The Sun.
London, England, 1854-07-29 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.)
The house met at five o'clock.
REFORM OF THE CRIMINAL LAW.

The Earl of STRADBROOKE called attention to the
enormous expense, and the inconvenience imposed upon
the country by the prosecution of persons for petty
offences at the assizes, and expressed a hope that a mea-
sure would be introduced to: enable these cases to be
disposed of by magistrates at petty sessions.
Lord BROLGHAM said a bill had been introduced
on that subject into this house, but it had been post-
poned in consequence of the lateness of the session.
The LORD CHANCELLOR intimated that it was
his intention to consider the subject during the recess.
and he hoped to be able to bring in a bill next session
to remedy the evil complained of.
Lord CAMPBELL rejoiced to hear that a measure
was to be introduced by his noble and learned friend,
and trusted it would not be delayed beyond next year.
The Earl of HARD WICKE concurred in the proposed
reform in the criminal law.
The subject then dropped.
REFUSAL TO TAKE AN OATH.
Lord CONGLETON adverted to the case of the female
who was committed to gaol at the assizes for refusing to
take an oath, and inquired whether the law was such that
a judge had no alternative, when a person refused, on
conscientious grounds, to take an oath, but to commit
him to prison.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said as the.law stood.
if a person was subponned to give evidence, he was bound
to take an oath, unless he belorwed to the excepted
classes of Quakers, Moravians, and. Separati-ts,
and to fail in doing so was a contempt of court for which
thejudge had no alternative but to commit the indivi-
dual to prison. In the present session, ho wever, there had
been introduced a bill, which he trusted would receive the
concurrence of the other house, and shortly become law,
which would meet the cases of persons who had con-
scientious scruples to taking an oath.
After a few words from Lord CAMPBELL, the subject
dropped.

YOITTHFUL OFFENDERS BILL.

The house went into committee on this bill.
Lord BROUGHAM said he approved generally of
the bill, but objected to the second clause, which
rendered it necessary that a young person should be
sent to prison for a few days before becoming an in-
mate of a reformatory school.
The BISHOP of LONDON considered that no sys-
tem of reformation for juvenile offenders could be effec-
tual, while it subjected them to the taint of associations
in a gaol.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said the term of impri-
sonment was so short that it was not calculated to con-
taminate young persons.
The clauses were then agreed to, and the house re-
sumed.
The Convict Prisons (Ireland), the Indian Appoint-
ments, &c , the Inclosure, &c., of Land, and the Ad-
miralty Courts Bills, passed through committee.
The Land, Assessed, and Income Taxes Bills were
read a, second time.
The Public Revenue and Consolidated Fund Charges
Bill passed through Committee.
The Standard of Gold and Silver Wares Bill also
passed through committee.
SALE OF BEER BILL.
This bill was read a third time.
On the motion that the bill do pass,
The Earl of HARROWBY proposed amendments to
extend the hours during which publichouses may remain
open on Sundays from between 1 and 2 in the day to be-
tween 1 and half past 2, and from between 6 and 10 in
the evening to between 5 and 11 in summer and between
5 and ten in winter, in accordance with the notice given
by the noble earl on the previous day.
Lord REDESDALE considered that while 300,000
persons went out every Sunday upon pleasure excursions,
it would be difficult to interfere with the means of pro-
viding them with refreshments. Their object should be
to combine as far as possible consideration for the neces-
sary requirements of these people with regard for public
order. There was, however, this difficulty in dealing
with this matter—that while in the large towns from
which the excursionists proceeded in the morning, and
to which they returned probably late at night, the hour
of 10 or 11 o'clock might not be too late to allow refresh-
ments to be supplied to them, it might be altogether too
late in the country.
The Earl of HARROWBY moved his first amend
ment that 5 o'clock lie substituted for 6 as the hour at
which public houses might open in the afternoon.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY expressed a very de-
cided objection to the motion. As the bill was origi-
nally introduced, the hours were from six to nine in the
evening, subsequently a compromise' was entered into
with the consent of all parties, and the hour for closing
was extended from nine to ten, and in that shape the
bill was passed by the Commons, and sent up to their
lordships. Now, it was proposed to extend the period
by three'bours altogether—that was from six to nine,
to five to eleven, which would give six consecutive hours,
during which these public houses might remain open
every Sunday evening, so that the positive restriction
which would be gained, as compared with the existing
law, after all the exertions which had been made, was
two hours and a half—viz., from half-past two till five.
He trusted that their lordships would not sanction any
such change in the bill—at` least before they saw the
very important evidence which bad been taken by the
select committee of the House of Commons. For himself,
he must say that nothing would give him greater pain
than that by introducing these amendments, their lord-
ships should defeat the whole oljects of the bill, as in-
troduced into the other house, and that it should be said
the House of Leeds had less consideration for the wishes
of the people than the House of Commons.

The 'Bishop of LONDON knew that the best possible
effects had followed from the chan2e in the law which
he had been instrumental in carrying some years ago.
whereby public houses were kept closed until one o'clock
on Sunday morning, and he believed that it was the ex-
perience of the great social benefits which had resulted
from that change, that had been the cause of so many peti-
tions being presented in favour of the further restriction
proposed by this bill. He considered that four hours on
the Sunday evening was quite sufficient toallow persons
to resort to public houses and places of amusement on
the Sunday evening. There was no hardship in the
case ; on the contrary the restriction would compel those
who frequented such places to spend more time at home
with their wives and families. As they diminished the
hours for drinking in public houses the more they would
increase the comforts of the people, and of the working
classes especially. (Hear, hear.)
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE urged that recrea-
tion was necessary for the health of the people, and the
Sunday was the only day upon which, as a general rule,
they could avail themselves of the means offered them
for obtaining it. While they were permitted to obtain.
that recreation in the most innocent way possible, he could
conceive nothing more absurd or unjust than to deny
them that refreshment of which they stood in need.
(Hear, hear.) It was not to be supposed that, because
the public-houses were open an hour or so longer, people
would remain in them if they did not require refresh-
ment. It had been said that travellers had a right to
be supplied with refreshments on the Sunday, but the
whole grievance turned upon the want of a definition
of the word " traveller," and the inconvenience of these
restrictions would be still experienced as it was now by
persons who were at a distance from their homes, and
who, according to the decisions of some magistrates,
were not to be considered as travellers.

Their lordships divided—
For
the clause as it stood 24
For the amendment l5
. Majority —9
Six o'clock consequently remains as the hour at which
public houses may open on the Sunday evening.
The amendment, extending the hours for public
houses remaining open at noon from 1 to 2, to 1 to half-
pest 2, was agreed to. Some other amendments were
introduced during the absence of strangers, but what
they were could not be ascertained, and the bill passed.
The Reformatory School (Scotland) Bill, the Ecclesi-
astical Jurisdiction Bill, the Stock-in-Trade Exemption
Bill, and the Common, &c., Rights (Ordnance) Bill were
severally read a third time and passed.
_ The Friendly Societies Bill, the Burials beyond the
M tropolis Bill, the Spirits (Ireland) Bill, and the Literary
and Scientific Institutions Bill were reported as amended,
and agreed to.
......The Land Revenues of the Crown (Ireland) Bill, the
highways Public Health Bill, and the Public Libraries
Bill were severally real a third time and passed.
MEDICAL GRADUATES BILL.
_ Lord MONTEAGLE having moved the order of the
day for the committee on this bill fur the purpose of
postponing, it,
Tree Duke of ARGYLL
hobserved that he had seen
several medical men uponf
whomt e subject of this bill since
the second reading, allo
one ground or another. It was were.
opposed to it on
of
fhattheif
University
pri.vti-
lege were conceded to theb graduuartgeesd
to th
of London, it should vertu.),
of Dublin and of thee eedfoxutreudSttch ueuigvreardsiutie:B;
that if the principle
and it was also contend
of the bill were adopted, they ought to go the whole
length and. give to the graduates the right to practice
pharmacy, surgery, and every otherbranch of medi-
cine. He thought that the bill rashly established prin•
ciples which were now in a state of en ioon controversy, and
therefore should be considered with cautthe bill a rash bill, and attempted to settle questionsth°ht
which should be deferred until the introduction of a
general measure of medical reform. In committee, he
should move that the Universities of Scotland and Ire-
land he included in the bills. He did not wish to de-
prive the London University of the privilege sought, but
he thought that other universities were equally entitled.
He did not knot' why this bill should be brought in at
the present moment. The excuse was that penalties
existed against practising in vaccination and lunacy, but
he believed that their legality was doubtful. Even if
they did exist, the graduates of Ireland and Scotland
were as amenable as those of the University of London.
Lord MONTEAGLE, in reply, said that this bill
need not interfere with a general measure of medical
reform. It merely proposed to give the University of
London privileges at present enjoyed by the older uni-
versitiee, which were without medical schools. The bill
had been supported in the other house by every member
of the
Government ; the last division- in its favour being
IZ7 to r), and the Horne Secretary had supported it
eaxperessly on
Tlnieeral the ground that it would not interfere with
measure of medical reform.
• Duke of ARGYLL •
'mull day had .
Colleges of said that he had on the pre-
su an interview with the Presidents of the
posed to the bill.
After and that both were strongly op-
After a few words fro
Tu.
The Marquis of L m Lord ~, YNPORD,
a the University
knowledge say o'fINLS6I::dOOOW, NE recognised the claim ,
that alth and could of his own
°ugh no stipulation was. entered 1