The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-06 00:00:00

, . .
JUNE 6, 1848

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

ROUSE OF LORDS, June 5.
Their Lordships assembled at the usual hour.
REGISTRATION OF MARRIAGES BILL.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented several
petitions from schoolmasters and session clerks in
places in Scotland against this Bill.
SITES FOR CHURCHES.
The Noma; Dunn also
favour of this Bill, presented a petition in
Ile stated that he entirely dis-
sented from its prayer.
CexAempptß frEoLmri thpirsed presented
LEGACY DUTY.
The Marquis of
ru
rbde u WESTMINSTER presented a
nuaymber of petitions praying that charitable bequests
SCOTCH BANKING,
duty
a prain petition from the
corporation ofEdin burgh, yg for the removal of the
restriction upon Scotch banking.
THE PENINSULAR MEDALS.
The Duke of RICHMOND gave non
Friday next he should ask
the Noble E that
arl (Earl
Grey) when these medals would
be issued, the time
when they were promised having long passfl by.
THE POOR-LAW,
Lord MONTEAGLE moved for a copy of a cir-
cular letter from the Poor-law Commissioners of Ire-
land to the clerks of the boards of guardians, respecting
the mode of administering relief to the families of
persons retaining possession of land. He said the
giving relief to the families of persons so situated was
a contravention of the poor-law, and as it partook of a
despotic character, ought to be put an end to.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE had no objection
to produce the circular.
After some discussion the motion was agreed to.
THE CONTINENT.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY inquired
whether any communications from her Majesty's
representatives at the Courts of Rome, Naples, and
Florence, with respect to the extraordinary circum-
stance of troops of those countries having entered
Austria and commenced war without any previous
intimation of their intentions, and in violation of
existing treaties, had been received ?
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE did not wish to
express any opinion on these matters, which might be
construed into that of the opinion of the Government.
There were no treaties in existence which made it
imperative on the Government of this country to in-
terfere, and he did not think it would be advisable,
under these circumstances, to lay any information
which the Government had received on the subject on
the table.

CHARTIST DISTURBANCES.
Lord BROUGHAM availed himself of the
opportunity to call the attention of their Lordships
to the fact that tumult still nightly prevailed in the
metropolis and in other parts of the country. The
apparent object of the lawless persons who took part
in these unlawful assemblages was to wear out the
police
and other authorities, and it was, therefore,
incumbent upon the Government to adopt vigilant
measures to preserve the public peace, and to pre-
vent these lawless persons from setting the law at
naught longer.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, in the
event of the measures which the Government had
adopted proving insufficient to quell the disturbances
to which the Noble and Learned Lord had adverted,
the Government would not hesitate to come to Par-
liament to seek more ample powers than those which
they possessed under the existing laws.—(Cheers.)
GREAT YARMOUTH DISFRANCHISEMENT
BILL.
The Earl of DEVON then moved the second
reading of this Bill.
The Duke of RICHMOND thought the Bill uncalled
for. If the law officers of the Crown were directed to
prosecute those agents who had been convicted of
bribery, they would hear no mare of bribery in the
borough of Great Yarmouth.
Lord BROUGHAM coincided in the opinion ex-
pressed by the Noble Duke. The present Bill was,
he conceived, introduced without any facts to support it,
there being only certain suspicious upon which it was
grounded ; and while for the future they might dis-
franchise the parties named in the Bill, he could not see
how they could do so by the present measure.
Lord REDESDALE considered that the case, as set
forth in the Bill, was one totally free from objection, and
he should therefore support the measure.
After a few words from the Earl of DEVON, the
Bill was read a second time.
PROTECTION OF FEMALES BILL.
The Bishop of OXFORD, in moving the second read-
ing of this Bill, said that the evil it aimed at formed
only one portion of that great and painful question
which involved the moral condition and the well-being of
the people. The Bill was simply intended for the pro-
tection of females. It was not introduced for the pur- '
pose of suppressing brothels, but to meet one great evil,
namely, the entrapping by direct means of unwary and
innocent females. There were at present in this great
metropolis eighty thousand females living on prostitu-
tion, and the greater proportion of whom had been led
into their present wretched mode ,of life by the direct
arts of persons which the present measure was intended
to attack.—(Hear, hear.) Were it necessary to enter
into any detail on this painful subject, he could make
statements of the most appalling nature. He could
prove that there were actually persons stationed
at all the inlets from the country, for the
purpose of intercepting young females coming to
town, and luring them off, by promises of good situa-
tions into those dens of infamy where their ruin was
speedily accomplished.—(Hear, hear.) He was certain
that whatever difference of opinion there might be
among their Lordships as to legislating for the purpose
of putting down brothels, he was sure there would be no
difference of opinion among them as to the necessity of
a remedy for this glaring evil, as they would no doubt
all agree that those females were entitled to all the pro-
tection which the law could afford them.--(Hear, hear.)
He confessed it was difficult to frame a Bill so as to meet
the case, and on showing the present Bill to some legal
gentlemen, several portions of it had been pointed
out as calculated to render the other inoperative.
These ho had endeavoured to alter, and as ho meant
that the Bill should be submitted to a Committee
before its third reading, these alterations could
then be considered and inserted. It was not neces-
sary, ho conceived, that lie should say more on the sub-
ject. It was a portion of their Lordships' duty to pro-
tect the morals of the community, and to punish, if
they could, by legislation, great moral delinquency. It
was true they could not by Act of Parliament make
wen moral or immoral, but there was a principle of the
law of England which they were bound to carry out,
and that was to protect those who, from their own igno-
rance
and simplicity, fell victims to the deceptions and
intrigues of others • and if it Bill could be framed which
would but make this trade of entrapping females more
difficult, much good would be done.—(Hear, hear.) The
state these poor creatures were led into was the most
derided and wretched that could be conceived, and very
frequently resulted in their putting an end to their own
existence. He trusted, therefore, their Lordships would
interpose on their behalf, and would, therefore, move
the second reading of the Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM said, although he had opposed a
measure which was formerly brought forward on much
the same subject, after the statement of the Right Rev.
Prelate, so ably and feelingly made, he did not intend to
oppose the second reading of the present measure, more
especially as any alterations could be made upon it in
Committee which were thought necessary. No doubt a
great evil existed, and much misery was entailed on
those unfortunate creatures from the system referred to.
At the same time, there were great difficulties in the way
of getting these evils remedied; but, as he hoped these
were not such as could not be overcome, he should vote
for the second reading of the Bill.
The Bill was then read a second time.
CRUELTY TO ANIMALS PREVENTION BILL.
On the Duke of BEAUFORT moving the second
reading. of this Bill,
Lord CAMPBELL made some objections to various
of its clauses, but the purport of which did not reach the
gallery ; and,
After a short conversation, joined in by Earl Fitz-
hardinge, Lord Redesdale, and the Earl of Malmesbury,
The Bill was read a second time.
COLLECTOR OF CESS (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion of the Marquis of CLANRICARDE
this Bill was also read a second time.
EVICTED DESTITUTE POOR (IRELAND) BILL.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE next moved that
the House go into Committee on this Bill.
The Earl of RODEN could wish that the measure
should be postponed until after the holidays, as he had
some amendments to make.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE regretted that he
could not comply with the Noble Earl's request. He
had several amendments to propose to the Bill himself,
when in Committee, and perhaps these might obviate
the objections of the Noble Earl to the Bill.
Their Lordships then went into Committee, and the
clauses having been agreed to, the House resumed, and
their Lordships adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 5.
The SPEAXER took the Chair shortly before Four
o'clock.

SPAIN.
Lord MARCUS HILL brought up by command
of her Majesty certain dispatches from Sir .11-
13ulwer to Lord Palmerston.
The third reading of the Midland Great Western
Railway of Ireland (Deviation Line from Mullingar
to Athlone), and Stirling and Dunfermline Rail.
way (Amendment and Deviations) Bills, were post-
poned to Thursday next at the suggestion of Mr.
BERNAL, in consequence of some informalities.

YORK, NE ‘ti CASTLE, AND BERWICK RAIL-
WAY, &c. BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS.
The Reports on the following Bills were further
considered and agreed to :
Bristol and Exeter Railway (Branch from Bleadon to
Wells, Glastonbury, and Street) Bill.
Bristol and Exeter Railway (Taunton and Castle
Cary Branch) Bill.
Drumpeller Railway Bill.
Great Northern Railway (Isle of Axholme Exten-
sion) Bill.
Leeds and Thirsk Railway (Harrogate and Pateley
Branch) Bill.
London and Blackwall Railway Improvement, and
Branches to the St. Katharine's and London
Docks Bill.
Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway
(No. 2—Deviation of Line, and Power to Shrews-
bury and Birmingham, and Birmingham, Wolver-
hampton, and Dudley Railway Companies to con-
tribute and make arrangements) Bill.
SECOND READINGS.

The following Bills were read a second time, and
ordered to be committed :
Hamlyn's Estate Bill.
New Ross Port and Harbour Bill.
GREAT WESTERN OF BENGAL RAILWAY.
1 Mr. GREENE moved that the order made on the
20th of March last, referring the Great Western of
Bengal Railway Company Dissolution, and Transfer
BCOomAmßintte°e
of Capital to East Indian Railway Company Bill to
the Committee of Selection, be discharged ; that the
fora Select
Bill be withdrawn.
Mr. MARTIN opposed the motion, and it was
ultimately withdrawn.
Dr. BOWRING gave notice that he should move
OF ORDNANCE.
constitu-
tion
of the Board of' Ordnance.lu
OinßDirNeAi
OATHS OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT.
In answer to a question of Sir R H. INGLIS,
R. INGLIS,
introduce J. RUSSELL geld
introduce the Bill of
respect to the oath of Members, intention to prop
that the House should go into
whole House for the purpos '3
which
pee
hadfound he could not
given notice with
.
ose,
on
Tuesd ers, but it was his
!toCEthe
ay the 27th instant,
Committee. of the
Purpose of considering these
oaths. The Right Hon. Gentleman had i•ef -
the defeat which had attended the Jewish
Bill in another place. The Right Hon. ee t o
Disabilities
would remember that a majority of the Hon: aant
least had supported that measure.—(Loud cheers.)
With respect to the oaths of Members, he begged
to inform the Right lion. Gentleman that many
Noble Lords had scruples in taking the oath of su-
premacy, as they considered that the authority of the
Pope as a spiritual prince extended to this country.
It was with a view to obviate these scruples that he
proposed to introduce that Bill.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said the Noble Lord had
told the House that all her Majesty's subjects would
be able to take these oaths. He wished to know from
the Noble Lord if this would refer to Mahomedans
and Pagans ?—(Laughter and cheers.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said that it was only in-
tended to refer to the born subjects of her Majesty,
and he did not think there were many Mahomedans
or Pagans in these dominions.

CHARTIST DISTURBANCES.
In answer to a question from Mr. G. THOMP-
SON,
Sir GEORGE GREY said, with reference to
the question asked by the Honourable Member,
that he would have been better prepared to give
the information required if notice had been given
of the question. He had no hesitation in say-
ing that the police had acted throughout entirely
under the directions of the Home Office. After the
disturbances which had late taken place, to the annoy-
ance of the inhabitants in the localities ht which the
meetings had been held, it was the intention of the
Government to put a stop to them. As the pt ions
who assemlf.ed had committed acts of violence against
persons and property, it was the duty of the Govern-
ment to afford the inhabitants protection, so far as
they were allowed by law, and he believed the law
was complete in its effect for this purpose.
The particular meeting in the Tower Hamlets
to which the Honourable Member alluded was
not interrupted by the police, but after the
dispersing of the meeting the mob broke several
windows in a church in the neighbourhood and
the police were consequently obliged to interfere.
A conflict took place, but be was happy to say that
the police completely succeeded in routing the mob ;
not, however, until thirty policemen were severely
injured, and, he believed, one was stabbed
through the hand by one of the mob who
was armed with some dangerous weapon.
In consequence of the experience which the Govern-
ment had had of the nature of those proceedings—
proceedings which, he must say, deprived the parties
of any pretext of their being for a legitimate object--
he had directed the police to take effectual measures
to put a stop to them—(Hear, hear)—and he had no
doubt, indeed he was certain, that most effectual
and stringent measures would be put in
force to put down proceedings that were calculated to
disturb the peace of those who were truly her Ma-
jesty's faithful subjects.—(Hear, hear.)
ITALY AND AUSTRIA.
Mr. MUNTZ, pursuant to the notice he had
given, wished to ask the Noble Lord at the
head of Foreign Affairs whether it was true
that her Majesty's Government had interposed in Italy
in favour of the Austrian Government; and if they
had, he wished to know to what extent?
Lord PALMERSTON was glad the Hon. Mem-
ber for Birmingham had put the question to him, as
it enabled the Government to deny the false and
calumnious reports that had been circulated with re-
spect to English agents in Italy. He could assure the
Hon. Member that there was no foundation whatever
for the report to which he had referred—(Hear,
hear)—and that the British Government, what-
ever might be their feelings on the subject, had
done that which they considered to be their duty,
remained quiet spectators of what had been going on.
—(Hear.) With regard to what was going on
at Naples, he believed that they had been
greatly misrepresented, but it was his intention on a
future day to lay on the table of the House the
account given by the Charge d'Afaires at Naples,
which he believed would show that he had nothing
to do with them, and that they did not bear the
character which they had been reported to bear.
LAW EXPENSES AND JOINT-STOCK BANKS.
Mr. AGLIONBY moved, pursuant to notice, for the
following returns :—Return of the names and amount
of monies paid for law expenses to solicitors to public
departments ; stating whether for salary, professional
charges, or from bills paid by individuals for official
business, whether such solicitors are wholly or not paid
by fixed salaries, distinguishing, as far as may be, the
amount charged for attendances on the principal or
other officers of each department, with the total amount
of the bills for such attendances, and for law or other
expenses charged to the public since the last return ;
also, whether any such solicitors are engaged in private
business, and, if so, whether in partnership, with the
names of the partners, and the authority under which
the public appointments are held (in continuation of
Parliamentary Paper No. 603, of session 1843). Ac-
co ru
nt of the number of private and joint-stock
ban registered in each year from 1842 to
1847, both inclusive of all the joint-stock banks
existing in England and Wales on the Ist day of
January, 1848, specifying their names, the dates of
their establishment, the places where they had
branches established, with the number of partners in
each, on the Ist day of January, 1843, 1844, 1845,
1846, 1847, and 1848, distinguishing between those
banks that issued and those that did not issue notes
(in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 85, of
session 1843).
After some discussion, the motion was withdrawn.
BUSINESS OF THE NIGHT.
In answer to a question from Mr. RICARDO,
Lord J. RUSSELL stated that he did not intend
to bring on the debate on the navigation-laws
the Spanish question closed before ten
oterminated
however, the discussion on that,cioc
o'clock.
unless
If
navigation-laws before that
should
ulproposed
b be
resumed, that thea topicnd debatehe should
theu ld
askor the
to-morrow Hon.
to
postpone Members who hadth o
m tillmotionsTohtou-ntrmhs
Thursday,
in
paper
f
order that the debate might be continued
Should the debate on the navigation-laws not come
on to-night, of course it would stand over till Thurs-
day.