The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-17 00:00:00

'o qp7 c r 7 1-4!•,-r
u):! ~! ;• t ho'v.
ever, he em.thf net can ant to this proposal.
Mr. SPOONER suggest= d that the county courts
should have jurisdiction in ticions for 50/, where both
parties were disposed to consent to it. He was how
ever, opp;:eil to the motion. ,
Mr. MULLINGS was in favour of extending their
jurisdiction to large r amounts, and should support the
motion before the House.
After a few words from Mr. Ellis, Mr. Brotherton, and
Mr. Charles Lushington,
Lord DUDLEY S WART said as the county courts
had worked well, he was glad to see that the general
opinion of the House was in favour of extending their
jurisdiction. If the clause of the lion. Member for Lowell
was carried, he was sure that it would give great Baas'
faction.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, as there was pe
appeal from these courts, he thought it would be unwise,
to extend their jurisdiction. It they did they would
have to reconstitute the whole of them, and he therefore
should recommend the House not to consent to the me'
Lion of the Hon. Member.
Captain PECHELL said his opinion had been much
lortified by the information given by the Hon. Member'
for Salford. that the court there worked well.
Mr. FITZROY had heard nothing which could change
his opinion as to the expediency of the extension to 501.
After a few words from Mr. EVANS,
Mr. SPOONER rose to ask whether the words pro-
posed by the Hon. Member for Lewes were necessary ?
The ATTORNEY- GENERAL said they were not.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that the question of the extol'
sion of jurisdiction was one of such importance that be
thought it should not be incidentally raised upon a point
which did not involve it. He should advise that the
Hon. Member should withdraw his clause.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause
.. ..• ... 34
Against it ...
••• ... 62
Majority against the clause . .
The remaining clauses of the Bill were agreed to with'
out discussion.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said, with reference to the
compensation clause, he begged to ask the Attorney`
General upon what principle the compensation was to be
made.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he took the
principle simply of four years' purchase; and the cony'
pensation would be awarded by the Lords of the
Treasury.
Lord DUDLEY STUART objected strongly to the
Treasury having anything to do with the matter
of compensation. In the four years preceding the
passing of the 7 and 8 Victoria, in 1844, the aggregate
amount of the fees was greater by 10,0001. than in the
four previous years; and yet the Treasury awarded
upwards of 7,0001. to the officer,. He could not Oa.
ceive a more shameful way of dealing with the pubis;
money. He thought the compensation, if any, shoal
be awarded by the House, and not by the Treasury.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and 013.
tained leave to sit again to-morrow.
Mr. C. LEWIS moved the second reading of the Stook'
in-Trade Bill, which was agreed to, the discussion to be
taken upon it to-morrow.
The third reading of the Inland Ports (Colonies) Bill
was postponed till to-morrow at twelve.
The Commons Inclosure (No. 2) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The County Rates, &c., Bill was read a third time
and passed.
The adjourned debate on the Palace Court (Welt'
minster) Bill was postponed till to morrow.
The House then adjourned,till five o'clock.

The SPEAKER resumed the Chair at Five o'clock.
Mr. AGLION BY brought up the report on the Delia;
Improvement. Bill.

SCHOLEFIELD presented a petition fro;
Sydney, pra)iog for an extension of the elective frarl"
chise in that colony.
Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from Eirrairr
ham against the Bill for the prevention of intermentsiis
towns.

Mr. AGLIONBY presented a petition from the Nell'
Zealand Company in favour of steam communicatiors
between New Zealand and England.
Mr. DISRAELI present,- d a petition from Windsofr
praying for protection to agriculture.
NATIONAL EDUCATION.
Mr. MILES had intended to call the attention of t-
he
House to the question of national educatiotT.
but he regretted to say that ,he had life
yet had an opportunity of doing so. In til.,„
event, therefore, of his not being able to do so
the close of the session, he begged to give notice 0,7
early next session he should call the attention of wr
House to the restrictions imposed upon the founders
Church Schools by the Committee of Council on Ecitles°
tion.

PLURALITY BENEFICES.
Mr. FREWEN askt.cl the Right Hon. Baronet ,°13,1
Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he,lit
examined a return moved for by Mr. Hume, cr,.nr,
clergymen holding two or more benefices and pre;g:
mews in the Church, and appointed since the pase'".
of the Act called " The Pluralities Act ;"
was aware that by this return five hundred and elg,th
nine clergymen bad been appointed to benefices
plurality since the passing of this Act about eleven J.-a-gas,' ago, it having become law on the 14th of August, Lusli,
whether
being an average of fifty-three and a half in eV'
year; whether he approved of so many clergyine!.
monopolizing Church property to themselves, and if
was the wish of her Majesty's Government that fiftii
clergymen should be appointed in each year to benefice°,
in plurality; also, it he was aware that some of the bent":
flees included in the above return are stated to be of
value and smaller population than they are stated to'
in the clergy list?
Sir GEORGE GREY had been unable to give °nil,
attention to the return, but he had no doubt the result
stated by the Honourable Gentleman were correct.
ot
regard to the latter portion of the question, be was 11,7 n,
in possession of sufficient information to enable him'-
speak on the subject.

PUBLIC RECORDS.
'
Mr. HENRY DRUMMOND wished to know from the; •
Right Hon. Baronet when the long-promised and I°yine;
expected report in reference to the state of the pui," records was likely to he laid on the table?
Sir GEORGE GREY had communicated with the
Master of the Rolls ora the subject, and he was hopPYla
say Lord Langdale hoped and believed the report
vv-0"" be ready in the course of the present session.
AUSTRALIAN COLONIES BILL.
Mr. ADDERLY wished to know from the N°17,18 Lord at tho head of the Government, whether be ~
tended that the Bill for framing a new constitution " ,
rho five Australian colonies should be read
second time on Thursday morning, after tba
Irish Judgments Bill had been disposed of. The
Noble Lord was aware that the House was appointed
meet at 12 o'clock on Thursday for the purpose, and n°
tad reason to believe that it the discussion on the Jecig'
ments Ireland Bill came on at that hour it would extend
considerably beyond two o'clock.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it was not intended to
rake the Judgments Ireland Bill before the Australian
Colenies
Mr. DIVETT thought it was extremely desirable that
the opinion of the colonies should be taken before eel
legislation took Alice on the subject.
CHOLERA AT BRISTOL.
Mr. 11. BERKELEY wished to ask a question
consequence of the epidemic which was now raging
the country. In the city of Bristol the cholera Il
broken out, the place first
attacked being a very unhealluie
end unwholesume situation, end being in the immedlel:
'Vicinity of an overladen and pestilential graveYerd
Where bodies had not been properly interred. No lrea
than twenty deaths took place immediately on Ol!
appearance of the cholera in this neighbourhood
The question, therefore, which he wished to ask, as it
was impossible to bring in a Bill this session to pre/ell"
intramural interments, was, whether her Majeet)'s G 0:
vernment did not feel it necessary, under the prevaleneu
of this epidemic, to introduce a short Bill
as a tern'
porary measure for the purpose of investing tl!,
local authorities with power to prohibit interments 11
churchyards in cases where they were considered
dangerous to the public health.
Sir G. GREY said he had received no representation
of the cases which the Hon. Member had hutted had
occurred at Bristol, but if what he stated were correct'
that the bodies were not properly interred, but were
posed, he apprehended that the conduct of the authorities
connected with the churchyard was illeg (al.—
Hear./
With reference to the other part of the
question, he would call the attention of the Hon. Gee; cleman to the provisions of the existing law. The 11 and lm
Vic., cap. 63, sec. 82, passed last session, gave power to the
General Board of Health to prohibit burials in a church'
yard when it was represented by the local board that it
was dangerous to the public health. There was also
another provision giving power to the authorities to pr°;
~ide another churchyard for the accommodation
burials where re cessary.
Mr. H. BERKELEY observed that what he bad
stated had occurred not only at Bristol, but in o'er/
large town in the kingdom.
ORANGEMEN IN IRELAND.
Lord CASTLEREAGH rose to ask the Right Hon.
Baronet at the head of the Home Department whether
ho had received any official information of a fatal
don having taken place between a party of Ribbonmen
and a party of Orangemen, near Castle Wendt), in Ire.
land, and also whether it was the intention of Govern'
went to bring in any Bill to put an end to such things?
Sir GEORGE GREY said he was sorry to say that
he had received intelligence of such a collision from the
superintending magistrate of that district. The extent
of the number of killed was, he was informed,
live, of whom four were Ribbonmen and one an
Orangeman. The Noble Lord was quite correct id
stating that the Act under which party processions in
Ireland were prohibited had lately expired. But the
Government had Loped that the decrease of party feeling
in Ireland vet old have been sufficient to prevent a recur-
rence of such scenes.
Lord CASTLEREAGH reminded the Right Hon•
Baronet that he had not answered the last part of big
question.

Sir G. GREY said that it would be necessary to have
a full report of all the circumstances of the affair before
they could determine in what manner to legislate.
INDIAN MEDALS.
Mr. FIUME rose to make an inquiry with respect to
the Indian medals. Some time ago he had made a roe"
tion for the production of rules and regulations in force
with respect to tb:, distribution or these, and be wished
lo know if the Government would lay on the table all
core sponth-nce wizh the Court of Directors on thl°
subject.

Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE said that the repulation
with respect to these medals was that no medal could
be given to any suluier or officer for any action but for
those in which some gent ral officer or coaanander-in"
chief had served and obtained a medal.