The Sun.
London, England, 1854-06-13 00:00:00

THE StIN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JITNE 13, 1854.

with the great and important change which he proposed
with r+ Terence inli ntl bills of exchange.
Mr. J. B. SMITH asked the right hon. gentleman what
amount he expected to raise upon foreign bilis.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did Lot
believe that any man iu England could give a reliable
estimate, but it was calculated that the foreign bi.ls
drawn upon this country amounted to about 200,000,0001.
per annum, and the duty would be a shilling per cent.
Mr. SANDARS objected to the proposed tax upon b-
reign bills.
Mr. JAMES MACGREGOR insisted that the tax would
be equal to 2i per cent. upon the bills drawn. He advised
the committee to take a lesson from the United States, and
apply their free system to bills of exchange.
Mr. HUME said he, for one, was prepared to do that.
Mr. MUNTZ was decidedly in favour of the proposed al-
terations with regard to inland bills, but he objected in tato
to placing a tax upon foreign bills. True, the amount was
small, but it would be none the less onerous.
The committee then divided, wh©n there appeared—
For the clause 173

Against it
The clause was accordingly agreed to, as were also clauses
from 5 to 8 inclusive.
Mr. VANCE moved to leave out clause 9, relating to ex-
emption from receipt stamp duty by lettere acknowledging
receipt of bills, Sze., repealed.
After a short conversation the clause was postponed.
Clauses 10 and 11 ware agreed to.
Mr. HADFIELD moved to add the following words to
Clause 11: " And, further, the duty charged in the said act
of last session (16 and 17 Vic. c. 63) on conveyance in Eng-
land and Ireland, and charter, disposition, or contract COl-
- the first original constitution of feu and ground tu-
nnel rents in Scotland, in consideration of any annual sun
payable in perpetuity, or for any indefinite period, whether
for farm-rent, feu-duty, ground-annual, or otherwise, shall
be abolished, and in lieu or substitution for such abolished
duty there shall be a duty on the same scale as on a lease
or tack of any lands, tenements, hereditaments, or herit-
able subjects at a yearly rent, without any sum of money
by way of fine, premium, or grassum paid for the same, or,
where the same shall be with such fine, premium, or gras-
sum, and also of a yearly rent amounting to 201. and up-
wards, then both the ad valorem duties payable for a lease
in consideration of a fine only, and for a lease in considera-
tion of a rent only of the same amount ; and, further, that
in computing the rent chargeable with conveyance duty by
the said last-mentioned act, a due allowance and deduction
shall be made from such rent for any original rent or rests
that the premises conveyed shall be subject or liable to."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said this
alteration in the law would go the whole foundation of the
duties on conveyances. There must be a distinction drawn
between leaseholds and conveyances of freeholds, and al-
though there might be isolated cases of injustice, he yet
could not consent to alter the ad valorem principle upon
which the existing duties were founded.
Mr. BRIGHT argued the case as one affecting the work-
ing classes, upon whom it inflicted great injustice, particu-
larly those living in the district of Manchester. The case
was simply this—a man who purchased a piece of land on
lease for 999 years, at a rental of 1001. per annum, paid a
duty of 10s. ; but the man who purchased a precisely simi-
lar piece of land at the same rental, but without any de-
fined term, paid a duty of 12/.los. Now that was a great
injustice, because the tax was professed to be levied ac-
cording to the value of the laud which was the same in one
case as the other.

Mr. G. BU PT contended that it was necessary to pre-
serve this distinction between leaseholds and freeholds.
Mr. KIRK said the existing law operated most unjustly
in.lreland, where at least an eleventh of the whole land
was hell upon renewable leases at small rentals.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER confessed
himself ready to take the case of Ireland into consideration,
but he could not make any change to meet the exceptional
case contemplated by this amendment. As for the present
arrangement of the duties prejudicing the working or in-
dustrious classes, the alteration of last year was made ex-
pressly for their benefit, and it was only estates of more
value than 3501. that could possibly derive any advantage
for this proposed loss to the Exchequer.
Mr. HADFIELD said it was quite absurd to keep up a
distinction between real and personal property. That dis-
tinction was the cause of great and numerous anomalies.
Mr. MUL LINOS said that, without giving any opinion
as to the propriety of the distinction, they must, as long
as they recognised different kinds of tenure, keep up a dis-
tinction between freehoM and chattle interests.

Mr. DUNLOP was so well pleased with the concession
made last year that ho felt repugnant to ask for more,
but the grounds on which the present concession was
asked were well founded, that he hoped the right hon.
gentleman would at least consider the question. It was
natural for all law-, ON to wish to see the distinction kept
up, but what was desired was not to do away with the dis-
tinction, but to lay on the tax, not with regard to the
feudal tenure, but with regard to the substantial interest
of the property. (Hear.)
Mr. BROTHERTON said that the distinction between
real and personal property produced great anomalies. The
difficulty was to find the proper remedy.
Mr. BRIGHT said he would take the opinion of the
right hon. gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
on a matt.er of fiscal arrangement sooner than, perhaps, that
of any other member of the house. He certainly had more
confidence in tie way in which he proposed his taxes than
agues in any other matter. (Laughter.)
in any of his coll.,:
He had often stated that in private, and he now stated in
public, and he would not worry the right hon. gentleman
on this point were he not convinced, that if the right hon.
gentleman knew all the facts, kuitead of leaving it to his
bon. friend to propose this amendtrient, the right hon. gen-
tleman would propose it himself in the first instance. He
begged, therefore to press on the right hon. gentleman to
consider the question.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
it was difficult to resist the hon. member for Manchester,
he was so complimentary. (Laughter.) He said that the
clause appeared to him to be one of which it was most dif-
ficult to understand the effect. But he would ne perfectly
ready to consider whether something could not be done to
frame an equitable arrangement. (Hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT was quite satisfied that if the right hon.
gentleman understood the real hardship of the case, he
would agree with his hon. friend. He would suggest to
his hon. friend not to press his motion. Did the right
hon. gentleman intend to postpone the clause ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Certainly
not. The clause was a good one. But he would consider
the other point.
Mr. HADFIELD withdrew his amendment, but gave
notice that he would propose it at a subsequent stage.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 12, 13, and 14, were agreed to.
On clause 15, which empowers the commissioners of In-
land Revenue to require an affidavit,
Mr. HENLEY said it would put the party to expense.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the commissioners of Inland Revenue, on looking at the
instrument, might have a knowledge amounting to cer-
tainty that the true consideration for which it was granted
was suppressed, and it was in this case only that they
could call for an affidavit, this was the object with which
the clause was framed.
Mr. HENLEY said that he merely referred. to the ex-
pense of requiring thJ affidavit. It was not necessary to
send the parties to a solicitor. Any person could count
the number of words in tho instrument.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said the clause, as it was
proposed, was more merciful and less costly to the party
than if the suggestion of the right hon. gentleman were
adopted.
After a conversation, in which Mr. MuHinge, Mr. G.
Butt, and Mr. Phiun took part, the clause, as amended,
was agreed to, as was clause 16.
Ou clause 17,
Mr. VANCE complained of some peculiar burden to
which the Dublin pawnbrokers were subject, under an old
act of Geo. 111.

Mr. WILSON said it was quite true they had to pay
1001. in Irish money in order to carry on their trade ; but
they did not pay this to the Imperial exchequer, but to
the city of Dublin, which had chosen, instead of rtting
the inhabitants generally, to lay a tax of 1001. a year on
pawnbrokers. (Laughter.) The pawnbrokers of Dublin
diet not complain of the stamp duty, but -vere grateful for
its reduction by one-half. The Government had thought
they might reduce the duty in Dublin to the same amount
as was paid in provincial towns.
The clause was thou agreed to, as was clause 18.
On clause 19,
Mr. VANCE objected to that part of the clause which
gave the public the opportunity of going to the stamp office
and claiming the discount on stamps to the amount of 51.
The result of this would be to injure the sellers of stamps,
who would hardly find it worth while to keep their shops
open._
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
reduction of the limit at which discount might be claimed
had been made with reference to the decreased amount of
the stamp duties. It would be much better to leave this
matter to be settled between the Government and the
sellers of stamps.

The clause was then agreed to, as were the remaining
clauses. .

Mr. PHINN moved a new clause—" That eYery instru-
ment liable to stamp duty shall be admitted in evidence in
any criminal proceeding, although it may not have the
stamp required by law impressed on or affixed thereto.
Agreed to.

Oo the schedule,
Mr. M'MAHON said he had given notice of an amend-
ment for reducing the stamps to Id. and 2d. on bills not
exceeding 101. and 201, respectively ; but as he understood
the Chancellor of the Exchequer was willing to allow those
small stamps for bills of 5/. and 101. respectively, he would
not press his amendment. Bills under Si. were at present
liable to several restrictions, with regard to other matters,
and he hoped to see those removed.
Mr. T. BARING said the result of these alterations
would be largely to increase the number of small bills,
which would add by so much to the circulation. For every
small purchase of Si. or 101. bills would be given and
would be discounted. After trying to bring all our trans-
actions to cash limits, he doubted the propriety of the step
now taken. It would largely increase the number of small
bills in circulation, and would operate injuriously to the
trade of the country.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
heard with regret the opinion of the hon. gentleman, but
he did not believe that these small bills were to be regarded
as an addition to the circulation. It was not. at all with
the view of seeking relief from the fetters of a gold circu-
lation that this change had been proposed, but solely to
relieve tradesmen from the evils of their present system of
open credit, and to substitute for them certain and fixed
payments.
Mr. VANCE said he should certainly take the sense of
the house against the proposed ld. and 2d. bill stamps.
After a few words from Mr. FRENCH,
Mr. VANCE, on bein, asked, declined to press his
amendment; and the schedules were gone through and
agreed to.
The house then resumed. _ _

Mr. VANCE asked if auy reduction was contemplated
in the stamps on agreements for submission to arbitration ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had
received no representation on the subject, and he did not
mean to propose any reduction in the present bill.

granted to England and Wales, in relief of the county
rate, enancc while the whole sum
granted to Ireland had only been 4!3,000/. In Ireland, too,
no expenses bad been allowed to witnesses out of the Con-
solidated Fund, except in those cases which were called
" crown prosecutions." He thought that the Irish people
had a right to demand a committee of inquiry iutu the
whole subject.
The vote was agreed to.

17,061. for the inspection of the prisons of the United
Kingdom.—Agreocl to.
371,9331. for the Government prison and convict esta-
blishments at home,

Sir J.-
PAKINGTON wished to know whether, in con-
sequence of the adoption of the system of penal servitude,
the Government intended to make any alteration in the
period of seprate confinement with each person sentenced
to transportation had to undergo.
Viscount PALMERSTON said that the period of sepa-
rate confinement was formerly one year and sometimes
more. It had, however, appeared to him from information
he had received from persons engaged in the management
of prisons that that long period was likely to be injurious
both to the mental and the bodily health of the persons by
whom it was undergone. (Hear, hear.) It had therefore
been reduced to nine months as the maximum, but in cases
in which from the peculiar construction of the individual
even that period was likely to lead to any permanent in-
jury, a discretionary power had been allowed to shorten
the time. There were two very opposite opinions held by
persons employed in the management of prisons with re-
spect to the separate system. Some held that it was almost
invariably attended with the most beneficial effects, that
it afforded time fur reflection and opportunities for exhor-
tation to reform ; and that, except in cases of weakly per-
sons, the effect was universally good. Others again thought
that it threw too great a strain upon the mind. (H -ar.)
He (Lord Palmerston) believed that the truth lay between
the two ; and that to persons of strong constitution the
period of separate confineineut often proved most salutary.
Mr. HENLEY asked if the noble lord could lay before
the public the documents upon which he had founded the
opinion he had just expressed?
Lord PALMEE.STON said it would be difficult to give
the grounds upon which he had arrived at the decision he
had stated ; for he had come to that conclusion, to a great
extent, upon the verbal communications which he had had
with persons in charge of the different prisons. The plan
adopted was to subject the convict first to separate confine-
ment in which he had little communication with the offi-
cers and none with the rest of the inmates. Next, he was
associated with the other prisoners, with whom he was now
allowed some intercourse, and lastly he was sent to Port-
land or some other place where he could be employed on
the public works. In county prisons, if properly conducted
there should be a certain part arranged in separate cells,
in which the criminal could hold communication with the
officers of the prison, the chaplain, or the person employed
in teaching him a trade. But there should be another part
in which the prisoners could be associated together; and
there should be a discretionary power in the governor as to
the period at which each person should be removed from
the one part of the prison to the other.
Mr. HENLEY believed that public opinion had of late
been undergoing a considerable change in the direction
pointed at by the noble lord ; but he thought that the per-
sons on whose communications the noble lord had acted,
ought not to shrink from making a public report for the
information of those on whom the responsibility of sen-
tencing persons to imprisonment devolved.
Sir J. PAKINGTON concurred in the views of the
noble lord, and asked how long the new plan had been
acted upon.

Lord PA.LMERSTON—Since last autumn.
Mr. PALK asked whether the same system was pursued
at Dartmoor as at Pentonville ?
Lord PALMERSTON said that persona were sent to
Dartmoor who were not strong enough for the public
works. He believed that the separate system was an essen-
tial part of the reformatory process, provided that it was
not carried too far.
Mr MACA.RTNEY said the statement of the noble lord
would be read with great alarm in Ireland.
Mr. NEWDEGA TE called the attention of the Govern-
ment to a case in which a notorious malefactor bad been
released from prison on the understanding that he was to
be received in some person's employment. The man, how-
ever, did not stop in that employment for more than three
or four weeks, and there was too much reason to fear that
he had relapsed into his former licentious habits. He (Mr.
Newagate) wished, therefore, to ask the noble lord what
regulations had been adopted to obtain some security that
convicts released under similar circumstances should re-
main in their employment for some given period ?

Lord SEYMOUR reminded the committee that they
were told last year that transportation had ceased, but he
had been astonished to find when looking at the estimate
that whereas the sum asked last year in respect of tran-
sportation was only 69,5181., the present vote was for
92;765/. O❑ the other band, supposing that transporta-
tion had ceased, it might reasonably be expected that the
expenses of establishments at home would be increased,
but the votes showed a decrease, last year being 407,0001.,
and the present 371,0001. The figures being so opposite to
what might be expected, he should be glad of a few words
in explanation from the noble lord, as he thought that so
momentous a change as was now taking place in our
sys-
tem of banishment ought to be fully understood by the
house. _ _ _ _ _

Sir J. PAKINGTON wished also to put another ques-
tion. He desired to know how the present remnant of
transportation was carried on. It seemed that a certain
portion of prisoners were transported, and it was desirable
that the principle should be understood on which the
selection was male.

Lord PALMERSTON said that when a prisoner was
released it was of course difficult to take any positive
security that, he would find employment. Sometimes
an application was made for a pardon, which was granted
to a prisoner whose offence was not serious, on con-
dition that his family would find employment for
him. Of course Government could only go upon the
representations which were made in such inquiries as the
circumstances of the case afforded. When a pardon was
granted all control over the discharged prisoner was at an
end. But in case of a ticket of leave, there was a hold over
tho party released, for if he misconducted himself the very
condition on which ho was released was broken—for the
ticket of leave was granted on the proviso that he should
be liablo on misconduct to bo called back again to complete
his term of penal servitude. He (Lord Palmerston) was
glad to state that out of the considerable number who had
been released, a very small proportion had been guilty of
misconducting themselves, and in those cases means had at
once been taken of bringing the parties back to the public
works from which they had been sent. With regard to the
question of the noble lord (ieyinour) the excess of the pre-
sent estimate arose principally from thil increased price of
provisions abroad in Australia. There was, however, every
reason to think that the substitution of the present system
of imprisonment for the old system of transportation would
tend much to decrease the expense of prisoners. It would
of course necessitate an increase in the accommodation, or
rather the means, of lodging prisoners. With regard to the
system of transportation still existing a certain number of
prisoners—about 900—were proposed to be sent to Austra-
lia in the present year. Those were selected who were
thought likely to be most useful in the colony. The selec-
tion was not made on the ground of the offences which
were committed by the parties.

Capt. SCOBELL remarked that the salaries for last year
were but 60,0001., while this year they were 71,0001., al-
though the number of convicts was 3,000 less.
Mr. HENLEY said it appeared from the statement of
the noble lord (Palmerston) that all the best of the prison-
ers were sent aimed and all the greatest rogues left in Eng-
land and then turned loose on society. He should like to
know how many of these rogues were so turned loose ; as
9,0001. was charged for them it could be no small number.
Mr. FITZROY said that in the course of last year 1,194
prisoners were discharged, and out of this large number it
had only boon found necessary to revoke the tickets of
leave of three. The item of 9,0001. rose in this way—it
was thought desirable to give the persons discharged the
means of returning to their native place, and also enough
to purchase necessary clothing. During their term of im-
prisonment a certain portion of their earnings was put by
for them according to their conduct. Thus, for the first
class, 9d. a week; for the second, 6d. ; and for the third,
3d. per week was retained. This money was given to them
upon their discharge in order that they might not come
upon the world totally unprovided for. Notice has been
taken of the increase of salaries in the vote. This arose
from a reason to which reference had already been made—
the increased price of food and other commodities in Aus-
tralia.
In answer to Mr. ITENLET,
Mr. FITZROY said that in a case where transportation
for seven years had been awarded, three years' penal servi-
tude was considered equivalent—a conditional ticket only
being given at the end of that time for the remainder of
the term.
Mr. SPOONER observed an entry in theeetimates under
the head special services, in these words, " Provision for
Rowan catholic priests, 5501." He wished to ask au ex-
planation of this, and to know what these special services
were. Also, as this was a perfectly new vote, he should
like to know if it was to be a continuous one.
Lord PALMERSTON—I suppose the hon. gentleman
wants really to know whether Catholic priests are to be
allowed in prisons. (Mr. Spooner shook his bead in dis-
sent.) Well, then, all that is to be said is that the 5501.
is for Catholic priests who are attending convicts in catho-
lic gaols.
Mr. SPOONER wished to know whether the vote refer-
red to Government prisons only ?
Lord PA.L NIERSTON replied that the estimate was for
the attendance of priests upon Roman catholic prisoners
in Government prisons.
Mr. SPOONER thought that answer very unsatisfac-
tory. (A laugh.) If Roman Catholic priests were to be
paid, why not the ministers of other dissenting sects? A
man had already a right to send for the minister, whatever
sect he belonged, but the minister was not to be paid.
(Laughter, and ironical cheering.) This was, in fact, pay-
ing for what the Sovereign declared in her coronation oath
to be a blasphemous, false, and a dangerous deceit. He
know no reason why he should say more on the subject.
(Laughter.)
Lord PALMERSTON said, though he might not be so
vehement a Protestant as the bun. gentleman opposite, he
flattered himself he was as sincere an one. If violent
speeches in that house, if hard words and cutting off of
estimates, could convert all their fellow-subjects, he should
join with the hon. gentleman, and vote fur his motion ;
but, unfortunately, neither the hon. gentleman's efforts,
nor his, if he were to join him, could have the effect that
he desired. And, therefore, as it happened that they had
a large proportion of their countrymen who were Catholics,
ho thought it better to treat their religion with respect,
and to give to those who wore of that faith the means of
becoming better Christians than they might happen to be
in the condition to which they wore reduced. The hon.
gentleman was mistaken in supposing that the principle on
which this vote was founded was new, because the system
had been in practice for several years at Millbank. At
Mill bank there was a regular allowance to a Catholic priest
for attending the convicts. The convicts on arriving
declared themselves whether they wore Catholic or Protes-
tant. Those who were Catholics wore regularly attended
by the Catholic priests, who performed divine !service to
them on Sundays, Good Fridays, and Christmas days. The
priests attended once a week in ministration on the male
prisoners, and once a week in ministration on the female
prisoners. At Millbank also, when a convict was ill, so as
to show that he ought to have religious consolation, if he
was a Catholic, the priest was sent for to give bins mini-
stration. That system was established before his time,
and he thought it a good ono, and it was his intention
that it should be extended to all the Government prisons,
and for this purpose an additional vote was proposed to
the house in the estimates for this year. It did not occur
to him that the Protestant succession or the throne was
likely to be in danger by this vote. (Laughter.) He
could not seriously deal with the alarm of the bon. gentle-
man. Ho was not of opinion that they should wait always ,
till a convict wished to have a priest, and that then the
priest should come at his own cost. In the first place, the
man who most wanted spiritual assistance was the man
who was least likely to ask fur it. What was the object
they were aiming at by their prison discipline ? It was not
mere punishment : it was a combination of punishment
with reformation. They wanted to avail thenallvels of the

' period daring which the man was confined to give a new
turn to Ilk thougl:t6, to discipline him with ideas and
feelings, which probably never entered his mind before.
They wished to turn him out at the end of his period of
confinement a better man, and less likely to be dangerous
to the community. How were they to do it ? The Pro-
testant had the ministrations of his clergyman, but the
Catholic could not advantageously receive the ministra-
tions of a clergyman who was not of his own faith. They
could not expect that the ministration of a Protestant cler-
gyman would have great effect on the mind of a Catholic
convict any more than they could expect that the minis-
tration of a Catholic clergyman could have great effect on
a Protestant. If the hon. member for Warwickshire were
to be attended by a Catholic priest he did not suppose that
ho would derive much advantage from it. They wanted to
get at the mind of the man, and they must employ some-
body who could reach it. They must, therefore, employ
the clergyman of the man's own persuasion. The system
was introduced by Sir G. Grey, and under it a Catholic was
not at liberty to refuse attending Catholic worship ; he, like
a Protestant, must attend divine worship conducted by his
own clergyman. If a Protestant wished to turn Catholic, or
a Catholic wished to turn Protestant, he had a fortnight for
reflection, and then he acted according to his ultimate de-
cision ; but a Catholic priest did not come into contact with
a Protestant, and therefore the hon. member need not be
alarmed that our prisons would be turned into places
for converting Protestants to Catholicism. But he was sure
the house would feel that our prisons were not to be used
for the purpose of turning Catholics into Protestants. That
was not the purpose for which prisons were established
He could not persuade himself that the house would feel
any doubt that such a provision as that which they new
asked for was a proper one. What thew wanted was to
give men who had committed crime, who had been sen-
tenced to punishment for those crimes, while undergoing
that sentence, an opportunity to have their minds im-
proved, to give them a sense of right and wrong, and that
could only be done by giving them the opportunity of re-
ligious instruction from some minister of religion whose
doctrine was their own, and who therefore could appeal to
those feelings which their nature or their education might
have implanted in their minds (Cheers.)
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD regarded the proposition of his
hon. friend as dictated by narrow and bigoted views. He
was willing to pay for chaplains of the Church of England,
the richest in the country, while he refused to give any-
thing to the priests of the poorest.
Mr. NE WDEGATE supported the amendment on the
ground that every concession to Rome was an encourage-
ment to the aggressions of Rome. If Romanist chaplains
were admitted into our prisons, justice demanded that all
dissenters ought to be placed upon the same footing. To
accept this proposition would, in fact, be to sanction the
erection of another Established Church.
Mr. DRUMMOND thought the vote ill-advised.
Mr. ADDERLEY approved of the amendment, because
1 the vote had not beenjustified by sound principle.
Mr. CROSSLE Y opposed the vote on the ground that
the State ought not to pay any sect whatever for religious
instruction.
Mr. HO itSFALL could not on principle consent to the
proposed vote, because it involved the teaching of error.
It, moreover, involved a violation of the constitution. And
he did not see how those who consented to this grant could
refuse to endow the Roman Catholic priesthood.
Mr. W. J. FOX eulogised the religious zeal and moral
qualities of the Roman Catholic clergy ; and expressed
sorrow at see ng hon. members of the same persuasion
striving to obtain a miserable pittance of public money
for their own purposes. His own principles pledged him
to oppose every attempt to bestow the public money for
religious purposes; and, therefore, he should support the
amendment, though he should do so with regret.
After a few words from Mr. J. BALL,
Sir J. PAKINGTON admitted the necessity of pro-
viding spiritual instruction for the inmates of our gaols,
but said it could only be given upon one of two principles.
It should be given either through a chaplain of the estab-
lished religion, or the gaol should be thrown open to all
sects. But the proposal of the Home Secretary did neither
the one nor the other It bad not the merit of toleration,
inasmuch as it benefited only one sect, and was evidently
the result of pressure. Under these circumstances he
should support the amendment, but if the vote had been
for the spiritual instruction of those prisoners who did not
belong to the Church of England, he should have assented
to it.
Mr. HADFIELD vindicated the principle of the State
paying no religious sect whatever.
Mr. LUCAS, alluding to the objections of Nonconfor-
mists to receive money from the State in return for spiri-
tual instruction, read returns relative to several prisons,
which he contended showed that if they did not receive the
money neither did they perform the work. The Roman
Catholics and the Church of England discharged a duty,
but the Nonconformists did nothing. Besides the Church
of England there was, therefore, nobody to perform the
service but the Roman Catholics ; and, performing the
work, they naturally asked the noble lord, the Home Sec
retary, for the payment. With respect to Mr. Spooner's
amendment, he conten led that the hon. member did not
carry out his own principles, inasmuch as he only proposed
to strike out one item of payment to Roman Catholic
chaplains, whilst the vote included half-a-dozen others.
Mr. MILES said the vote might be small, but. it in-
volved a great principle—the principle of establishing
Roman Catholic chaplains in Government prisons in Eng-
land This was a Protestant question, and he trusted it
would be so dealt with by all classes of Protestants.
Mr. MIALL briefly addressed the house, amidst loud
cries of " Divide."

Mr. SPOONER, in reply, defended himself from the
charge of having used " hard words." He was aware that
there were other grants to Roman Catholic priests; but
this being a new vote, he felt it right to make a stand
upon it. (Hear, hear.) His simple object in opposing it
was to raise a Protestant voice in that house. (Hear,
hear.) He believed that to vote a sum for the propaga-
tion of the Roman Catholic religion would be a national
sin. (Laughter.)
The committee then divided.
For the amendment
Against it 136 —22
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD inquired whether he could bring
on his amendment to further reduce the vote by the amount
of the salaries of the chaplains and the assistant chaplains.
Mr. BOUVERIE said he could not. By the practice of
the committee, when an amendment of this kind was car-
ried, the smaller sum was considered to have been voted.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress.
EXCISE DUTIES (SUGAR) BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
LEASING POWERS (IRELAND) BILL.

This bill was read a second time.
TENANTS COMPENSATION (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Sir J. YOUNG could not assent to the principle of this
bill, and therefore must oppose the second reading.
Mr. MAGUIRE thought this matter ought fairly to be
discussed, together with the other bills which had been
read a second time. He proposed that this measure also
should be read a second time pro forma, and then the whole
matter could be discussed in committee.
Lord PALMERSTON said it was impossible to enter
into a discussion on this bill at that late hour. However
willing the Government might be, the house was not.
Mr. DISRAELI thought that the practice of passing
bills pro forma was an injurious one. He could nut con-
sent to such a course on this occasion.
After a few words from Mr. LUCAS,
Mr. J. O'CONNEL proposed that the day for going into
committee on the Landlord and Tenant and Leasing
Powers Bill should be fixed at a late period of the session.
This, he thought, would obviate all difficulty.
A discussion then took place, in which Mr. M`Mahon,
Mr. Lucas, and Mr. Maguire took part. As each hon.
gentleman resumed his seat, a larger and larger body rose,
and the number of Irish members trying to catch the
Speaker's eye was becoming quite appalling, when
Mr. BROTHEitTON moved that the house do now
(20 minutes past 1) adjourn.
Mr. DI RA.ELI said that before that question was de-
termined it was important to arrange what was to be done
in reference to the order for the second reading of the
Drainage of Lands Bill, which had been fixed for a morn-
ing sitting. When the subject had been mentioned at an
earlier period of the evening, the general feeling of the
house appeared to be against a morning sitting—(hear)—
but hon. members also felt a delicacy in disturbing the ar-
rangement for going into committee at 1 o'clock, until the
hon. member for Dorsotehire (Mr. Ker Seymer) had been
communicated with. That communication bad been made,
and the hon. gentleman had no objection to the order being
discharged. He (Mr. Disraeli) therefore proposed that the
order should be discharged accordingly.
The SPEAKER said that the motion for the adjourn-
ment of the house must be disposed of before the right
hon. gentleman's proposition comet be entertained.
Mr. V. SCULLY asked if the second reading of the
Landlord and Tenant Bill had been postponed or not. The
learned serjeant (Mr. Serjeant Shee) he knew was under
the impression that the three bills should go on together.
The SPEAKER said the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland)
Bill and the Leasing Powers Bill had both been read a se-
cond time, and ordered to be committed on Thursday.
Sir J. YOUNG said he had no conception when be
moved these bills that any one was intending to oppose
them. In committee there woul I bo ample opportunity to
discuss them. The clerk read the titles distinctly in an
audible voice, and if hon. members did not oppose them he
could not help it. So far as he knew there had been no
agreement with any one about these bills. There was a
meat deal of difference in these bills. The third bill was
opposed by a large majority in the house.
Lord PALMERSTON suggested that the bill should be
fixed for Thursday—not that it could coins on then, but
they could then determine on what day the bill should be
taken.
After some further conversation, Mr. LIROTIIERTON with-
drew his motion for adjournment, and the second reading
of the bill was fixed for Thursday.
COURTS OF COMMON LAW (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. WHII'ESIDE said he should withdraw this bill.
The order for the bill being committed was then dis-
charged.

MORNING SITTINGS.
On the motion of Mr. DISRAELI, the twelve o'clock
orders for this day were postponed until Friday.
Mr. DISRAELI moved that the Lands Improvement
Bill, which stood for committee at twelve o'clock on Thurs-
day, should also be postponed.
Sir J. YOUNG resisted the motion.
Mr. DISRAELI announced his intention to oppose all
morning sittings at this period of the session, considering
that there was no pressure of public business.
Lord PALMERSTON said the government would not
trouble the house to divide on the motion.
The twelve o'clock order for Thursday was, therefore,
discharged.
Sir J. YOUNG then moved that the Lands Improve-
ment Bill should be committed on this day week, at
twelve o'clock, but this motion meeting with opposition,
it was ultimately withdrawn.
The house then adjourned at ten minutes to 2 o'clock.

A CHINESE NEWSPAPER IN SAN FRANCISCO.—We
have received the first number of a newspaper published
in the Chinese language and printed in Chinese charac-
, ters, which has been started in this city as the organ
,of the Celestial population. It is entitled the Gold
Bills News, California. being known among the Chinese
as " the Gold Hills." As usual with many of the
Oriental languages, one has to read Chinese from top
to bottom, instead of from left to right. The News
presents a very fair typographical appearance for
Chinese ; that is to say, it looks as if a spider out of
an ink-bottle had crawled over a sheet of white paper.
We are not very familiar with the Chinese characters,
but from appearances we should judge that the " salu-
tatory" of the editor was particularly eloquent. It
abounds in a number of hieroglyphics that strongly
resemble centipedes, with an occasional dish of taran•
tulas. The Chinese population of this State numbers at
least 25,000, and, as they nearly all know how to read,
notwithstanding the length of time and labour it re-
quires to attain that accomplishment, there is no doubt
the Gold Rills News will be well supporter .---San Fran-1
Cisco Ilerald. 1