The Sun.
London, England, 1825-03-12 00:00:00

`~ ~ ~.

For the Civil Establishments of New Brunswick - £5,19
For the same in Prince Edward's Island - - 3,010
For the Civil Establishments in Sierra Leone _ - 16,530
Upon this vote being proposed,
Air. HUME rose, and stated he should shortly bring the si-
tuation of that Colony under the notice of the House.
For the Civil Establishment of Newfoundland -
For the Civil Establishment of New South Wales -
For defraying Civil and Military Establishments in

IPI
23,934

45,930

the African Forts - - -
For the Charges for propagating the Gospel in Upper
and Lower Canada, Nova Scotia. Newfoundland,
New Brunswick, and Prince Edward's Island - 15,532
The House then resumed, and the Report was ordered to be

retteived.on Monday ,next.
• -MUTINY BILL.
I ord PAL3IERSTON moved that the House do resolve
itself into a:Coinniitttee 'upon the Mutiny Act.
Mr..eSYIiES took this opportunity of deprecating, in ghee
strongtst terms, the continuance of the -practice of flogging
part of military discipline. It was quite injurious to the charac-
ter of t British soldier, and unnecessary, inasmuch as the
foreign soldier was maintained in proper disciplin without
e hou
being exposed to the same degrading punishment.
tioned:some particular instances of the infliction of this punish-
ment, which had been lately communicated to him, that had
lanced him to take this opportunity of protesting against the
prevaleace of corporal punishment in the army.
-• Colonel JOHNSON thought that it ought to be abolished,
were it only in consequence of the inequality of its infliction in
different branches of the service.
Lord PALMERSTON declined going into the argument
upon the general principle at this moment; for that had been
long acid ably considered. He had no partiality for the Con-
tinuance of corporal punishment, though he feared that it was a
neceesary-evil, for the suitable maintenance of subordination,
which if removed would undermine the whole discipline of the
service. No argument could be drawn from the practice and
composition of foreign armies, unless some analogy could be
found between their discipline and that of the British upon try-
ing occasions.
Mr.• !MIME said, that if he were not mistaken, there were
general orders in the Duke .of Wellington's service, recom-
mending the French discipline for British imitation. He (Mr.
Hume) was a decided enemy to the practice of flogging.
General HOPE said that the practice of flogging had in a
great degree arisen from the offence of drunkenness, a vice
which was much removed by the recent salutary regulations of
the Commander-in-Chief, facilitating the payment of weekly
allowances, and thereby preventing that accumulation of money
to the soldier at more distant periods, which sometimes led him
Into unworthy extravagancies.
Captain MABERLY thought - the- punishment ought to be
abolished.
Mr. H. GURNEY deprecated the evil of enlistment for life,
which prevailed in the English service only.
?,ord MILTON repeated his complaint against the enor-
mous inermse of the standing army in time of peace, for which
no adequate reason had been advanced. He remembered well
19 Tears ago the introduction of enlistment for life, instead of
for terins of years. They owed both, not to the Ministry in
general, but to the military part of the administration. He re-
minited Hon. Gentlemen of the diminution of troops much in-
ferior to heproposed establishment which they had forced upon
administration _ even in times of alarm. His fears upon the
augmentation of the army did not prevent him from doing
justice to the financial regulations of the Right Hon. Gentle-
man opposite, which were excellent in a commercial point of
view ; especially in the reduction of the ditties on wine and iron.
But all the benefit of these arrangements was likely to be frus-
trated by the almost warlike expenditure now created in the
military departments.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER entirely dis-
claimed the imputation of the Noble Lord, that the increase of
the army was a measure only_ partially supported in the Cabi-
n et, and not attributable to the whole of the administration.-
-He condemned the opinion of the Noble Lord upon that mea-
sure, as one which implied a total ignorance of the altered and
increasing consequence of our colonies, trade, and other interests
in almost every quarter of the globe. He cheerfully took upon
himself any blame which might attach to administration in con-
sequence of that indispensable measure.
Mr. ROBERTSON denied that there was any reason what-
ever to be found either in the arguments of the Ministers or the
state of Europe to warrant any augmentation of the army.
The House then resolved itself into a Committee.
Mr. HUME wished to know if there were any alterations in

the Bill?
Lord PALMERSTON proposed to introduce a clause, to
enable men enrolled in the militia to enter into the Regiments
of the Line, without the dangers which the law threatened as at
present. while the Militia Regiment should be disembodied.
The House resumed—the Report was ordered to be received
or. Monday next.
MARINE MUTINY BILL.
The order of the Day thr committing the Bill was read.
Sir EDWARD K.NATCHBULL wished to know if there
was any objection to putting the marines on the same footing
wioholie troops of the line, as to the allowances for removing
the wives and families in case of embarking for foreign coun-
tries, or returning them ?
CROKER said that the marines were differently cir,.
cunistaneed. They had fixed places from which only they
en. 11.! 'be embarked, and at which alone they could be landed.
While here, they were domiciled, and on their return they
'would expect to find their wives ready to receive them, as it
must e known where they would be landed.
The House resolved itself into a Committee.
Mr. HUME wished to introduce a clause to prevent flogging
wit out the formality of trial, in the Navy, conceiving that a
measure of relief which had been extended to the negroes in
the. West Indies could not be too great an indulgence for Bri-
tish sailors employed in defence of their country.
i 3 r. CROKER said, that the Hon. Gentleman must be under
- a mistake. The discipline of the navy was authorized by the
25th Geo. 111., which -was a permanent measure, and could
only be brought into discussion by a motion for revising or re-
peating the act. This was an annual bill, affecting the marines
oat their character, of land forces, and applicable to them
while they remained on shore.
2,1:. HUME signified his intention, as the subject was of
deep. consequence; of bringing it before the House upon a spe-
ciS.c otion ,of which lie-promised early notice.
The House resumed—thTO ANIMALSe report to be receißHAved on Monday.
CRUEL TY,.
Mr. MARTIN moved the seoond reading of this Bill.
- Mr. HEATHCOTE rose to oppose the motion. He did not
know that there were so many as two bears in the Metropolis,
mail the compassionate narrative given a few nights ago
by the Horioutable Mover. He had, in consequence of the
Honourable Gentleman's information, gone to Duck-lane,
an:l paid a visit to the bears ; and he must say, that so far
f.wm the distressed and emaciated condition in which they were
SaiLl t,3 he, a better-fed and a better-conditioned hear—a more
healthy and hopeful cub, he had never seen.-o-( Laughter.)—The
• bear had, it was true, been engaged in fighting in his early days;
but within.the last six years he had become incapable of that
exercise, because he had grown too fat.—(Aluch laughter.)—
. If the Bill were good for any thing, it would prevent cruelty
in the.upper ranks also. It would prevent hunting, shooting,
soot ftshing. Could they make a law to prevent bear-baiting,
and leave stag-hunting uncontroulled ? They must,. however,
interfere with the amusements of the: country gentlemen if
they acted justly. The King kept stag-houbds. Many No-
blenu and many honourable gentlemen in his view had been
seen attending the hunts. Could.they Make one law for the
rich; and another for the poor ? There was no justice in the
measure, and he would take the liberty to move that the
.Bill
be read a second time this day gix months.
Mr. C. WILSON supported the Bill. He thought that next
to poaching, cock-fighting had the effect of demoralizing the
lower orders. . .
Mr. PEEL, though ready to do justice to the motives of his
Hon. Friend, tree 7rlernber for Galway, must oppose. his Bill.
- his Honourable-Friend seemed to take for, his. motto, -‘6 nihil
' humani ame alienam p 1.10." But why should the Honourable
Gentleman stop at die ill-treatment of bears, and monkies, and
dogs.? Was there more cruelty in baiting a bear than in hunt-
ing a stag ? There was a difference, it was true. The bear
was left in possession of all his natural means of defence ; to
qualify the stag for hunting, the horns were in the first place
cut off. Then what did his Honourable Friend say to pigeon-
shooting, where one gentlemanwould bet.another gentleman a
sum of money dist, he would kill more pigeons in a minute with
a double-barrelled gun ? Could any thing exceed the torment of
trout-fishing ? Why did hiS Hon. Friend give relief to bears,
and dogs, and monkies, and refuse it to hares, and foxes, and
badgers Was not this instituting.a favoured class of suitors ?
- One part of the Bill was pure tyranny; if. thellouse could he
persuaded to carry it into effect. The passage_to which he al-
luded was this:—" -And be it further enacted, ' at if any per-
- son in any part of the United Kingoom of Great Britain and Ire-
land, shall, after the —, be concerned or engaged in, or shall
promote or encourage, or anywise prleote or encourage, or aid
.or assist in promoting or encouraging, any bear-baiting dog-
fighting,monkey and dsg-fighting, g, or badger and dbg-fighting,
or • cock-throwing, or cock-fighting, or shall in any manner
wantonly and cruelly beat, abuse, or ill-treat any of the above-
mentioned animal?, e: any domesticated animal, it shall be
lawful for any person who shall witness such offence, to appre-
hend such person so effenclingeand to convey such offender be-
o fore any justice of the peace err other .lagistratc within. whose
jurisdiction such offence shall be committed ; or on complaint
cn oath of any such offence being made to any such Justice of
sOhe.Peace or other Magistrate, it shall be lawful for such Jus-
tice of the Peace or other Magistrate to issue his summons or
vwarrant, at his discretion, to bring the party or parties so com-
, plained of before him •or any other Justice of the Peace, or

other Magistrate of the county, city, or place, within which
such Justice of the Peace or other Magistratejlas jurisdiction."
But this was not the worst; there was another passage em-
poem-
powering Magistrates, upon view of any such practices which
might be deemed to fall within this Act, to commit and punish
without charge or examination.—(" No, no," from n:Member-
whom we understood to be Mr. Martin.)—He would read the
words :—" And be it further enacted, that if any,. Justice of
the Peace, or other Magistrate, shall witness such offence, as
aforesaid, within his jurisdiction, it shall be lawful for him; on
his view, to convict and punish the party or parties so offending
in such manner as he might do under this Act, upon informa-
tion and proof made before him of such offence." So that a
Magistrate who had slept upon a bed the night before, filled with
feathers plucked from the back of a living goose—riding home
froln a fox.chase, to dine upon crimped cod—might take up,
cotfimit, or otherwise punish any person whom he might find
engaged in fighting " a domesticated animal, or otherwise
ill-
treating the same." This could never be borne. He implored his
Hon. Friend, in his humane zeal for the well-being of the beasts
that perish, not to be wholly unmindfUl of the class of animals
to which he himself belonged. Was it to be endured that a
gentleman under the cruel necessity which the defects of sci-
ence imposed upon him, following up the improvement of his
particular. faculty, for the purpose of enlarging the limits of
knowledge, and of preserving the health of human beings—
was it to be endured dint such a man,- so engaged in the pur- •
suits of his calling, though it were known that he had, it its
fair exercise, committed cruelty like that imputed to Dr. Ma-
gendie (which statement was, however, denied), should be
taken up, imprisoned, or fined, at the discretion of a Magis-
trate, who might happen to be present? He objected so the
Bill, because it tended to created a favoured class of animals, if
the principle were good at all, it ought to be extended to all
cases of cruelty. Let his Hon. Friend introduce a Bill to pre-
vent hunting, shooting,' fishing, and other sanct'uinary, sports,
and then bear-baiting and. dog-fighting and cock-fighting
might fall within it. At piesent his measure was not one of
equal justice.

Sir J. MACKINTOSH would support the Bill notwithstand-
ing the ill-directed pleasantries and grave censure of the Right
Hon. Gentleman, who had, in criticising the form of the Bill,
actually aimed at the principle. The House had adopted the
principle by passing a law now fully -sanctioned by experience,.
and approved by public opinion, to restrain cruelty to ani-
mals; and this Bill was but an extension of that principle.
The object of both was to give the force of the supreme
authority to the best moral sense of the community. He him-
self was strongly opposed to any instances of petty, and trifling,
and vexatious legislation : but this was a point in which the
moral welfare of the lower orders was deeply concerned ;
and the effect of reprobating by Parliamentary denunciation
practices abhorrent to the common feelings of humanity
would be felt through the whole community. The argument
drawn from field-sports would not apply. Bear-baiting was
not a national sport. It had no insuperable habits and preju-
dices to plead for it. He admited that much evil might be
done by the prejudices of certain classes, and the readiness of
public writers to pander to those feelings. Anatomy, which was
the basis of sound medical knowledge, was suffering from them.
It would very soon be out of the power of the English student
to finish his education at home. He must seek in the schools
abroad fbr those accommodations to his studies which hitherto
had attracted foreigners to our own shores. What would the
great practitioners and luminaries in physiological science have
done, had they been impeded in their examinations as the
practitioners of the present day were likely by the growth
of those prejudices to be impeded ? The immortal Harvey
could not have made his luminous discovery upon the circu-
lation of the blood without the aid of practical anatomy. No
man, he believed, would accuse him of encouraging cruelty to
animals (Hear, hear) ; but still he would say, that, of all the acts
of authority which man exercised over the inferior order of ani-
main, not one was more excusable, for none was fraught with
greater benefit than the performance of those scientific experi-
ments, the object of which was to.mitigate suffering, to remove
disease, to establish health, and to prolong life.—(Hear, bear !)
—He would not shrink from any obloquy which might attach
to his support of experiments by which science was improved,
and the sum of human misery was leseened. A greater mitiga.
tion of human suffering was effected by this means than by any
other. It was true that the process which led to this perfection
in. science was harsh, but the results were beneficent. He
would now say one word with respect to the learned and highly
distinguished physiologist, Dr. Magendie, with whom he had
the honour to be acquainted. He was no judge of the import-
ance of Dr. Magendie's discoveries, but the concurrent voice of
all those who were judges of these matters were loud in his
praise. lle believed that the Honourable Member for Galway
had noticed the most aggravated parts of those experiments :
but he must be permitted to observe, that none of those experi-
ments, the most cautiously and the mast humanely performed,
would bear discussion.—(Hear, hear!)—When he was residing
at Paris, he was introduced to Dr. 111andie by their mutual
friend, Baron Humboldt, and, being in a state of ill-health,
lie (Sir James) was attended by Dr.. Magendie, as his physician.
It had been his misfortune to have suffered much from illness,
but he always felt, as a considerable alleviation of that misfor-
tune, the genuine sympathy, the true kindness, the unaffected
tenderness, which he had constantly experienced from the able
and intelligent medical practitioners whose advice he had
sought.—(Hear, bear!)—But he was bound in justice, and be
should be base and ungrateful if he did not state the fact, that
he never had been treated, amongst medical men, with greater
care and tenderness than he had received from Dr. Al agendie.—
(Hear, hear!)-1f lie had, in the ardent pursuit of .science—
if he had, in his anxiety to penetrate into the hidden secrets of
nature gone beyond those bounds which fine feeling would appear
to prescribe, it certainly was a great consolation to find that his
general character for tenderness and hunanity—that character
which was of so much consequence to his patients—bad not
been impaired by his professional pursuits.—;Hear!)—Much
had been said about the opinion of Sir Everard Ilome Sir A.
Cooper, and Mr. Abernethy, on this subject. And what was
that Opinion ? It was, that those experiments were necessary
to science ; bu', that no cruelty should be exercised—that as
little pain should be inflicted as, possible, but that, where tor,
ture was wantonly practised, it ought to be condemned as highly
immoral.—( Hear !)
Mr. G. LAMB said, that though lie was not fond either of
bear or bull baiting, still he must give his vote against any
legislative interference with those practices. He was very well
pleased with those enactments which prevented persons from
maltreating animals that were intrusted to their ,care, which
had the effect of making hackney-coachmen and drovers a
little more humane. That was the point which he wished to
see attended to in that House. But, the moment they inter-
fered with the sports of the lower orders, then the observations
thrown out byslie Right Hon. Secretary relative to the sports
of the higher orders applied with a force that could not be an-
swered. His Learned 1 riend bad spoken of the games at which
this Bill was levelled as not being the sports of this country ;
but Ire could show that they had been patronized by the great
and powerful, centuries ago. Evelyn, describing a bull-bait
that occurred in the time of Charles 11., stated, that " One of
the dogs was thrown so high, that he fell into the lap of a lady
of rank in the second gallery. Two dogs were killed. The
sports ended with the ape on horseback ; and I retired, wearied
with the filthy scene, which I bad not witnessed for many'
years."—(Hear, hear !)—lle would now read an'accOunt of an
exhibition of the same kind, which took place in 1702, in the
reign of Queen Anne. , He found, the. bill amongst the papers
of the Vice-Chamberlain of that day, who was one of the
prime beaux of the Court. The bill,, which Was headed with
the Queen's Arms, ran thus :—" Anna Regina. At the Bear,
in Hockley-in-the-Hole, near Clerkenweil-green. This is to
give notice, to all gentlemen, gamesters, and others, that,
on the 17th of April, a bald-faced dog of Middlesex, will be
matched against a dog of -Cow-cross.—(Laughter.)—A guinea
each dog. He that shows the 'fullest and finest game, and
comes most, clean to hand, wins all : and a great mad bull
will be turned loose in thee.yartl, with fire-works all over
him, and two or three cats tied 'to his tail.—(Shouts of laugh-
ter.)—Also other varieties. Alaure-baiting and a bear-baiting
Beginning at two o'clock in the afternoon.' Regina Vivat."-
-(Laughter)— He did not quote these instances in approba-
tion of such proceedings, but merely to show that they had
been encouraged as national sports: 'He conceived they ought
not to legislate on this subject. It was interfering unnecessarily
with that, the cure of which should be left to thar great correc-
tive—education.—(Hear !)—For his own part, • while there
were persons who like to be amused in this way, 'he would
rather see them so amused, than not amused at all.—(Hear,
hear !)
Mr. WILLIAM SMITH differed entirely. from. the opi-
nion of his Honourable Friend. 1 f there were any persons
who could be amused by such exhibitions as were.described.in
the paper lie had read, he trusted' they would never 'be amused
while they were in existence.' Much good had been done by
the exertions of his Honourable Friend (Mr. Martin) as might
be seen iii every market in London, and he hoped he would
persevere in his humane efforts. It was said that this bill went
to interfere with the amusements of the lower orders , hut was
that so new a circumstance? Were the public-houses as open
to the dances of the poor as tho great taverns and Assembly-
rooms were to those of the rich ?—( Hear !)—Was there •notean
interference here with the amusement of the lower orders ?
They were all in the habitof reading books of travels, and with
what severity of remark did they find their countrymen con-
stantly speaking of all the bull-fighta of Spain—a sport which was
as much admired by the higher as the lower orders. in that cOuntry.
They readily saw those faults in others which they refused to
correct in themselves. In his opinion'athe habirof seeng bull-
fights had prepared the Spaniards 'to look without. hoaror at an
auto dafe. It was certainly a step towards that gaol of cruel-
ty. Hogarth had well described the progress of cruelty in a
series of prints. The hero of the piece began his career by

spinning a cock-chafer, and tenninated it by the Murder of the
woman whom he had seduced. • -
Mr. MARTIN in reply, contended, that -nothing which had
been advanced against his Bill, impugned in the slightest de-
gree the principle on which it 'proceeded. The Right Moss
Secretary had argued, that because he did not legislate for the
stag or the innocent hare' he ought not legislate on the subject
at all. But was lie to do nothing because he could not effect all ?
lie, however, threw the argument back--on his Right. Hon.
Friend, and as he so much commisseratcd the case of.the unfor-
tunate stag, he called on him, as an adviser of his Majesty to
counsel his Majesty to dismiss the stag-hounds.—( Laughter.)—
An example of that kind, set by the King, would have a very
.good effect, and perhaps would put an end to the stag-hunting
of a Noble Lord, who kept up that sport near London. He (Mr.
M.) did all he could to remove cruelty of every description ; but
they must legislate on these matters by degrees. The Alder-
men of the city of .London, the Magistrates of Westminster,
and ten to one of the magistrates throughout England, and
Ireland, were in favour of the Bill. They were great.autho-
rides, and their opinion ought not to be disregarded. It was
said that this Bill was against the sports of the people : but it
was a consolation, that if they were legislating against the sports
of the people, they were legislating with the people on their
side ; and on behalf of the unvitiated population of England,
lie claimed the enactment of this law.—(llear, hear'.)—Ile
would now say one word as to Dr. Magendie. He did think,
notwithstanding what had been said, that Dr. Mageralie poo-
posed experiments the most horrible and the most wanton that
ever were proposed by any individual. He did not deny that
some experiments for the discovery of some latent fact might
be performed with propriety. If a question arose whether a man
could bear an operation that never had been performed before,
he did not deny thatit might be fair to subject an animal to
that operation, to prove whether it might be tried with success.
—But the experiments of Dr. Magendie were not new, they
had been performed a thousand times in Faris ; and lie came
over here to show them as a dramatic exhibition.—(Hear
He had the authority of . great physicians, of the greatest Eng-
lish anatomists, and amongst the rest the Regius Professor of
Anatomy at Oxford, against the practice. The last mentioned
individual was of opinion that the attention of the public ought
to be strongly awakened to the subject.—( Hear !)—He was con-
tent to be called the maligner of Dr, Magendie ; but lie could
read from that individual's own works a greater condemnation
of himself—he could point out a more refined degree of cruelty
than any he had stated. It was said that 10 guineas were not
paid for die greyhound. He really did not know whether that
was the fact or not. Some persons thought it was a stallion
which belied tortured : that animal having the most delicate
sense of smelling, might perhaps have been selected for the
purpose of destroying his olfactory nerves. What was said in
Parliament was not subject to trial abroad • • but he would put
this question in a course of trial. if Dr. Magendie would
consent that he (Mr. Martin) should have an opportunity
of proving that act Of cruelty with which -he had charged him,
or a greater act of cruelty, he would cheerfully go to trial with
him. He told the story at St. Bartholomew's Hospital just
as he had told it here, and therefore Dr. Illagendie could
get sufficient evidence, if he pleased to bring the matter to
issue. Then it was said it was not a greyhound, but a
spaniel—it was not a large dog, but a small one. This
sort of plea reminded him of a scene he had once witnessed.
He went to Newgate, and saw a man who had been con-
victed of the murder of his wife. He was attended by the
Reverend Mr. Ford, the then ordinary. The prisoner was ex-
claiming, " if I die for this crime, I am a mazdered man, and
my blood will rest on the prosecutor and the jury." The
clergyman said "Why, you were proved to hare been guilty
of the murder by 10 or 12 most respectable witnesses.. It was
sworn that you beat out the brains of your wife with a mallet."
—" Yes," said the prisoner, "but I beat out her brains with -a
pole-axe. .1 am, therefore, a murdered man."—(Laughter.)—
The pleas on behalf of Dr. Magendie were-of exactly the same
kind. He would state to the House what had been the conduct
of Dr. Magendie on another occasion in England : The Doctor,
whilst he was operating on a dog, placed his mouth near the
ear of the animal, and said, "Rester tranquille, restez tran-
quille ;" and then turning to the spectators, added, "Il
serail
plus trattquille s'll etzteltdait- Francois."—(A laugh.)—The
Hon. -Member concluded by expressing a hope that the House
would suffer the bill to go into a- Committee.
Mr. WIIAIOT-HORTON said that the bill formerly in-
troduced by the Hon. 3lember was directed against wanton acts
of cruelty, but the present measure was directed against cruelty
which was only incidental to amusements. He could not there-
fore approve of the
Sir F. BLTRDETT said, that as every body agreed that a
beneficial result had 'ensued from. the former Bill which the
Hon. Member had introduced, lie thoUght it should naturally
lead to the conclusion that they could not do harm in going; a
-little farther with him. It was not, he alaought, fair to draw
any comparison between field sports and these sports (if they
could be so called) which the lion. Member desired to put
down. The fanner were conducive to Wealth and activity—
every faculty of the body was called. into action by their pursuits,
but the latter were merely spectacles of unmixed barbarity_
animals being set to tear each other to pieces for the gratifica-
tion of a multitude who stood passively looking on.—(ilear!)._
It appeared sere strange that in the course of the discussion the
most impoitant part of the subject !sad been overlooked—he
meant the injurious effect Which such scenes had on the morals of
society.—(Bear'. )—Patting all ether considerations out of view
—considering that he was not legislatingon a principle of huma-
nity towards brutcs,but for men—he could not avoid giving his
support to the Bill. The persons who joined in the sports which
would be effected by the Bill were the very nuisance of so-
ciety. The neighbourhood where the sports were pursued was
the worst in the metropolio.—(llear !)—The common law of
England justified the-principle of interfering with regard to any
thing Which had a:tendency to injure the morals of the commu-
nity, and cruelties were in principle punishable by common law
at the present moment. The object of the Bill was merely to
carry abet principle into effect in those atrocious cases which
shocked the public mind.—(liear !)—lie.did not think that the
powers of the Bill would be abused; on the contrary, he fear-
ed that they would fall into disuse, unless the lion. Member
for Galway could appoint a successor as industrious and perse-
vering as himself, to see its enactments carried into effect. For
these reasons, the Bill should receive his support.
Mr. F. BUXTON and Sir T. A CLAIM supported the Bill;
and Sir M. W. RIDI.EY anti Mr. ROBERTSON opposed it.
The House then divided : the numbers were—
For the Amendment, 50 1 Against it, 32.
'The Bill was therefore lost.
The second reading of the Dissenters' Marriage Bill was
postponed to Monday.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at ONE'O'CLOCK.