The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-13 00:00:00

Coventry, Nuneaton, Birmingham, and Leicester Rail-
way.
East of Fife Railway (Markinch Deviation).
Great Western Railway (Amendment and Extensions).
Liverpool, Manchester, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne
Junction Railway Acts Amendment,.
London and North Western Railway (Lime-street,
Liverpool, Station Extension, &c.)
Newbury Cemetery.
Paisley and Renfrew Railway (Si4e and Improivement).
South-Eastern Railway (Widening of the Greenwich
Railway, and Arrangement and Enlargement of the
London-bridge Station).
Waterford and Limerick Railway.
Wexford Free Bridge.
BISHOPRIC OF MANCHESTER.
Sir J. Y. BULLER presented a petition from Here-
ford against the clause in the Bishopric of Manchester
Bill with respect to the Deanery of Hereford.
On the motion of Mr. WILSON PATTEN, it was
ordered, " That it be an instruction to the Committee of
Selection to appoint the Committee on Penson's Estate
Bill on Wednesday next. and that the Committee have
leave to report the same day."
On the motion for the first reading of Passingham's
Estate Bill,
Mr. GREENE moved that it be referred to the Ex-
aminers of Petitions for Private Bills, with leave to sit
and proceed to-morrow.
ARGYLE CANAL BILL.
Mr. HUME wished to know whether it was the in-
tention of the Government to proceed with the Argyle
Canal Bill ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said it was not the intention of the
Government to proceed with the Bill.
BISHOPRIC OF MANCHESTER.
Lord J. RUSSELL, in answer to a question from Mr.
Collett, said it was the intention of the Government to
proceed with the Bishopric of Manchester Bill to-morrow
morning at twelve o'clock.
Mr. COLLETT said he was determined to oppose the
proceeding with so important a Bill at the early sittings
of the House.
EDUCATION (IRELAND).
Lord JOHN MANNERS wished to know from the
Noble Lord at the head of the Government whether
the report was true that the Government had determined
to give preferment to no clergymen of the Church of
Ireland who would not support the system of education
adopted by the National Education Society of that
country.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that there was no foundation
for the report in question.
POST-OFFICE CARRIERS.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Fre-
derick Greig, a Post-office letter carrier, complaining
of his dismissal without notice from the Post-office, in
consequence of certain evidence which he had given
with respect to the " Post-office Directory," and praying
the House to institute a searching inquiry into the case.
The Hon. Member gave notice that to-morrow he
would move that the petition be printed with the vote.
Sir G. CLERK inquired if it was the Mention of the
Government to proceed with the Herring Fisheries
(Scotland) Bill ?
Mr. G. CRAIG replied in the affirmative ; and said
the object of the Bill was merely to transfer the power
now exercised by the Queen by letters patent to the
Queen in Council.
Lord J. RUSSELL, in answer to a question by Mr.
Hume, said the Government did intend to proceed with
he Thames Conservancy Bill.
BISHOPRIC OF MANCHESTER BILL.

The House then went into Committee of Ways and
Means, and a vote was agreed to authorising the issue
of various sums of money out of the Consolidated Fund.
NEW ZEALAND BILL.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that, before
going into Committee upon this Bill, he wished to call
the attention of the House, briefly, to its nature and
provisions. This Bill had gone through the other
House of Parliament with the entire concurrence of the

On the motion of Mr. HAWES, the New Zealand
(No. 2) Bill was read a second time.

law Lords. After a most careful investigation, he con-
fessed that he did not quite understand why so strong an
opposition should have been got up to it, especially to
the first three or four clauses. It had been stated that
the effect of the measure was to give an increased patron-
age to the Lord Chancellor ; but so far from that being
the case, it took from him a good deal of that
patronage which was at present vested in him
under one or two already existing Acts. It was
well-known that the law of Bankruptcy had for
the last six or seven years been administered by
the Court of Chancery in reality, although perhaps
it was not so nominally. It was proposed by this Bill
to do away with the Court of Review, and to vest
the administration of this law entirely in the Vice-
Chancellor, who should be appointed for that purpose.
It was admitted on all hands that the system which had
been introduced some years since, of giving a mixed
bankruptcy and insolvency jurisdiction to the Bank-
ruptcy Court, had greatly affected the just and proper
administration of the law of bankruptcy. When they
reflected that under the present administration great
expenses were incurred for the salaries and travelling
expenses of the commissioners, and these expenses it ap-
peared from the report of the commissioners themselves,
were in many instances quite useless, for when they
came to different towns upon their lists, they found no
business to do, although they might have travelled for
hundreds of miles at 2s. per mile. He therefore did
not see why the powers possessed by the commissioners
should not be vested in the local judges, and thus the
saving of expenditure effected under the circumstances.
He hoped that the House would give its consent to the
Bill.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that he was happy to say that
to the greater part of this measure he was enabled to
give This decided assent, but to the first few clauses he
most certainly entertained the strongest objection.
When it was stated that the Law Lords entirely con-
curred in this measure he (Sir J. Graham) knew that
Lord Brougham was entirely opposed to the transfer of
these powers to the Court of Chancery. It was not,
however, by the opinions of the Lord Chancellor, or of
ex-Lord Chancellors, that the question was to be
regulated. This subject was referred to a commission
of competent persons, composed of lawyers and gen-
tlemen connected with trade, and presided over by Mr.
Justice Erskine. The commission came to the unani-
mous report, first, that insolvency should be separated
from the great seal, and that there ought to be a distinct
and separate jurisdiction appointed by the formation of
a court of review. Upon this report the present law
was framed, and it had existed unchanged ever since
the enactment had been passed. The Honourable
Gentleman had said that this was only a nominal
change—if it were so why not adhere to the present
system until the whole subject came under the conside-
ration of the House next session? it were not in-
tended to create new patronage, the throwing of these
powers into the hands fof the Ct urt of Chancery would
tend to uphold offices of very doubtful use and necessity.
He viewed with great suspicion any design that would
re-transfer these offices to the Great Seal. He saw no
necessity why they shmitd, at this period of the session,
adopt such a course, considering that they had that re-
port before them.
Sir GEORGE GREY said, that if the opposition were
only directed to these three clauses referred to by the
Right Hon. Baronet, it might be better to defer the con-
sideration of them till in Committee. He should then
be prepared to prove that the Right Hon. Baronet had
misunderstood the object of these clauses.
Sir J. GRAHAM had no objection to take the dis-
cussion at that period.
Mr. JOHN STUART begged the Right Hon. Baro-
net to reconsider his determination, and much more did
he implore the Government not to press forward this
measure at this late period of the session. He should
feel himself called upon imperatively to give the Bill, if
persevered in, his most determined opposition, however
little able he was to do so, after having spoken in the
Court of Chancery for nearly six successive hours. The
object of the clauses, which were objected to, was to
re-transfer the jurisdiction of the Court of Review to
one of the Chancery Courts.
Sir GEORGE GREY said that he did not intend to
defend the Chancery Courts.
Mr. JOHN STUART—Why, the Bill before the
House inevitably led to the consideration of these courts,
and he did not think it fair that the Secretary for the
Home Department should come down to that House and
say he would not defend the Court of Chancery. But
if the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Attorney-
General, would consent to postpone his Bill for a short
time, it would not only shorten the discussion, but
would allow them to give a subject, so important, the
consideration which it demanded. They were dealing with
the subject in a most hasty and inconsiderate manner,
Now, he would have tried to define in the Bill what
were to be the limits of these local jurisdictions. He
would have tried to do so in a lawyerlike and states-
manlike character, but the framers of this Bill had not
done so ; and he prayed them to defer the further consi-
deration of this measure until that attention had been
paid which it well deserved.
The House then went into Committee on the Bill.
On the proposition of the first clause,
Sir J. GRAHAM moved that the clause be omitted.
Sir G. GREY advocated the retention of the clause.
Mr. S. WORTLEY was at a loss to know what had
been the reasons which had induced the Government to
introduce this clause is the Bill, and he should most
certainly support the motion for the rejection of the
clause.

„
POOR-LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
Messengers from the Lords appeared at the bar, re-
questing a conference with the House on the subject of
the amendments introduced by their Lordships in the
Poor-law Amendment Bill.

The following Members were appointed to confer on
the part of the Commons :—Lord J. Russell, the Attor-
ney-General, Solicitor-General, Sir George Grey, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir R. Peel, Sir J. Graham,
Lord G. Bentinck, Mr. Greene, &c. &c.
On their return,
Lord J. RUSSELL announced to the House that their
Lordships had communicated to them the following re-
solutions, which had been adopted by their Lordships:—
" 1. That the Lords are willing to receive from the
Commons, in ono message, all Commons'jßillsr when first
brought up to this House ; all Lords :Bills returned
from the House of Commons without any amendments
thereto, and all Commons' Bills returned thereto with
the Lords' amendments thereto, agreed to without any
amendments, a list of such Bills, with a statement of the
assent of the Commons thereto, being brought by the
messengers from the House of Commons, and delivered
together with the Bills so brought up.
" 2. That whereas by custom heretofore all messages
from the House of Commons to the House of Lords have
been attended by eight Members of the House of Com-
mons, ani whereas the attendance of so many may be
occasionally inconvenient to the Members of the said
House, the Lords desire to communicate to the Com-
mons their willingness to receive such messages, when
brought up by five Members only,"
to which they desired the concurrence of the Commons.
The Noble Lord concluded by moving that the resolu-
tions be referred to a Select Committee, which was
agreed to.
NEW ZEALAND (No. 2) BILL.

Mr. HAWES, in moving the order of the day for the
second readirg of this Bill, referred to those previous
measures on this subject which had been brought
under the notice of the House, and said that,
without entering into those questions at that time,
it would be better, by a wise and liberal system
of colonization at once to place upon a sound and perma-
nent basis the government of that country. Such views
as the Government entertained upon this subject were
attempted to be forwarded by a company called the
New Zealand Company, and the questions raised by the
Bill were—first, whether the Government should make an
advance of funds to this company; and, secondly, whether
it should, in the event of such an advance being made,
have any authority or control over it. In looking over
the books of the company, it appeared that the
amount of paid-up capital was 200,0001. ; raised on
the sales of land, 277,0001. ; borrowed from Go-
vernment, 80,000/. ; from other sources, 25,0001. ;
making in all 636,0001. It appeared that the company
had spent 200,0001. in the colony, and as their prospects
seemed to justify further assistance, he proposed by the
Bill to advance them the further sum of 136,000/..

On the question that the Bill be read a second time,
Lord G. BENTINCK said he would not oppose the
measure, although he thought that the principle with
which -the Government had started in the present session
had been departed from in this Bill.
Sir R. U. INGLIS supported the second reading of
the Bill. _ _

On the order of the day being read for the second
reading of this Bill,
Lord J. RUSSELL moved that the Bill be postponed
till twelve o'clock to-morrow.
Mr. COLLETT moved, as an amendment, that the
Bill be read at five o'clock to-morrow.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw. The amend-
ment was, however, withdrawn, and the Bill ordered to
be read a second time at twelve o'clock to-morrow.
WELLINGTON STATUE.

Mr. W. PATTEN was desirous of knowing whether
the past liabilities of the company were to be under-
taken by the Government ?
Mr. HAWES said that the past liabilities of the com-
pany had been estimated, and it was for the purpose of
meeting them that the former loans had been granted by
Government, and no new liabilities could be incurred
without the sanction of the Government.
Mr. V. SMITH was desirous of knowing upon what
principle the money was advanzed. Was it intended to
give the grant as a compensation to the New Zealand
Company, because if compensation was intended it
would be better in his opinion to grant it in any other
shape than the present. If it was not made for com-
pensation was it for colonisation—if it was, then how
were they to meet the claims of other colonies? He had
made the observation in no spirit of opposition to the
measure, but in order that this Bill might receive
proper consideration, as it related to one of the most
important colonies of this country.
Mr. C. BULLER felt called upon 4o make some
observations, as some misapprehensions appeared to pre-
vail with respect to the provisions of the Bill. The Go-
vernment would not be answerable for any liabilities
further than those expressly stated—most certainly not
to any general liabilities. The Government had framed
this Bill not with a view to grant this loan as a means
of compensation, but as a means of colonisation for
which this company had done more than any other asso-
ciation of private individuals.
Mr. HUME thought that this Bill was one which
ought to attract the attention of the whole country. He
was of opinion that the money which they were called
upon to pay this year and last year, was the penalty of
the mismanagement which had been made by the Go-
vernment of the colony of New Zealand. He hoped,
however, that the present heads of the Colonial Depart-
ment would profit by the mistakes of their predecessors,
and exert themselves to prevent a recurrence of the evils
that had already taken place. The most effectual method
for that purpose would be to establish local self govern-
ment. By carrying out this principle, the evils which
spring from the mismanagement of the Colonial-office,
would be put an end to, and a responsibility secured
which would prevent abuse. He was also of opinion that
it would be much better to leave colonization to private
speculation, as from the experience which they had of
the attempt hitherto made by Government in this re•
spect, he feared there was little to be expected but failure
and abuse.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated that he would take

this opportunity of stating, in reply to a question put by
the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn with respect to the
Wellington statue, that he had had an interview with
the illustrious Duke himself upon the subject, who had
informed him that he looked upon the question entirely
as a public one. Many persons had considered that the
removal of the statue would be a mark of disrespect
to his Grace. The illustrious Duke had, however,
replied to him in substance that, for his own part, he
had received too many proofs of the regard and appro-
bation of the Crown to lead him to think that such
could be the intention of the Crown in ordering the
removal of the statue.—(Hear, hear.) Upon public
grounds he deprecated the removal of the statue.—
(Hear.) This opinion had been communicated to her
Majesty, and he (Lord John Russell) had received the
Queen's commands to state to the House that it was not
the intention of the Government to proceed with the
removal of the statue.—(Hear, hear.)
GREENOCK ELECTION.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL requested the Hon. Member
for Greenock (Mr. Baine), who had a motion on the
paper, on reading the order of the day for the Committee
of Supply, to call the attention of the House to the re•
cent interference of the Government, exercised chiefly
through the medium of the Secretary at War, with the
constitutional privileges of the Parliamentary electors of
Greenock, to postpone his motion, in order to allow
the House to go into Committee of Supply.
Mr. BAINE did not wish to throw any obstacle in the
way of the public business of the House; he would,
therefore, withdraw his motion.
After a few words from Mr. F. MAULE and Mr. TUE'-
, NELL the motion was withdrawn.
MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.

On the order of the day for going into Committee of
Supply being read,
Mr. V. SMITH called the attention of the House to
the present confused mode in which the miscellaneous
estimates were prepared, and suggested the appointment
of a Select Committee to inquire into the circumstances
of the case, and also to examine into the reasons why so
great an increase had taken place in the amount of the
miscellaneous estimates for this year from what it was
in the year 1838. He found in the present year that the
miscellaneous estimates were 1,328,286/. more than they
were in the year 1838.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Government had
not proposed any Select Committee on the miscellaneous
estimates this year, because, considering the time they
were brought forward, there would hardly have been
time for making any progress in the matter. He thought,
however, that there was great room for inquiry, and did
not think there could be any objection to it, provided it
were instituted at an early period of the session.

--------
Mr. HENLEY supported the rejection of the clause.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL explained that the
object of the clause was simply to legalise a mode of
conducting this business, which had hitherto worked to
the satisfaction of the public.
Sir J. GRAHAM contended for the necessity of con-
tinuing the existence of the Court of Review. He
would rather recommend the abolition of one of the in-
ferior Courts of Chancery.
Sir G. GREY thought that if a judge were to be
enesp in the business of
sloyment ; whereas, by the present
con-
stituted sole judge of the Court of Review, he would
einpilde m
le
the united Court of Chancery and Court of Review over
which he would preside.
Bill
Sir J. GRAHAM said that if the remaining clauses
he o h couldalf his
findtitime
ample
of the Bill were passed, they would have the effect of
increasing the number of appeals from the County

Mr. WILLIAMS thought the grant now proposed
was a large expenditure, but he would not oppose it.
He considered, however, that the mismanagement of the
Colonial office, which necessitated this additional grant,
should be put an end to.
Sir J. GRAHAM thought the Bill should be dis-
cussed on its merits, and that the censures directed by
the Hon. Member for Montrose and the Hon. Member
for Coventry against the late administration of Colonial
affairs was not deserved by the Noble Lord who pre-
sided over that department in the Government of which
he (Sir J. Graham) had been a Member. If the whole
liability of the British Exchequer was to be limited to
236,0001.—the money advanced last year, and the pre-
sent grant—he would be satisfied. He hoped these
grants would be the means of securing the prosperity of
the colony, and enabling the colony to carry out those
operations, which were calculated to develope its re,
sources.
After a few words from Lord INGESTRE and Mr. E.
DENISON,
Mr AGLIONBY said that the colony had weighed
the consequences of its own acts, and he believed that at
the expiration of the three years they would be com-
pletely successful. He was always desirous that there
should be no concealment in the affairs of the colony,
and he believed the succ( ss of the undertaking was cer-
tain from the soundness of the principles on which it was
based.
Mr. DISRAELI thought that their constituents out
of doors should properly understand what they were
called upon to do this evening. They were called upon
.to give a grant of public money for one of their colonies.
Now, at the beginning of the session a great outcry was
made because a proposition was made for a grant of pub-
lic money for a great public good, and the grounds on
which it was opposed was, that possibly it might go into
the pockets of destitute shareholders.—(Laughter.) He
wished to know, then, into whose pockets this money was
to go.—(Laughter.) He very much feared that now, at
the close of the session, the Government, under the
magical influence of twilight, were allowing those prin-
ciples which they advocated with such energy at the be-
ginning
,of the session to drop quietly into oblivion.—
(Hear, hear, and laughter.) If this was an ill-used and
unfortunate country, as had been stated, he thought it
was pretty fairly represented in the Government.—
(Laughtei.) He wanted to know how it was that the
money now proposed to be advanced to the New Zealand
Company, was to be given at 3i per cent., while that
proposed a few nights ago to be advanced to Ireland was
to be charged 5 per cent.? Was it to be understood
generally in Ireland, that in the estimation of the present
Government, the security of New Zealand was to
be preferred to that of Ireland.--(Hear, hear.) He did
not mean to vote against the Bill, but he thought that
this vote showed a most extraordinary and glaring in-
consistency on the part of the Government, and while
it paid a proud homage to the soundness of the prin-
ciples advocated so ably by his Noble Friend beside him
(Lord G. Bentinck) at the beginning of the session,
pronounced the strongest possible condemnation on the
course pursued by the present Government.—(Cheers.)
The Bill was then read a second time.

Courts.
Mr. DISRAELI thought that after the Government,
had thrown over the Health of Towns and other Bills
there was not much necessity for discussing at this late
period of the session, and late hour of the day. clauses
which the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for
the Home Department had himself admitted to be of no
importance.
Mr. ROMILLY thought that the present Bill would
tend to remove the mischief of the sub-division of Courts
at present existing, and which gave rise to an enormous
amount of litigation and expense.
Mr. HUME thought that the best course would be to
let the matter remain as it stood, and he hoped that the
Government would withdraw the clauses.
After a few words from Mr. MACARTHY,
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the clause 44

THAMES CONSERVANCY BILL.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE wished to ask the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Secretary of the Admiralty when it
was intended to proceed with the Thames Conservancy
Bill ?
Mr. WARD said that it was intended to proceed with
it immediately after the disposal of the estimates.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said, as it was announced to be a
private Bill it ought to be proceeded with at the time
of private business.
Mr. EWART said it was useless to go on with this
Bill. It contained 100 clauses, and could not be got
through this session.
Mr. lIUME wished to have the opinion of the
Speaker as to whether the Bill ought not to be pro-
ceeded with at the time of private business.
The SPEAKER said the Bill partook both of the
character of a private and a public Bill, and it would,
therefore, be more regular to take it at the time of public
business.
The subject then dropped.
BRITISH SPIRITS.
Mr. MOFFATT then moved for a Select Committee to
inquire into the operation of the existing regulations in
reference to the bonding of British spirits in the United
Kingdom, and to the rectification of British spirits for
exportation. These regulations prey! ed very heavily
upon the spirit trade of the country, and he hoped that
during the recess the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer would give the subject his best
attention.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER pro-
mised to do so, and the motion was withdrawn.
SUPPLY.

Against it
Majority in favour of the clause
Clause 1 was then agreed to.
Lord J. MANNERS then said that if the three first
clauses were agreed to he should feel it his duty to op-
pose the whole of the remaining clauses of the Bill.
Mr. HUME thought that if the Government wished
to preserve the beneficial clauses of the Bill, it ought to
give up the three first clauses.
Clause 2 was then proposed.
Mr. S. WORTLEY thought that to avoid future op-
position on the further stages of the Bill, it would be
better to withdraw the obnoxious clauses.
Sir G. GREY thought that the better course to adopt
would be, for those Hon. Members who objected to the
clauses to oppose them in the future stages of the Bill.
After a few words from Mr. Disraeli, Mr. Wakley,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Stuart,
strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House di
vided, when there appeared
For the clause

The House then resolved itself into a Committee of
Supply
sum of 3,5
ly;Mr. GreenelsL was ♦o
inthretd
chair.e
Tto
defray
the expenses
of the temporary accommodation of the Committees of
P o r t p a
Rrioc
andks
sbHeasrbbeoeu should
contended
therefore
the o
atheHouse of
question Com
Commons.
On be voted on aceount of
thattheophpaorsbeotuhrewould
ec
op
upon
perfectlypo
hov ne
useless,Mr vote.
Mr. Mr. HUME also considered the harbour
useless work, and that it ought notsbtoeubled abgersepe
more so as a few years ago a pledge was given by' the
Government that no more money
this harbour.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER cie-
fended the vote on the ground that it was for the public
service.
Mr. HUME moved that the grant be postponed.
After a few words from Mr. Ross and the CELAN-
CELLOR of the EXCIIEQUER,
Mr. WILLIAMS denounced the vote :as a job sup-
ported by the Government for the benefit of a Whig
Peer.
After a few words from Mr. FERRAND,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
Hon. Member was wrong in his surmise.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the vote llB
Against it
—ll4
in Ireland was
c„,ritly
.A vote of 4,000/. for the establishment of convict de-
potsreed to.
A vote of 5
Alter a vote beingediassed for a sum of 600,000/. to
to the 31st March, 1
oEfx.icacrnrcinc:uoEnßthseaid R
be any alterations in the mode whether there were to
Mr. HUME wished to know
The CHANCELLOR of the
Commission.
ethliaet
it was not intended to make any '
f
Lord CLEMENTS took thata alteration in the system.
plaining of a leading article wh?tcPlPi appearedortunity of corn-
;Wolin!' Chronicle of this day. He i,il
e
in the
always. con-
sidered that paper to be a well conducted and
able paper, but he regretted to see that orsP anyeet.
other paper endeavouring to intimidate any Honourable
Nfember of that House by pouring down abuse on their
heads. He believed that that journal was an organ of
the Government.—(Laughter.) He trusted that he
would never again have such an attack mode apou hi,,,,
and he hoped that the writer of the article would see
reason to reconsider his opinions.
The vote was then agreed to.
A vote of 500,0001. for commissariat supplies in
Ireland was then agreed to.
The goose then resumed.

:andmr.
Against it .... ............................... 40
Majority in favour of the clause
The clause was then agreed to.
froCnalaufier.3sw.
was
otrheeeny,prtohpeosAedt,toarnndeya-Gfteernearalfiw words

Stuart, was agreed to.
The remaining clauses were then agreed to.
Mr. BROWN moved the insertion of the clause, giving
power to the Judges of County Courts to issue warrants
to arrest a debtor in certain cases, such debtor being
within the limits of the jurisdiction of the court, and to
detain him in custody for a limited time, or until an
order obtained to hold him to bail, when the custody to
be transferred to the sheriff or officer holding a capias
issued thereon, and setting forth that whereas
the delay which sometime takes place in pro-
curing an order from a Judge of one of the
superior courts to hold a defendant to bail, and in
issuing a capias thereon,
is injurious to creditors, be it
enacted, That if a plaintiff in any action in any of her
Majesty's superior courts of law at Westminster for
the recovery of a debt, or the creditor of any debtor who
shall enter into an undertaking immediately to commence
such an action, shall, by the affidavit of himself
or some other person, show, to the satisfaction of any
judge of any of the county courts aforesaid, that ho
has a cause of action against such defendant
or debtor to the amount of twenty pounds or
upwards, or has sustained damage to that amount,
and that there is probable cause for believing that such
defendant or debtor is about to quit England, unless he
be forthwith apprehended, it shall be lawful for such
Judge to issue his warrant, directed to such person or
persons as he shall think fit, whereby such person or
persons shall have authority to arrest any such defendant
or debtor named in such warrant, wherever he may be
gotfo
found within the limits of the jurisdiction of such
Judge, and him safely keep for five days then next, or
until such defendant or debtor shall have given a
bail bond to the Sheriff, or shall have made
deposit of the amount of the debt or damages mentioned
icno suchrdn .
cording pat w
resent
es t pmr
iancstti
ec
re, of
whenh e r
aMajesty
defendant 's superior
iis
in
courts
custody upon a writ of capias, or until an order for hold-
ing such defendant or debtor to bail can be obtained
d'it:rs' augragintisr.tretshte °i
under the provisions of an Act passed in the session of
Parliament held in the first and second years of the
reign lof her present Majesty, intituled "An Act for
propertym es n e 0 processf debtors
i:
andt-liviltoa'2ratnai°eillnCleinx.ol
.i., ..1 <.:,!rt an ea,es, fur extending' 11-, i''''''' die' '' c" -
the laws for the relief of insolvent debtors in England." -
After a few words from Sir G. Grey, Mr. Henley'
. uart, and the Attorney-General, the clulse Wa
mr it s
withdawn.

MUSSEL FISHERIES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
HERRING FISHERIES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
POST-OFFICE BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
NAVIGATION (No. 2) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
CONSTABULARY FORCE (IRELAND) BILL.
The report on this Bill was brought up.
DESTITUTE PERSONS (IRELAND) BILL.
The House went into Committee on this Bill, and
passed the remaining clauses.
The House resumed.
LONDON BRIDGE APPROACHES BILL.
The House then went into Committee on this Bill.
The clauses of the Bill were then agreed to without
alteration. The Chairman reported progress, and tho
report was ordered to be brought up to-morrow.
RECOVERY OF PUBLIC MONIES (IRELAND)
BILL.

The report on this Bill was further considered. The
Bill was ordered to be engrossed, and read a third time
to-morrow.

INIILITIA PAY BILL.
This Bill was read a second time.
TRUSTEES RELIEF BILL.
The Trustees Relief Bill was then read a second time,
and ordered to bo committed to-morrow (this day).
CANAL COMPANIES BILL.
The House then resolved itself into Committee upon
this Bill.
The clauses were agreed to, and the report ordered to
be brought up to-morrow.
COPYRIGHT (COLONIES) BILL.'
The House then went into Committee upon the Copy-
right (Colonies) Bill.
rßhAe
NseKcoßndrelacdiyng Aoxf
rhe clauses were agreed to, and the report ordered to
received to-morrow.
COMMONS EN;l.i
tomorrow.
up
upon this Bill, goingL this Bill wva'
ariNPot; corp;eildiniLi
Upon the order of the day for untiltea

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JULY 13, 1847.

The preamble of the Bill was then declared to be
►roved, the House resumed, and the Bill was ordered to
►e reported on Wednesday.
JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES (No. 2) BILL.

The order of the day for going into Coinnaittee on
;his Bill was postponed till Thursday next.
TRUST MONIES INVESTMENT BILL.

On the order of the day being read for going into
Committee on this Bill,
Mr. STUART said he felt it his duty to oppose the
further progress of this Bill. He entirely disagreed with
the principles of the Bill.
The House then went into Committee on the Bill.
After a few words from Lord Courtenay, Mr. llenley,
and Sir G. Grey, the several clauses of the Bill were
agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to be reported this
day.
The other orders of the day where then disposed of,
and the House adjourned at a Quarter past Twelve
o'clock.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.

(YESTERDAY.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.

CALEDONIAN RAIL WAY (EDINBURGH
STATION AND BRANCHES TO GRANTHAM
AND TO THE EDINBURGH AND GLASGOW).

The Committee met this morning at eleven o'clock
and after hearing the evidence of Mr. Granger, and
other witnesses in opposition to the Bill, decided that
the preamble of the Bill was proved.