The Sun.
London, England, 1854-06-16 00:00:00

oipation in the government of the college which rested in
the-dean alone; and it must be admitted that for the pur-
poses•of the bill the governing, body in this instance was an
_lmperfect instruMent. 'At)3rasenose, the body was a very
nanctly one. The choice now was between retaining the
phrase "governing body," subject to the defects which ac-
companied it in ono or two cases, and discarding it altoge-
• ther and adopting some other. He thought it not desirable
to constitute any new governing body for the purposes of
_the bill; but the mode he proposed was to make it apply to
two-thirds of the foundation, being also members of convo-
cation, in each colle„ee:
Mr. LABOUCHERE was glad to see that the right hon.
_ gentleman seemed to feel the weight of the objections which
kadtbeen urged. He should regret to see the option of se-
_ cepting reforms from the commissioners left to such small
bodies as the governing bodies would be in some instances.
Re hoped that the Government would reconsider the
clause.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, the
most convenient course would be, as no one was prepared
- with exact words for the purpose intended, to consider the
matter between this and the bringing up of the report.
After some further discuision,
Mr. VERNON withdrew his amendment, on the under-
derstanding, that the clause would be reconsidered.
Mr. HENLEY moved that the Chairman report progress.
Sir W. HEATHCOTE remarked that towards the end
• of the clause, it was provided that if the governing body
of a college should declare in writing that the ordinances
and regulations of the commissioners were prejudicial to
-the lege, "as a place of learning and education," the
same should not take effect. Now, it might so happen
that the ordinances and regulations might be prejudicial
to the college in other respects than as a place of learning
and education. For instance the preamble of the bill re-
cognised the colleges as necessary for the adva cement
de-
of
religion, and the ordinances and regulations might be
trimental to them in a theological point of view. He
should, therefore, move the omission of the words "as a
place of learning and education." (Hear.)
The committee divided, when there appeared
For the amendment lll
Against it . 159
..................
Majority —4B
to; and the house having re-
The clause was then agreed
The-
The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and obtained leave to
nit again this day.
WAYS AND MEANS.
The report of the resolution passed yesterday for increa-
sing the duty on sugar used in breweries was brought up
DisRAELI complained that no notice had been
giritlk of the nature of this resolution. ..-He understood
"fhat the object was to increase the duty chargeable on
sugar used in bieweres, but on the paper was a bill by
idhich the use of sugar in breweries was prohibited. This
• wee to inconsistency which should be explained.
• ; Mr. J. WILSON replied that the explanation had been
Oren yesterday. The prohibition in the bill referred to
was consequent upon the change in the malt duty, it being
considered that it would not be safe, considering the dif-
. feronces between malt and sugar used in brewing, that the
41dventage in favour of sugar would be so great under the
'new duty, that it would not be' safe to allow the practice to
continue. Since then, however, the Inland Revenue Com-
missioners had satisfied themselves that by adopting a
BYitem of licensing by which they would be enabled to
* know and have access to the breweries in which sugar was
used, the revenue might be protected, and the object of
the
_resolution was therefore to increase the duty on
sugar so used to make it equivalent to the increased malt
-„duty.
The resolution Was then agreed to.

TrSeOMMON LAW PROCEDURE BILL—MORNING
• SITTINGS.
• The ATTORNEY-GENERAL proposed to fix the com-
mittee on this bill for Monday, in order then to fix it for a
morning sitting on some subsequent day.
Mr. DISRAELI repeated his objections to the practice
of morning sittings, especially at so early a period of the
session. At the morning- sittings the legal members could
not be present, and those who were engaged on committees
up-stairs were necessarily absent, and amongst them were
always some of the most distinguished and the most prac-
- tibal members of the house. Another objection to morning
sittings was that members came to the duties of the even-
- ing sittings with exhausted energies. Never was there a
• session when it was so little necessary to sit in the morn-
' ing as this. True, Government had brought forward many
• important measures, but they had abandoned the greater
-.number of them, and the state of public business at the
.. present moment certainly did not justify that proceeding.
- Besides, the session could not be unnecessarily curtailed at
time like the present. When the country was at war it
Was desirable the House of Commons should be sitting to
sustain the Ministry in the event of disaster, and to um-
' pathise with them in the event of success ;or it might
happen that the presence of the House of Commons might
be useful to counteract any lack- of spirit, and to encou-
. rage Ministers to prosecute the war with becoming vigour.
(Hear, hear.) For these reasons he must oppose the pro-
position of the Attorney-General for fixing this bill for
a morning sitting, and he hoped the noble lord would not
impose upon him the disagreeable task of opposing the
_ Government in reference to the conduct of the business of
the house, and that he would fix some later period of the
session, July or August, for the commencement of the
morning sittings.

Lord-J. RUSSELL reminded the right hon. gentleman
' that he had not himself followed the practice he recom-
mended, for when he was leader of the House of Commons
in 1852, he commenced the morning sittings on the 31st of
May. (Hear; hear.) No doubt there were inconveniences
in morning sittings, but it was a balance of inconveniences,
1 and in the month of August, when the right hon. gentle-
man would commence them, a large proportion of mem-
. hers, distinguished and -undistinguished, were invariably
absent, having left for the session. Now that they had
arrived at the middle of the month of June, he thought it
• was desirable, looking at the amount of business still to be
got through, that they should appoint morning sittings,
• for the consideration of some important bills. He should,
• ' therefore, propose that on Thursday se'nnight they should
at twelve o'clock for the purpose of considering this
• bill. Other bills, including that of the Lord Advocate,
might be considered at morning sittings ; as well as the
Mercantile Marine Bills.
Mr. DISRAELI said when he proposed a morning sit-
ting, at the end of May, it was in consequence of the noble
lord pressing for an early dissolution of Parliament.
(Cheers from the Opposition.)
' Mr. MALINS urged that the bill under discussion ought
' to be taken when members of the legal profession were
present. (Hear, hear.) The same observation would ap-
ply to the Moitmain Bill, which could not be properly dis-
cussed without the members of the legal profession.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he had not antici-
• pated, from the way in which his bill passed the first and
. second reading, that no opposition would be offered to it.
He understood that some of the details were objected to ;
and as these were matters which would hardly interest a
full house late at night, he hoped the members of the legal
• profession would for once make a sacrifice, and attend a
• morning sitting to discuss the bill.
Col. BLAIR urged the postponement of one of the bills
• fixed for this • day—the Valuation (Scotland) Bill--or at
least that it should not be taken first.
The LORD ADVOCATE could not consent to alter the
. , arrangement that had been made.
Mr. WALPOLE said it was very natural that Govern-
ment should desire to get to the end of the session, but
when members were attending there from 12 in the day
till 2 in the morning, it was impossible that they should
be in• a condition properly to attend to the business that
came before them. He could declare from his own expe-
rience that this was the case, and he was convinced that if
morning sittings were commenced too early, the business
of legislation would not be so satisfactorily conducted.
Mr. K. SEYMER asked the noble lord to name a day
when the Drainage Bill would be brought on at a morning
sitting.
Lord J. RUSSELL suggested Thursday next ; and the
' bill was appointed for that day.
Mr. CRAUFURD protested against the Sugar Duties
Bill being proceeded with until hon. members had had
time to examine its provisions
Mr. V. SCULLY said that much time was lost by hay-
' ing a ierarate set of bills for Scotland, and another for
Ireland. By having the same legislation for the three
countries, a great deal of time would have been saved.
The motion that the Common Law Procedure Bill should
be Laken at a morning sitting on Thursday se'nnight was
then agreed to.
The Bills of Exchange (No. 2) Bill was fixed for the
name day.
Lord J. RUSSELL suggested that, if morning sittings
were adopted, they should not sit so late at night. (Cheers.)
, REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
• The other orders having been postponed,
,: Mr. DISRAELI moved that the order for the commit-
, tal of the Scotch Registration of Births Bill, which was
fixed for the morning sitting of this day should be die-
charged, for the purpose of being postponed. (Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said that he was rather surprised at
the motion—(cheers)—because it seemed to be the general
opinion of the house that the bill should be discussed to-
morrow morning. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. STIRLING said that several of the Scotch mem-
. basis would not be able to attend to-morrow, as they would
• be pugaged upon an important committee.
The LORD ADVOCATE said it was generally under-
etoo.d, amongst the Scotch members that the bill would
„,, collie on to-morrow. (Hear, hear.)
• Celonel BLAIR said that he would not object to the
othei bins being' discussed, but he certainly would object
to`the discussion of the Scotch Valuation Bill.
, Lord ELCHO said the Valuation Scotland Bill was on
thq paper err ten days as fixed for to-morrow.
• ar,.. FORBES hoped the bill would be postponed.
lifa• , COWAN would wish to have the bill delayed for
aulr'sPm• days, .in order to give sufficient time to consider the
am,A4druthentsem. 'At the same time, he would not object to
have,
morrow. explained by the learned lord in committee to-
Mr. CRAUFURD • said that the question was not as to
the Valuation Bill, but to
Lord D. STUART disliked Registration Bill. (Hear.)
cularly at STUART
there ibr morning
sittings, anal parti-
general feeling abroad
that the Government vtere :el- a
as possible, lest lotlnese to get through the ses-
sion as soon
sh4::lld prove inconvenient to them of Parliament
hear.) At the same time, this rate! cular junc-
eture. (Hear,
.the morning sitting had been discuased' dquestion of
was hardly'faanir in the right
as he (the
d he could not
nobl© lord) thought,. settled;
*it
e hon. gentle.ina,n to le-open the question and
give him his Note. (Laughter.)
as the chair-
J. BALL appealed to Sir J.Pakingke •
munittee on the business of the heaie, to
.eaan of the co
support the pro posal for morning sittings.
xplained that the reason he did
Mr. DISRAELI
e-
period was because.thequestion not
then
cito a morning sitting on Thursday
divide at an earlier
' before the house relate
' se'nnight. (Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER disputed
the accuracy of this explanation amidst the loudly expressed
concurrence of the house.
The house then divided—
Ayes
Noes

58
131
Majority... ........................ —73
The motion was therefore lost, and the house ordered to
to meet at twelve o'clock to-day.
The house adjourned at twenty minutes to two.

WINE AND SPIRIT LICENCBS. —A Parliamentary 77
tyrn states that in 1850, 1,642 wholesale and 35,446
Wail 6
Wail licences were issued in the United Kingdom f
tie sale of wines, and 3,864 wholesale and 84,406 retail
licences were alio issued for the sale of spirits. In
1851 there were issued 1,625 wholesale and 36,216 re-
tad wine licences' and 3,945 wholesale and 84,942 retail
spirit licences. In 1852 the number of wine licences
issued was 1,609 wholesale and 37,300 retail wine
liCences, and 3931 wholesale and 86,492 retail spirit
licences. In 1853 wine licences were issued to the num-
ber. of 1,652 wholesale and 38,455 retail, and spirit
licences to theynumber of 3,988 wholesale and 87,618
::I'Btittl,