisity. Had an opposite course been pursued by the
souse some show of reason might be made for this amend-
ment, but as things stood there seemed not one single ar-
mment to be found in its favour. He had mentioned be-
'ore :and repeated now, that it was the resident body in
Oxford who had been most favourable to the commission

4' 1850, who were now most favourable to the present
ueasure. It had been thought by some that the tutors
.vere a body standing alone—a sort of Macedonian pha-
lanx, bristling with spears. This was not the fact ; for
Imougst those who wore best inclined to the Government
a large number were persons actually engaged in the
business of tuition. He trusted that the house would not
ionsent to the amendment.

Lord R. CECIL explained that he hail no intention to
lisparage the tutors. All that ho had intended to say
was that when the various ranks of society were looked to,
it would be found that the proportion of successful univer-
,ity men not tutors was greater than those who had occu-
pied that position.
Mr. HORSMAN was sorry to find that what he had said
on a -former occasion had conveyed to some the idea that
he thought the university- iu a rationalistic state. He did
not say or believe that such was the case. (Hear.) His
4atement was, that the manner in which things were at
oresent going on was tending to Germanise the university.
Such be still thought to be the case, and in proof of the
soundness of that opinion, he reminded the committee
that the classics in use at Oxford were those edited by Ger-
man professors, and the theology was the theology of that
eoun try also. With regard to the particular amendment
under consideration he did not, as the bill now stood,
regard the question as of so great importance as some hon.
members.
Mr. ROUNDELL PALMER said that there seemed to
be an impression that the Government had recommended
!,hat convocation should consist of all the members of the
university ; he did not clearly understand whether that was
so or not.

Lord J. RUSSELL had not recommended that convoca-
tion should consist of all the members of the university ;
he had only said that when convocation itself came under
consideration; it might be a matter for grave deliberation.
Mr. ROUNDELL PALMER objected strongly to the
statements which had been made as to faction and party
spirit. That was not a place to complain of such things.
Party spirit was one of the infirmities of human nature,
and would always show itself where people thought strongly
and seriously upon any subject. It was a fact to be re-
gretted, perhaps, but it was no less a fact that could not be
turned aside and got rid of. Neither could he view with
Approbation the onservations which had been levelled at
!he tutorial body. He could conceive no higher occupation
than that of educating the people of England, and those
who were engaged in that great work were entitled to and
had his greatest respect. , To the detractors of those gentle-
men he replied by reminding the house what they had done,
and by pointing in support of that reminder to the judicial,
the episcopal, and the Treasury beaches. (Hear.)
Mr. HILDYARD objected strongly to the exclusion
of non-resident members from a right of voting in the choice
of members for the Hebdomadal Council. He wondered
that some cf the liberal members on the opposite benches,
the hon. member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) for instance,
had not taken the matter up. The proposal of the Govern-
ment amounted to reducing the number of electors from
about 3,000 to not more than 150. The' simplest method
of dealing with the question was to adopt the amendment,
and allow every member of the convocation the right of
voting.
Mr. R. PHILLIMORE, thought the house would not
agree to anything so unfair as that the six heads of col-
leges should be chosen by the close body, and the six tutors
by the convocation at large. The bill in no way limited
the powers of convocation, but gave it for the first time the
power of acting.
Mr. VANSITTART, who spoke amid impatient calls for
the division, was understood to support the amendment.

Sir W. H.EATHCOTI4; would vote for the word .'• con-

gregation " rather than " convocation," having given notice
of an amendment which would come at a later period of
the bill to'enlarge the boundary of the congregation
Mr. MILES thought, the noble lord should state whether
he would accept his hon. friend's (Sir W. Heatheote)
amendment to the 18th clause for enlarging theboujidaries
of the congregation.
Lord J. RUSS E LL must decline giving any -pledge until
he knew precisely what the amendment was, how it would
apply, and.the arguments by. which it might be supported.
The corn .t.ittee then divided—
For the word "congregation," as in the clause 192
For the amendment 176-16
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER intimated
that he proposed to adopt the amen. i ineut of his hon. friend
and colleague (Sir W. Heathcote), that the 'Vice-Chan-
cellor or. his deputy should preside over the Hebdomadal
Council. There was one person in the university they had
forgotten, that was the Chancellor, and he would give
notice of an amendment to the effect that the Chancellor,
when residing in the university, should be a member of
and preside over the council.
The clause as amended was agreed to.
On clause 7;

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he,
proposed to add words at the end of the clause, which
would enable the Vice-Chancellor to continue a member of
the council for one year after leaving his office.
The clause as amended was then agreed to.
On clause 8,
In answer •to Mr HENLEY,

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
clause was propc.ed to prevent the arising of any legal
doubt on the construction of the statutes which prevented
professors holding any other office. It was thought the
word office might apply to a place at the Hebdomadal
Council, and this clause was intended to avoid that diffi-
culty.
The clause was agreed to.
On clause 9,

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY proposed the following pro-
viso :--'4 Provided always that nothing contained in this
act shall be construed to give any executive functions to
the Hebdomadal Council or its committees, except such
as may be required to provide for the preparation and pro-
posal of statutes for congregation."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that

there IVIIB no probability that any board fn Oxford would
encroach on the duties of the executive. The functions of
the Hebdomadal Board were transferred by the bill to the
council, and as the board had never made any encroach-
ment on the executive, there was no reason to think that
the council would do so.
Clause 9 was then struck out.

On clause 10,
Sir W. HEATHCOTE moved 'an amendment to leave
out certain words, anal insert " not reside for 18 weeks
during term time, or attend 18 times at the meetings of the
Hebdomadal Council in each." The object of the amend-
ment was, that distinguished persons woo were not per-
manently resident might, with the facilities for travelling
now existing, be able to be members of the Hebdomalal
Council.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
term of 21 weeks had been inserted in the bill, with the
perfect knowledge that 14 weeks was the term of acade-
mical residence. He thought it would have been well if
Government had prolonged the term of residence. They
thought it reasonable and desirable that the members of
the Hebdomadal Council should be resident.
After some farther conversation, the amendment was
withdrawn, and the clause was agreed to.
Mr. PACKE moved that the Chairman report progress.
Mr. DISRAELI asked when the bill would be brought
on again.
Lord J. RUSSELL said it would not be brought on
either to-morrow oe Monday, and he could not now state
when it would be brought on.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and asked
leave to sit again.
BOUNDA ttY SURVEY (IRELAND) BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
ROYAL MILITARY ASYLUM.

Mr. OLIVEIRA moved that an humble address be pre-
sented to her Majesty, praying that she wil be graciously
pleased to grant au inquiry into the capability of increasing
the accommodation at the Royal Military Asylum at Chel-
sea, for the reception of the children of non-commissioned
officers and soldiers on foreign service, as far as may be
practicable, to theextent which that establishment afforded
under various warrants of her Majesty's royal predecessors.
Mr. S. HERBERT said there was no doubt that the
Asylum at Chelsea had afforded, and does afford at this
ii.otnent, considerable ad vantages to the army. It contained
now 350 children, but at one time when a similar estab-
lishment existed at Southampton, the number reached as
high as 1,222, including boys and girls. It was found,
however, that so far as their after life was concerned, the
• system f educating female children both at Chelsea and
Greenwich entirely failed,' and the Government therefore
put it down ; but as regarded boys the case was different.
The asylum at Chelsea was divided into two parts, one
portion being devoted to the boys and the other to the
purposes of a normal school for training masters for the
army. Now if the request of the honourable member
were acceded to without limitation, some other place
would have to be provided for the schoolmasters, but
the change could only be made at an obvious disad-
vantace to the service,. because you could not keep up
an efficient normal training school, unless you had attached
to it a large school for the education of children where the
master could obtain practical experience in the duties of
his calling. He had found,' however, upon inquiry, that
by making a certain amount -of alteration in the building,
accommodation for about a hundred and twenty children
more could be provided, but it was obvious that, as the
war progressed, the call upon the asylum for the reception
of children would be much greater than it is now, and
even here some limitation would have to be put on the
number. At present the inmates of the asylum consisted
of three classes of children, viz. orphans who had lost
both parents, children who had only one parent living,
and, lastly, hildren whose parents were alive but serving
abroad. The present number of inmates, as he had al-
ready stated, was 350, but if it was possible Government
intended to ask for pertnission to increase it at discretion by
150, which would involve an additional expenditure of
3,0001. for the first year, but something less in subsequent
years. He had directed inQuiries to be made as to how far
the increase coulit be carried out, and he hoped, under
these circumstances, the hon. gentleman would not think
it necessary to press the address.
After a few words from Colonel DUNNE and Colonel
NORTH, the motion was withdrawn.

COURT OF ADMIRALTY.
Sir G. B. PECHELL moved for a return from the Re-
gistrar of the High Court of Admiralty, together with
copies of the return transmitted to the Lords Commis-
sioners of the 'Admiralty, from the several Vice Adaairalty
Courts, of all cases which had been adjudged in the said
courts respectively, under the Act 13 and 14 Vic., since
the Ist of Jiane, 1850, with the dates of the seizure, ac-
cording to the schedule annexed to the said act.
Agreed to. •
INDUSTRIAL AND PROVIDENT SOCIETIES.
Viscount GODERICH moved for a bill to amend the
Act 15 and 16 Vio., c. 31, to legalise the formation of in-
dustrial and provident societies. The object of the bill was
to enable friendly, societies to appoint.public officers to sue
and be sued instead of the trustees.
Agreed to.
PAYMENT .OF *WAGES (HOSIERY) BILL,
Sir H. HALFORD moved that this bill be referred to
the select committee on the Payment of Wages Bill.
Agreed to.

POOR 'REMOVAL BILL.
Mr. BAINES moved to nominate the select committee,
viz'.: Mr.-Baines, Sir George Grey, Sir John Trollop°, Sir
Benjamin Hall. Mr. Liddell, Mr. Dunlop, Mr.. Alexander
Thistle, Colonel Blair, Colonel Mure, Mr. Cumming Bruca
Sir John Yoang, Mr. George Alexander Hamilton, Sir
Robes t Ferguson, Mr. John Ball, and Mr. Maguire.
Colonel DUNNE moved the adjournment of the, debate,
on the ground that owing to some misunderstanding the
Irish members left the house under the impression that
-Lord Naas and Mr.' IL Herbert were to "be added to the
committee.
Mr. DANES said he should Iwo bog happy to.hsve

acceded to the gallant colonel's proposal to insert the names
of Lord Naas and Mr. Herbert ; hut owing to the compo-
sition of the committee, he could not assent to their being
added to it, unless he also proposed two more Scotch and
Irish members.
Sir J. TROLLOPE supported the original motion.
After a few words in explanation,
Colonel DUNNE withdrew his amendment, and the
committee was appointed.
PUBLIC STATUES.

Sir W. MOLESNiblad moved for leave to introduce
a bill to place public statues within the metropolitan police
district under the control of the Commissioners of her
Majesty's Works and Public Buildings.
Leave was given.
The house adjourned at 1 o'clock.

THE AMERICAN DRAMATIC FUND.

( From the Sunday Courier. )

NEW YORK APRIL 16, 1854.
The annual dinner took place in the ladies' ordinary of
the Astor House, on Monday evening last, and was parti-
cipated in by about one hundred and fifty persons. The
report of Mr. Wemyss was favourably received, and the
donations made on the occasion exceeded by a trifle five
hundred dollars. Speeches were made by the president,
Mr. Stebbins, Blake, Parke, Goodwin, Fuller, Fields,
Marsh, John Van Buren, Fleming, and others, and Gay-
ler, volunteered several songs, which were deservedly ap
plauded. The music was furnished by Lyster, Rea,
Cardon, Fordolf, Madame Pozzoni, Miss C. Hiffert, Mrs.
Brown, and Mrs. Hayes.
-Among the invited were two reverend gentlemen, Henry
Ward Beecher and E. H. Chapin, both of whom declined,
and from whom letters were received and read. As the
former has distinguished himself by his bitter and perse-
cuting assaults upon the drama and its professors, we pre-
sume that the request for his attendance was a piece of
satire, and if so, Beecher proved by his note that he was
too old a bird to be caught in the trap set for him. The
success of the play of" Uncle Tom's Cabin" may, however,
have worked a radical change in the views of our clerical
friend, and he may now be of the opinion that the stage is
not quite so bad as he painted it.
The following letter, read by Mr. F. C. Weinysa, at the
dinner we have not seen in print :
Theatre Royal, Haymarket,
London, 30th April.
My dear Sir,—l have just read the report .of your last
American Dramatic Fund Festival, and permit • me, as
Master and Treasurer of the General Theatrical Fund
in England, to congratulate you on the noble and generous
spirit which procured. you the triumph of your inde-
pendence on that occasion ; and while that independence
has not been the only one achieved by America, it is not
the less honourable because it has secured the comfort, in
old age, of the prudent and retired actor, and shown to those
who neither comprehend his pursuit nor its purposes. that
the stage, besides its high and legitimate aims, posiesses other
kindly and liberal objects which must ever command the re-
spect of all enlightened and tolerant minds.
The characteristic impulse that at once obtained you such
a proud position amongst the institutions of both hemis-
pheres, is only what I could have expected, from experience,
during my visit to the United States, where I met with libe-
rality and kindness at every turn.
At our next festival I shall certainly allude to your last
most extraordinary demonstration in the hope that I shall
witness something like a corresponding feeling here.*
While again conzratulating you, allow me to forward you a
donation of Fifty Dollars, and'with best remembrances to all
who may not have forgotten me in your country, believe Me,
very truly yours, J. B. BUCHSTONE.
• To F. C. Wemyss, Esq., Secretary to the American Fund
Association.

17, Ely-place, Holborn, London, Sept. 20th,

MY dear PoveY,l beg to return the rules and regulations
of the American. Dramatic Fund Association with thanks,
and at the same throe permit me to say that I am much
pleased with them. I cuchise you a draft for 5/. for the
purpose of the Fund, being a great admirer of the talent from
that great country. Wishing them all the success they can
wish themselves, believe me yours, &c.,
To John Povey, Esq. TllOlllB J. JERWOOD.

* Alluding to the fact, as stated by Mr. Buckstone at the
last anniversary dinner of the General The itrical Fund; that
on one occasion thirteen gentlemen subscribed one hundred
dollars each after the subscription list had closed, to obtain
the independence of the American Fund, and to- enable it to
grant annuities. - - •

RAIL WAY INTELLIGENCE.

RAILWAY AND CANAL TRAFFIC REGULA,

TION BILL.
Mr. Cardwell's bill, under this title, has been amended
in committtee at the request of the railway directors.
The clauses in the original bill for sanctioning
working arrangements between railway and canal
companies, and conferring various powers on the
Board of Trade for the regulation of the traffic, the
starting and arrival if railway trains at points
of junction, and for the settlement of disputes be-
tween railway companies, have - been expunged thus
reducing the bill from 15 to 5 clauses. These clauses
provide that every railway company or canal com-
pany, and railway and canal company shall afford all
reasonable facilities for the receiving and forwarding
and delivering of the traffic upon and from the rail-
ways and canals belonging to or worked by such
companies, and for the return of carriages, trucks,
boats, and other vehicles, and shall not give any
undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to or in
favour of any particular person or company, or any par-
ticular description of traffic ; and every such company
having railway or canal or railway and canal communi-
cation, forming part of a continuous line of railway or
canal communication, or which has the terminus sta-
tion or wharf of the one near the terminus station or
wharf of the other, shall, so far as reasonably and con-
veniently may be, afford all due and reasonable facilities
for receiving and forwarding alt the traffic arriving by
one of such railways or canals by the other, without any
unreasonable delay, and without any undue preference
or partiality, and so that no obstruction may be offered
to the public desirous of using such railways or canals
as a continuous line of communication, and se that
all reasonable accommodation may at all times
be afforded to the public. Parties complaining that
reasonable facilities fur forwarding traffic are withheld
may apply, in a summary way, by motion to one of the
superior courts in Westminster or Dublin, or to the
Court of Sessionin ScAland, as the case may be, and it
shall be lawful for such court or judge to hear and de-
termine the matter, and to enforce certain penalties from
companies or parties for disobeying the orders of the
court. It is also provided that the judges of such courts,
or any nine of them, of whom the Lord Chancellor, the
Master of the Rolls, the Lord Chief Justices of the
Queen's Bench and Common Pleas, and the Lord Chief
Baron of the Exchequer shall be five, from time to time
to make all such rules or regulations as may be necessary
for proceedings under this act. The saving clause pro-
vides that nothing contained in the act shall take away
or diminish any of the rights or privileges of any person
or company under the existing law, except so far as they
may be inconsistent with this act.