The Sun.
London, England, 1836-06-18 00:00:00

N, SATURDAY, JUNE 18, 1836.

commutation beyond the twenty per cent. Although most
anxious for the disposal of this Bill, which he considered as
calculated to do much good to the country, he certainly
thought this clause ought to be maturely considered before it
was adopted.
Mr. CAYLEY looked upon the clause as a great im-
provement.
After some further discussion, the clause was agreed to.
The House then resumed, .and the Chairman reported
progress.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the Report should
be taken into consideration on Monday next. He also moved
that the clauses should be printed separately, and that the Bill
as amended be printed.
REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND MARRIAGES

BILLS.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL observed that several amend-
ments had been made in these Bills. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman opposite (Mr. Goulburn) objected to the provisions of
the Bill. Perhaps the Right Hon. Gentleman would con-
sent to take the sense of the House upon those objections on
the third reading.
Mr. GOULBURN was understood to say that, if consi-
dered more convenient, he should discuss the provisions to
which he objected on the third reading.
Lord STANLEY thought the House was bound to take
Tito its consideration the situation in which a class of persons,
the parish clerks, would be placed by this Bill. Some of
those persons received in fees from 1001. to 1501. Now, al-
hough he could easily imagine it might not be desirable that
those persons should fill the office of registrars, yet it might
be proper, when it could be conveniently done, that those
persons should fill those offices. He wished to know whe-
ther meang could not be taken to afford compensation to those
persons?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought there would be very
great difficulty in providing a remedy for the grievances re-
ferred to by the Noble Lord. Until the Bill was in operation
they could not say what loss those persons would sustain. He
did not well know how clauses for compensation could be in-
troduced into the Bill.
REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS BILL.
The report of this Bill was received, and the Bill was or-
dered to be read a third time on Monday se'nnight.
CHURCH OF ENGLAND BILL.

Lord J. RUSSELL moved the second reading of this Bill.
Sir R. INGLIS said his objection to the Bill was, that it
made the bishops of the Church of England, instead of being
great proprietors, stipendiaries of the State. The apportion-
ment of the salaries he considered of minor importance. As
he believed that any opposition which he could offer to the
present motion would not be in the slightest degree success-
ful, he should content himself with entering his protest
against the principle of the Bill.
After a few words from Lord J. RUSSELL, which were
quite inaudible,
Mr. POULTER said that this was a question which ought
to be completely discussed and receive the fullest considera-
tion. The object to be obtained was one of no less import-
ance than the real efficiency of the Established Church. He
should not oppose the motion, but he must express his hope
that the Noble Lord would fix some day on which the ques-
tion might be discussed fully.
Mr. PE ASE considered it his duty to state that it was in-
tended when this Bill came into the Committee to propose a
provision for the see of Durham, previous to any portion of
the funds being set apart for Manchester and other places,
which were in a situation to provide for their own wants with-
out abstracting any thing from the poor see of Durham.
After a short conversation the motion was agreed to, and
the Bill was ordered to be committed on Thursday.
REGISTRATION OF VOTERS BILL.

On the motion of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL this
Bill was committed.
On the 49th clause,

Mr. W. M. PRIED proposed an amendment for the pur-
pose of allowing counsel to appear in suppert of votes before
the revising barristers.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opposed the amendment.
The Committee divided—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority

... 68

The original clause was then agreed to.
On clause 50, which gives the right of voting to charitable
trustees, being proposed,
Mr. G. F. YOUNG proposed as an amendment that no
trustee should be allowed to vote who was not a trustee for
property of the amount. of 301. a year, and who was not in ac-
tual possession of the rents and profits.
Mr. C. ROSS also objected to the clause, on the ground
that it gave the power of voting to charitable trustees.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL contended that it was but
just that all property should he represented.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG said, that according to the principle
laid down by the Right Hon. Gentleman (the Attorney-Gene-
ral), the property owned by females should he represented.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed, that the pro-
perty possessed by females was deprived of representation,
precisely for the reason that property belonging to minors
and lunatics could not be represented—namely, that from its
very mture it was unfit to have the privilege of representation
granted to it. The property under the superintendence of
trustees, however, was capable of being represented, and there-
fore it was the object of the present clause that it should be
represented.
Lord STANLEY thanked the Right Hon. Gentleman for
his illustration respecting minors and lunatics, as it appeared
to him to bear precisely on the present clause ; for he was per-
suaded that on the very same ground on which the guardians
of the property of minors and lunatics could not be repre-
sented, trustees, to whom it was intended by the present clause
to give the right of representation, should be excluded,—
namely, because they have no beneficial interest whatever to
entitle them to vote.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that if the Noble
Lord would look at the words of the clause, he would see that
those trustees only who exercised a controlling power over the
property of which they were appointed guardians were cm.
powered to vote.
Mr. C. ROSS said that the effect of this clause would be
that nominal charities would be created in every part of the
country, in order to give a fictitious right of voting.
Mr. FOSTER was in favour of some amendment of the
Reform Act, as it stood at present, with reference to trustees,
for he knew instances in which men having a trusteeship,
without any beneficial interest whatever, were allowed to vote,
though he, who was similarly circumstanced, had his claim
disallowed.
The Committee then divided, when the numbers were
Against Mr. Young's amendment
For it
Majority against the amendment —2l

On our re-admission to the gallery we found
Lord STANLEY objecting to this clause as being opposed
to the provisions of the Reform Bill. By the statute of Wil-
liam, trustees in actual possession were allowed to vote ;
but by the statute of Anne which followed, no trustees were
allowed to vote unless they were in actual possession of the
rents and profits for their use and benefit. In the Reform Bill
there was one clause with regard to the trustees which de-
clared negatively that no person who was not in possession of
the rents and profits should be allowed to vote. This clause
did not certainly say that they should be in possession of the
rents and profits for their own use and benefit; but by a sub-
sequent clause it was distinctly declared, in conformity with
the statute of Anne, that no trustee should be allowed to vote
unless he were in possession for his own use and benefit. It
was rather extraordinary that the latter restrictive clause was
that relied on by the Attorney-General as a justification for
the change now proposed, which must have the effect of mate-
rially enlarging this class of voters. He asked the Committee
whether they would, in the face of the statute of Anne, in the
face of the abuses which his Hon. Friend (Mr. C. Ross) had
alluded to, as the inevitable result of their sanctioning this
proposal : he asked them whether they would, in the face of
common sense and the plain meaning of the Reform Act,
consent to the creation of a number of faggot votes grounded
on no beneficial interest whatever, ?—( Hear, hear, from the
Opposition.) If this clause passed a man having 601. a year
out of a school would have nothing to do but to make two or
three trustees, and they would thereby be entitled to rote for
Members of counties, they having no direct beneficial interest
in the property. He called upon the Committee to reject the
clause.—( Cheers. )
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the Noble Lord
happened to differ in his opinion of the right of a trustee to
vote under the Reform Bill from the Chief Justice of the
King's Bench.—(Hear, hear.) He had himself heard the
Chief Justice declare, in the case of the parish of Mary-la-
bone, in which a question as to the right of trustees to vote
arose, that under the Reform Bill a trustee had the right of
voting. And any judge in England might, he thought, have
expressed the same opinion. Before the Reform Bill passed,
trustees in possession had, under the Act of William, a right
of voting.
Lord STANLEY (across the table)—But what do you say
to the statute of Anne ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL did not mean to pass over
the statute of Anne. But under the statute of William, trus-
tees in possession were considered to be entitled to vote. Then
came the statute of Anne, which declared nobody entitled to
vote unless he were in possession of the rents and profits for
his own use and benefit. A doubt existed whether the statute
of William was repealed by that of Anne ; and then came
the Reform Bill, in which was inserted the statute of Wil-
liam in totidem verbis. When, therefore, that statute was ex-
pressly re-enacted by law, how could the Noble Lord argue
that it was repealed by the Reform Act ?—(Hear, hear.) By
a subsequent clause of the Reform Act, however, it was de-
clared that trustees were not entitled to vote unless they held
for their own use and benefit. Taking this clause by it-
self, trustees certainly appeared to be excluded from the
right of voting ; but considering the two clauses together, it
did appear to be a reasonable construction that when the trus-
tee was in possession as a mere receiver he should not have the
power of voting ; but that where hd was intrusted with a discre-
tionary power over the rents and profits, his claim should be
admitted, because sub modo he had a beneficial interest in the
property. —( Hear, hear.) That interpretation of the Act ap-
pearing to receive the most general approval he had embodied
it in the present clause, which he trusted would be approved
of by the Committee.—( Cheers. )
Mr. PR AE D contended that unless, as argued by the At-
torney-General, the words " for his own use" included trus-
tees having a regulation or control over the trust funds, the
objection taken by the Noble Lord was not removed. He
should certainly take the opinion of the Committe upon the
point.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL observed, that the object of the
26th clause of the Reform Bill was to place the law in regard
to trustees in the same state as it was placed by the Act of
William 111. • I

........... ____
Mr. W. MILES was of opinion that the bona fide adminis-
trator of a charitable bequest had a valid claim to vote.

After a few words from Mr. PR YME,
The Committee divided on the question, that the clause
stand part of the Bill--
Ayes
Noes
Majority
The clause was accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.
On the Chairman proposing clause 52,
Mr. PRAED moved that it be omitted. He objected to it
on two grounds ; first, as an infringement of the provisions of
the Reform Bill ; and, secondly, as being a disfranchising
clause introduced into a Bill, of which the title and preamble
were of an enfranchising nature. The clause of the Reform
Bill which the clause before the Committee went to repeal was
one introduced by the House of Lords, and on its being sent
down from that House, the Noble Lord and the Hon.
Member for Kilkenny both expressed their approval of it.
Unless, therefore, it could be shown that it had operated pre-
judicially, the House would be stultifying its proceedings by
repealing it. The only ground of objection which, he be-
lieved, could be found to the class of voters now proposed to
be disfranchised was, that they were unfavourable to the pre-
sent Government. That, however, was not a valid ground, or
one which the Legislature could entertain. His objection,
however, extended as well to the manner in which the clause
was introduced, as to the matter it contained. If it was found
necessary to meddle with the Reform Bill, it ought to be done
openly, and the necessity ought to be stated in the preamble.
The measure before the House was entitled " A Bill for the
more effectual registration of persons entitled to vote in the
election of Members to serve in Parliament ," and its preamble
was of a similar enfranchising character. How, then, was a
voter to know that, by a disfranchising clause smuggled into
the centre of it, his right of voting was taken away ?—( Hear,
hear.) He should certainly take the sense of the committee
upon the question.
Sir H. VE RNE Y expressed his conviction that the clause
of the Reform Bill proposed to be repealed was introduced
into it by mistake, and it was therefore glaring that Ministers
had availed themselves of the present opportunity to destroy
its operation.
Mr. C URTE I S and Mr. BAINE S expressed themselves
favourable to the preservation of the clause as it stood.
Mr. EWA RT considered that the clause proposed to be
omitted, so far from being an infringement, was in strict con-
formity with the principles of the Reform Bill.

. . .
The Committee then divided on the question that the clause
stand part of the Bill—

For the motion
Against it
__ . .

86
.... 44

Majority _ 42

Clauses 64, 65, and 66 were also agreed to.
On the motion for agreeing to the 67th clause,
Mr. PRAED moved that the chairman do report progress
and ask leave to sit again.

The motion being agreed to, the chairman accordingly re-
ported progress, and obtained leave to sit again on Monday.

CHARITABLE TRUSTEES BILL.

Mr. VERNON SMITH moved the second reading of th©
Charitable Trustees Bill.

Mr. C. ROSS moved the adjournment of the House, as
several Members who were interested in the Bill were absent ;
not having expected that it would come on at that late hour.
Mr. SMITH was not aware of any serious objection that
could be entertained to the Bill. The principle of it was
sanctioned in the Alunicipal Corporation Bill of last year.
Mr. C. ROSS observed that there were some very impor-
tant clauses in the Bill, and he hoped his Hon. Colleague
would not press it.
Mr. V. SMITH said that his Honourable Colleague had
not stated one reason why the Bill should not be read a
second time.

Mr. A. TREVOR declared that although it was a rare
thing for him to vote with his Majesty's Ministers, he would
vote for the second reading of the Bill; as any objections to
it (and he entertained several) might be most advantageously
urged in the Committee.
Mr. V. SMITH stated that the Hon. Member for the
University of Oxford had that morning told him that he would
not oppose the recond reading of the Bill.
Mr. PRA ED opposed the Bill.
Mr. C. ROSS said, that, after what had taken place, he
would not press his motion for adjournment.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed on Wednesday.

GRAND .JURIES (IRELAND) BILL.
Lord MORPETEI moved the second reading of the Grand
Juries (Ireland) Bill.
After a short conversation, in which Lord Clements, Col.
Perceval, Mr. French, Sir Robert Ferguson, and Lord Mor-
peth participated, the Bill was read a second time, and ordered
to he committed on Wednesday.

The remaining Orders of the Day were than disposed of,
and at Ten minutes before One o'clock this morning, the
!louse adjourned.

STATUE OF GEORGE 111.

This statue was to have been placed on the pedestal pre-
pared for it on the 4th of this month, that day having been
the anniversary of the birth of the monarch whom it is in-
tended to commemorate. Its erection on that day did not
take place in consequence of an injunction from the Court of
Chancery, obtained at the suit of Mr. Williams, a partner
in the House of Ransom and Co., who considers that his
premises will be injured by the site chosen for the statue,
which is in Pall-mall-east, and nearly opposite the banking
establishment of the firm. The statue itself reflects the
highest cred't on the genius, taste, and mechanical skill of
Mr. M. Cotes Wyatt, the artist. It represents the monarch
on horseback ; the horse is not in an attitude of progressive
motion, which would have been incorrect, because the action
of advancing in a statue on a pedestal always conveys the
idea of the figure being about to leave the station, and topple
from the position in which it is placed. The horse in this
group is reined back by the curb-rein, and thrown upon
his hanches. This attitude has enabled the artist to deli-
neate the muscles and form of the animal with great effect,
and he has availed himself of it to display a correct know-
ledge of the anatomy of the horse, and to pourtray it with
a spirit that gives the figure the appearance of life and ani-
mation. There is nothing outre or theatrical in this horse;
he is a close study from nature, and represents a splendid
specimen of a charger. The figure of the King has all the
peculiarities of outline and general appearance by which
George 111. was distinguished. There is nothing foppish
or absurd in the co3tume ; it is precisely such as was worn
by the good old king, and bespeaks most plainly the sim-
plicity of his manner. The countenance and the whole
person of the monarch are expressed in a very felici-
tous manner, and render the statue an exact representation
of the original, even to the very minutia) of identity.
Another excellence of the group is, that it is not supported
by the adventitious but clumsy contrivance of a piece of
rock, or an ancillary serpent to uphold the legs of
the horse ; neither does that animal rest, like. an opos-
sum, upon his tail, in order to secure the back sinews of his
legs from being strained and broken. The whole is elabo-
rately finished, and comes as near to Nature as the sub-
stance of which it is composed can come. It is at present
of a beautiful gold colour, and it has been proposed to cover
it with a varnish or cold enamel, which will preserve its
present appearance for many years. It is in height between
ten and eleven feet, being of what is called the heroic size,
but not colossal ; the pedestal is about eight feet in height,
so that the whole will be rather under twenty feet. When
erected it will form an additional ornament to the part of
the town in which it may be placed.

On Thursday last (Nov. 5) the Ambassador of
the Sultan of the Maldine Islands paid the annual visit to
our Governor. He was received on shore from his boat by a
guard of honour of the Ceylon Rifle Regiment. He carried
on his head a letter rolled in a handkerchief, from his mas-
ter, and was 'preceded by persons bearing the usual tribute
of cowries, sweatmeats, salts, and dried fish and mats. He
was introduced at the King's house to his Excellency the Go-
vernor, to whom he presented the letter, and who conversed
with him through the medium of an interpreter, for some time.
—Colombo Observer.

When Hogg visited London, a literary friend took
him to the Opera, where the Shepherd soon gave unequivo-
cal symptoms of drowsiness; yet, to any inquiry implying a
doubt of his feeling entertained, he replied—" Eh, I like it
gae weel, Sir." When he did give his attention to any por-
tion of the performance, his eyes were observed to be fixed
on Mr. Costa, the conductor. At length he could restrain
his curiosity no longer, but exclaimed, " Wha and what the
deil's that fallow that keeps aye fugle.ing yonder ?"—New
Monthly.

MURDER OF A WIFE BY HER HUSBAND.—
A most savage act was perpetrated at Passage West, on Fri-
day night last, the particulars of which it is our painful duty
to lay before our readers this post. It appeared that the de-
ceased, Anastacia Twomy, and her husband, quarrelled while
on the road from Cork to their own house the evening of this
dreadful occurrence, and that he, becoming exasperated,
commenced striking her with a stick, blows from which he
continued to inflict until he got her into his own stable, where
he leaped upon her body in such a manner as shortly to de-
prive her of existence. Her cries in this place drew her
children to the spot, and, as they witnessed the cruelties of the
father, their testimony on his trial, corroborated as it will be
by others who witnessed them on the road, will, it is believed,
convict him upon the most indubitable evidence. An inquest
was held before Richard Foott, Esq., Coroner, on Saturday,
and continued by adjournment until this morning, when the
Jury found as follows :—" That the deceased, Anastacia
Twomy, came by her death by violence committed upon her
head, body, and limbs, by her husband, Jeremiah Tvvomy."
Twomy has been committed to the County Gaol to abide his
trial at the coming Assizes.—Cork Evening Herald.
A SEA DEVIL.—On Tuesday last, a fine speci-
men of this rare and remarkable fish, popularly known by the
expressive name of the " Sea Devil,"
was caught in the Se-
vern, near Newnham, in a net with several other fish. The
creature, whose enormous and formidable mouth could have
engulfed a shoal of small fry, weighed 122 pounds, and was
on the following day exhibited in the market Gloucester,atof _
at
2d. per head. We are not aware whether a fish_this de-
scription has ever been captured in the Severn before.
KEYNSHAM ABBEY. The workmen, in excavating
for the railroad at Keynsham, had to break utpusomeof the bu-
rying ground of the old Abbey, where they found the remains
of persons interred there much perfectmoreen than could have
Keynsham was abolished
been expected. The monastery of
by Henry VIII., with the rest. The estates of the monastery
were then worth 4191. per annum. They are now in the pos-
session of the Chandos family, and worth 4,0001. a year,