The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-07 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, August G.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY took his seat upon the
Woolsack at Five o'clock.
Messengers from the Commons brought up severrl
Bills, and praying their Lordships' concurrence.
SHUAR DUTIES.
Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition from the
Convention of the Royal Burghs of Scotland, in which
they express their gratification at the passing of the Bill
for the abolition of the corn-laws, and now pray
for the
equalisation of the sugar duties.
The NOBLE LORD also presented a petition from the
town of Newport in Wales in favour of the Bill for the
better recovery of small debts.
AMENDMENT OF LAW (IRELAND).
The NOBLE LORD also obtained Wave to bring in two
Bills, for the improvement of the law in Ireland--one
was entitled the Interplcaders' Act and the other the
Mandamus Prohibition Act.

Thee Bills were read a first time.
MARRIAGES (IRELAND) AC r AMENDMENT

BILL.
On the motion of Lord CAMPBELL, this Bill went
through Committee.
JOINT-STOCK BANKS IN SCOTLAND.
The Earl of CLARENDON moved the second reading
of the Joint-Stock Banks (Scotland) Bill.
The Earl of EGLINTOUN said he would not con:
tinue his opposition to the Bill, because the Scottish
bankers had withdrawn theirs. Ho still, however, re:
tained his opposition to anv interference with the present
system of banking in Scotland.
The Earl of RADNOR said he thought that the
system of banking in both countries might be assimn:
lated ; but when the system carried on in Scotland ger;
universal satisfaction to the people of Scotland, and t“
system pursued here worked anything but satisfactorilli
he thought it would be wrong to assimilate a g°?,„
system with a bad one. The Scotch system V"'
that satisfaction for a period of one hundred and fifl
years, and the introduction of an altered system Inns
lead to confusion. He was not surprised at the ciro.
cumstance which led to the Noble Lord's withdraw*"
of his opposition, namely, the bankers no longer offer"
ing any opposition, because it would give them 1"

monopoly.
Lord CAMPBELL said that the present Bill bad
been for upwards of twelve months under consideration
by the late Government, so that no new principle WI
introduced. That system had been found to W°ra
well in this country, for notwithstanding what bs
been said it had had the effect, during the mania tiftl
speculation, to prevent spurious banks being got up.
would, therefore, support the second reading of the Pl'
The Earl of EGLINTON explained his opini°°
with respect to the principle, not only of the present
measure, but former banking Bills.
•

The Bill was then read a7second time.
CHESTER RETURNING OFFICER'S BILL,
The LORD CHANCELLOR, in compliancu
the notice he had given on Thursday last, moved ttiv
third reading of this Bill.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed. ,„g
NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA WAS."'

LANDS.
Lord LYTTELTON wished to ask a question fr°lll
the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies—it w„Pi
with reference to New Zealand. There were a Eff;-t
many difficulties connected with this st`ti'-„;
but he hoped that the present Governlege;
would consider it their duty to take some notice °l, '-
measure which the late Government had in conteiney
tion, and which he believed would be of the utmost 101:
portance, and the principles of which met with the greatee;
concurrence. Ho desired to know what were the intentiond
of the Government respecting that measure? The see°,
question which he desired to ask was with regain Lt 4
c
measure respecting the Australian Waste Lands, 111,13
was also introduced by the late Government, sin"
upon the table of the House. in et
Earl GREY said he hoped that the Govere-",„ess
would be able to pass both measures this session, no
it was. The draft of the Bill was found in the e"-„s'.
Alien the Government came into power, and he is
tiered it was most necessary that some Bill should
regulating th; future Government of New Zealand. lor
regard to the second Bill, the Government found ito
cessary to modify it in some particulars, but theYmity
agreed in the principle of the Bill. He proposed "-ore
troduce it on Tuesday next, and he would thee fa ge
its second reading, and desire that the House sb°l,lote
into Committee pro form!, in order that he wig,_ -
what alterations he should propose.
POOR- LAW REMOVAL BILL. f the
Earl GREY then moved the second reading o
Poor Removal Bill. He would not ask their Lortl'lnr
to pass it if it was to be a final measure, ost
the subject of settlement would require the rqod,
serious attention of Parliament at a very early Pelltbe
Reserving final legislation on the law of settlement, ist,
question now was, should they interfere with the ex.o_
Mg evils which wore well-known to attend the,opera+!
of the present poor-law? By the law, as it now stood, tit'.
a poor man went in early life into the rettlir,
facturing districts and passed a considerable Pe „,
tion of his life there, he was not entitled to any
relief, should he require it. This, it would be geaeralq
admitted, was a great hardship ; and it was to wee'
that case that the Bill was introduced. A strong er
pectation was excited when the Corn Bill was intro-
duced, that such a measure would be brought forwards
wad it was to meet that feeling that he asked their
Lordships to give the Bill a second reading.
The Duke of RICHMOND objected to the Bill. $e
thought that as the whole law of settlement was to be
considered next session, it would not be advisable to in-
terfere now with the law of removal. This was one of
the boons which was promised to accompasy the corn-
laws.—(Laughter.) He was against union, settlements.
es he 134dieved that they would grind the poor to t.
dust. He agreed that the hardship pointed out by t"
Noble Earl was very great, but, instead of any tot;
rary regulation of the law, they o fight not to inter be
tilt a permanent measure was brought forward. ' A7deal
considered that this Bill would give rise to a greernini
of litigation, and as he considered that such an in3P;ttress
question should not be lightly touched, he wolli";53ill
upon the Noble Earl the propriety of postponing h'"
till next session.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH objected to the BiIL ht
It was not the Bill which was intended to be brollge
forward by the late Government, and he could not th
fore support it.

• •
Earl of ELLEN BOROUGH—Then,
Earl GREY—It is the same Bill exactly-
he must say that alterations were introduceds:ged
it in the House of Commons which completely ch ot as
it from that contemplated by the late Governme
supplementary to the Corn Bill. ever°
Lord REDESDALE supported the Bill. The gthough
principle of the Bill he was most happy to adopt,
he thought it admitted of further amendments. 00 the
The Marquis of SALISBURY said it was onlY, go-
if it be the same,
last day that the House met he asked the Nnb'eseble
quis opposite a question OA this subject, and th° f very
Marquis replied that he considered the subject would
great importance, and he was induced to think i',or the
not be pressed on so quickly. He was also ueu years
impression that it was intended to make firie to the
residence a settlement. A pauper might aPP,I mig'.4
relieving officer under these circumstances, ',Yu ,va his
answer that he should go to a magistrate and Prv,ecide
statement, and that the magistrate would then was
whether he was entitled or not to relief. But waatilitae.
to become of the wretched pauper in the Ineta,roce
This Bill, if it were carried, would remain a w''''
on the statute book. hops
The Marquis of WINCHELSEA said be zit of
the Noble Earl would consent to the postponen3e orl-
this Bill. If this Bill were passed it would lead W the
less litigation. He would ask the Noble Lord °n
Woolsack what was meant by residence ? Pef-ja a
tamed that this Bill did not place the ptiaPe" ivea
proper position. With respect to lunatics ther'recani
considerable injustice done, and he knew a case ,':e ni all
occnrrence where a poor woman was removed 0--
her friends to a distance of 300 miles. acid to
Earl ST. GERMANS said that the Bill ietel'Attetl
provide an exemption from removal. Ho fully atocoir
that the measure was by no means complete, but t tote
sidered that it was an improvement on the prese°o not
of the law, and he must contend that the Bill vitae lata
materially altered from the one introduced hf Soils'
Government. He, therefore, trusted that tl'e
would not reject it. bieb' sci
Lord BEAUMONT said that the promise w would
companied the Bill was of such importance that h
st iv.,
not throw cold water upon it by voting agion.,e cle:S
a( lit t
eena
tri.o)n
tBo etchaeu
cis eu
et
shtai
ot
up roofmsiesettbleomunendt.thaerimatoregoloi3for
'eefl
ND desired his Noble Fr' ee
stehtetlperminecnitple that a residence should give a chino
The Duke of RICIINTO _
tell him what period of resicLeglied
eakimsofor settlement ; in fact he hell' no
.in every clause of the Bill fr
wolloutldhe
that there was an appeal
to give a claim to settlemenc,„°-ssibLe
Bill s'h.ould be to do as maci!,,ln°itY ti.°
f
possible decision which would be mad
any MOYS considered e.
ri°4°
Lord CA that a certain 10„d th,°
wdpeirtrehevdetnthhteautl
unjust
vusestrtpycolpsaseiirmbslose.2 ni
iih;tch,:ceeti
i- ;gear:3! stl _
APeti..
emW give
000uof5.al shtacthcl
justicetgbhoreeoakptso:awr to. h
ipcHahrei
wschooeunslsdi
whether he paid rate or not, should be urea '—toosii
residence
practical difficulties arose ' in every clause °` ler,--
,-,tisi
He should support the Bill, however, as he e--
it was an improvement. shoji°
The- LORD CHANCELLOR said that a
was 0
measure existed in Scotland, and though there was ee
abstract definition of the term residence, there (war,
practical difficulty in administering the laWe'
t
hear.) 'deed °int.
The Duke of GRAFTON said that he cons]. ofide-
the Billwould do dealof harm, and felt c
a great
JO
that it would produce endless litation. Le cretin
The Marquis of LANSI)OWNE said that t02*,,, were,
upon which he would vote for the second reading
cia_
that the Bill recognised the principle of irePr,..;,aa Os!
the poor-law, and because he felt sure that It i,t,t lope _
placed upon the statute book they would flan is such .
pas 000'
sable to stop, but that they should go on and The it
measure as would give universal satisfaction. -'.." a
receive-
sure was precisely in the state in which they .
_, bees1
from the late Government, and there n*".
OA trivial
no alteration in it except of the
aint there villa
instances. Their Lordships were aware th h
: prevented
a cruel law upon the sta`ute-book, whie %pen&
0 e f ad,
those who had passed their best years, a ; 0
- from local
their toil and money in a place, in their the w
versity from receiving. the slightest aidosiity. $o a
authorities if he had not been born in the 1° °gni°
he rec dhe
that was a cruel and unjust principle, and nt, to .he,
in the present measure a great improveinevo
d co in 75
would, therefore, support it as a step
ii:liseir Lordship
right direction. He, therefore, hoped
___..
not
would sanction the second reading of thheaDt il,
Le wottld n,_.s
The Marquis of SALISBURY said
ht .
he belieVed that
ill
press the House to a ivision, althougvision
divisions • .
the Bill would be the s douree of endless
Posed 01°
WA' REDESDALB slid 010 U theY

t

)It,,k°tlld be enabled to discover the inaccuracies of its
whieitin e
4g, and thus have the benefit of the experience
Th tbbey would obtain by next year.
bE e 11 was then read a second time, and ordered to
oslmu • ted this day week.
curd CLARENDON, in the absence of the Kam
taoricarde, moved the second readings of the Irish
k 46 Bill, the Grand Jury Assessments (Ireland)
and Bill,
Shannon Navigation Bill.
post,?rie the Shannon Navigation Bill, as objections
MONTEAGLE desired the Noble lord. to
hk?t
Thueel? made to it.
ttiNei NI was then withdrawn, and the two others re-
T
hee Rouse then adjourned.

TheQ.°l7SE OF COMMONS, August 6.
"I'Esame. took the Chair shortly before Four.
IY.!le reportsREPORTS.
%ait on the Bishop of Norwich's (North Lynn
) b ate
t Bill, Borthwick Estate Bill, and Lowe
Th -
arY Estate Bill, were agreed to.
THIRD READINGS.
,
zeithtttraz
atineltraiannsgoroLuingce&nLatlioll,Rail ay Bill
Bill, and the New
Ptsea, Company Bill were read a third time and

POST-OFFICE.
';131 •tr;huIINCOMBE presented a petition from Tho-
,loifib-:".4133, a leWr-carrier, complaining. of
.the har,d-
kt4e ,;IPg dismissed from the Post-ofhce come-
""e'teo hating given evidence before Mr. Peacock, the
lei% to that establishment, and praying for inquiry.
LOe AND WATERFORD RAILWAY.
nektfe !notion of Mr. WYSE, the Bill was ordered to
Captj secT, ond time on Friday next
lkl I'ECRELL presented, pursuant to notice, a
.I'°lll the Rev. Edward Duncombe, rector of
tho m.%kyr',e, in the county of York, complaining of
tt 44C4Ppropriation, by the York Central Diocesan
'
tt. of the sum of 3,5001., granted by the Committee
Pti:Teil of. Education for the purpose of building
tith, e le:raining Schools for the benefit of the children
p'B_4!l! i-nruring classes. The Hon. Member gave notice
"44.-ention to-morrow to move that the petition be

VAN MEMEN'S LAND.
,`4,ttr.orellt presented a petition from the free colo-
,71,1)1 Diemen's Land, setting forth the hard-
"PreE,;''er which they laboured, and praying for a
t, dlatative form of government.
tp• notion !notion of Sir GEORGE GREY, a Select
till
4Zd as appointed for the revision of the stand-
-4ft relating to Private Bills, consisting of Mr.
14411411, Mr. Strutt, Captain Jones, Mr. Gibson Craig,
• Greene.
ene.
Sir J• PLUGGING IN THE ARMY.
ettinkh C. HOBIiOUSE presented a petition from
am comaining. of the practice of flogging in
44341 and Praying the House to take the subject into
kr.eration.
Itgih moved for a return -of the number of
ktiet • that had taken place in the army (luring the

til.'llll
k MORTALITY IN THE ARMY.
mr.
also moved for returns of the mortal
4pasritish army in different parts of the world during
Year.
r„.,„ DEBT AND PRIZE MONEY.
i'-"NRY WINSTON BARRON rose, pursuant
tt t,'efe, to put the following questions to the Presi-
the Board of Control:—What was the amount
'44,1b1e of he debt and prize money since the last dis-
i?„,,liti°4 in 1832 of the Deccan Prize Money ?—Had the
ti4'eure jewels, in the custody of the East India Com-
ttio Deflates, been adjudicated, as set forth in • the
k;tlPaper of the House of Commons, as printed in
Fear 1838 ?—When will the distribution of the debt
114tize money take place ; and has the dispute which
kt4ted the distribution of the said prize money been
Vhtr lC.nf ot what is the nature of the disute ?
u• HOBHOUSE said that the last distribution
144/oeccan prize money took place in 1842, and not
"ed by the Hon. Member in 1832. With reference
lot e tttrher questions, he thought the Hon. Member bad
Ith,,,g'peve for a continuation of the returns moved for
411114'40n. Member for Montrose on a former occasion
subject.
sir. QUARANTINE LAWS.
t`g LA.YARD wished to ask the Secretar for
.°lll6 Department, whether Sir Witham Pym,
wie4talltendent General of Quarantine, had within
ttWo
t'd tai the jeers been employed by Government.to
.spr.o-
-()lament for the purpose of obtaining in-
'44lollllml the subject of quarantines from the au-
Ittliarl to different places, or for some other purpose.;.
iskade °I? if he made a report on his return ; and,. it
a rePort, whether there be any objection to its
I.l4;itlial:tlifitited• and laid on the table of the House ;
tp„"ernment may institute an inquiry, by com-
eta,. ,-,',844, as to the nature of the fever which pre-
,,,ear on board her Majesty's ship Eclair; and
t‘,Zlr,tlitti" have been the true yellow or black-vomit
it) tt,,ailtqollie,, inquiry should then extend to the ques-
otheins4t-iersi.a, tether it has been proved.. that such a disease
if 414 11,0110 from persons labouring under it to
io ogh.
Litre o th'IISON said Sir W. Pym was employed to
st— IQ:I'? subject, and the report had been laid on
;Ilesti • °I the House; with regard to the second
140 I); he
lb the , said that there had been an inquiry
q-ulLt virsu°,:leet of the fever, and the result was
e ilarto..th7ll; 9ue of the persons appointed to in-
k'saa inf • subject, came to the conclusion that it
.`keoutraetrytl°44indikosnease and Sir W. Barnett had arrived
on the subject.
kraiTTBI4II,,C°NDA.RY PUNISHMENTS.
gave notice that, on Monday next, he
hekb-- Bottle questions of the Government relative to
kr ret of secondary punishments.
pOo riIEROE moved for copies of any correns(i
th"ree between the First Lord of the Treasury
the
bltter of the Rolls, in the year 1845, respecting
-14ang of a Public Record Office.—Agreed to.
RELIGIOUS OPINIONS BILL..
The order of the day for the second reading of the
ItilssEl r:-)Pinions Bill, on the motion of Lord J.
fake
Nn„, "'as then read.
'‘lte a srteLtnLoßD wished, on this order being read, to
I'Vealeda --ent respecting the nature of the Bills to
Irt or and he might first observe that the greater
444ned these Acts were altogether unworthy of being
Stim ten the statute-book. These Bills might be
"Ito various classes, and among the first might
tjlsll-;tfeci an ordinance which prevented any Roman Ca-
libt Tra holding lands in this country. There was no
o :1' the general desire to gat rid of this nuisance.
,114 1;,91t ill this class was that which required thi!t
,1110„18 should wear a badge of degradation. This
PuAwer which he thought no one would wish to re-
Lf/ftlie 7,11 Jews were admitted to all the privileges
`eep., „'anstitution and it would therefore be absurd to
Wets a distinction' which had been practically abolished
b,(11 11V3',.r,; The next class of Acts which he was desirous
c„.7ttlerv'nit from the statute book was that which lan-
k
'td.n DenaltieS for not attending public worship
ft,,,k0l Ito the rites of the Established Church. By the
14-44111 "tlAward VI any offender was liable for the first
PreeP,VtarPrisoism”entfor six months, for the second
ti47l4oa4el4,_and forrt,thweatshird to the penalties of high
r.,‘..3 not to b.. in conn.ece
11110.thvlitit the 3'
Ensiaulaishyed Chpurch.d By the 29 Eliza
-
57,tallilTrY person not attending public worship in the_
:ued Church was liable to a penalty h f
i'lkitltti for
i a second offence was liable to a
(11411 et all his goods. The next class of Acts
1140 t was
desirable to repeal were those which
411 11411cd prosecution for religious opinions
%Ito esPecill
The io Y thhi instituted punishment for,
i 46 the supremacy of the Pope i.n this country.
I,ill4Dt itself was one of the reign of Elizabeth directed
ti‘'' the ~.opish recusants. It was subsequently enlarged
t. 4 4414' of J and imposed for the first offence
'la ;i fur theasmeceosn, second, loss of all the goods and chat-
!stii,. tile offender. and for the third, the punishment
t'4 He (Lord John Russell) thought there
little to fear from the Pope's supremacy in
411.,ikhfcliltitrY in the present day, and that the Act
ge• Lwith saf t be erased from the statute-book.
Lord Denmane and several eminent judges had
opin)nagainst these enactments, and there-
ilkthte; Government was convinced that there was no
sup remacy of the Crown
Whatever of the
kt 'lB country. He S.id not think there
that taLY advantage in keeping up these penalties ;
-et mere assertion that. the Pope ought to have
is.
~rlricacy in this realm, if it were the person's
4:11:11, ought not to. be punished. If any
,Nevil made his assertion of the Pope's supre-
t'etcin such a shape as to. bring it before
slitto;" of law, he would be dealt with according to the
'llz-.°ll law of the country. These Acts, the 13th of
b'ia,-41 for example, were enacted in times
of
n _thpepree,
,11c1-,111-13' was an assertion of the authority the.rPa.,e.
5',a,„41 attempt was made to free men from thei 110
i\the to the throne of this country by authority t
.44 °Pe, and after that time all persons who introducedhigh
tree: the country were pronounced guilty of
tt'l 41; Now the q estion was, whether it was desirable
4 the penalty for this. He said it was not in
4 s,
of any one to prevent the introduction
k the into this country. These were necessary
r,‘Ppeintment of bishops and priests in
think
of Pr 4,,`Atholi community, and it was folly to
da keteh,v-tlti g their being introduced. Supposing such
7,P,,tn to b:Made as they they had read of in former
t,:ria'sPtit;-:, Yet, it was extravagant to suppose that any
`I% ,Ig4
""ltin be made by the Pope to interfere with the
belly authority of this country ; he did
" en b—e„tbat any Roman Catholic would be affected
11:0,stls, Yto-t0.!..p that-effect—still if any one acted under it
the common law of the country, he
N law indicted on a charge
of high treason,
s'p would
Id deal with the offence. If there
if Uld teg treasonable in these bulls, they
‘Nis4re Was
by the law the country, and
the_as. nothing in them of a treefsonable character
e 't it was unnecessary to maintain those. laws.
t,NR1111,,„1.4 saY that after the Bill had passed, it certainly
tiglltieetrtitdirteioTe tF.rshoemree confusion in the law, though no
in the Bill to alt alter the oath which was now taken, and which
41411.0reatictstinue to be taken, namel. • that the Pope
ti stleat. nor ought to have, any namely,
eccle..
oitai,, the: spiritual, in these realms, while, at the same
4(14n could be no doubt that he actually exer-
i_°telt w-,e.'l, a, nthority. Such was the at present, and
spr'hal remain after the Bill had passedp. He always
eDZ4Alettalli the, oath to . be, that in the opinion of the
titsy hg it no jurisdiction of the Popes' in this
i)('el bat Lat)4l,(l, be enforced by law, and ought not to be
take the same time he thought it was not to
nte4_, n without proper consideration. He
,did not.ne
It'On th
it 41:4 fro e pa,,sing of the present Bill, to relieve tn
waa des:n the necessit.y of that oath. He thought thht
itltetir,,
,2rable to introduce this Bill alone, as its intro-
ben,ivt'th any others of a similar nature might impair
the that ; The late
Government came to the conchs-
thaght tech a 13ill was necessary, and Lord Lyndhurst
Ettaotin at, it Weald be wore desirable to fotrodifee
klit ~ate'Re than to encounter the difficulties
• via the protracted consideration of it which

would inevitably ensue if it remodelled the whole ques-
tion of religious opinions. He did not wish to give any
opinion on the other parts of the subject, but he thought
the House would do, right •to remove many of the ab-
surd penalties which could now be inflicted by the pre-
sent system of legislation ; and, with that impression,
he should move that the Bill be read a second time.
Col. SIBTHORP said that he had always pursued
one course of conduct in that House, and he always
would do so. He did not bear any unchristian feeling
towards those who differed from him in opinion, but he
certainly was attached to the national form of worship,
and he could not subscribe, and never would subscribe,
to any omission of a departure from the rules
necessary to establish its supremacy in this empire.
He knew the Bill had been prepared in another place
by the Lord Chancellor, but the high position of the
authority from whom it proceeded would not preclude
him from offering it his most determined opposition,
for he considered it might be both too passive and
too active. He knew his opposition would be futile,
but, nevertheless, he should not hesitate to enter his pro-
test against it now, and reserve a more detailed state-
ment of the nature of his opposition until the future
stages of the Bill. He regretted the absence of the Hon.
Baronet the Member for the University of Oxford (Sir
It. H. Inglis), because he was satisfied he also would
have opposed the measure. The Noble Lord (J. Rus-
sell) had endeavoured to console the House on the subject.
This was a happy knack on the part of the Ministers,
in order to enable them to get comfortably over the ses-
sion. They should not, however, forget that they had
got in because the others were an extremely bad set.—
(A laugh.) They promised well, as they had not yet de-
ceived the House—(Hear)—and he should not entertain
a bad opinion of them until they did deceive the House.
He objected particularly to that portion of the Bill re-
lating to oaths, and considered that the Bill, as it
stood, would have the effect of undermining the national
Church.
Sir H. W. BARRON entertained great respect for
the National Church of this country. If the Gallant
Colonel had such great veneration for our ancestors, he
might have recollected that they established the Roman
Catholic religion, and had handed down every great
principle which was worth contending for in that House;
and that a Roman Catholic Archbishop forced the
tyrant King John to sign the Magna Charta.
He was not going then to enter at large into this ques-
tion, but he believed no man could contradict this simple
fact, that the acts of their ancestors, which the Gallant
Colonel so much admired and so much eulogised, were
the acts of Roman Catholics.—(Hear, hear.) Now, with
regard to the principles of the Bill itself, he would only
say one word. One of the oaths prescribed to be taken
by Members on entering that House was, he would not
tolerate the spiritual jurisdiction of any foreign Prince
in this country, and yet it was notorious that the Pope
of Rome had an established and acknowledged jurisdic-
tion over the Roman Catholic Church in this country.
Mr. ESTCOURT complained of the time at which
this Bill was introduced, when the greater proportion of
Members had left town.—(Hear, hear.) The Bill had
only been in the hands of Hon. Members for a few
hours, and he could not be supposed to be acquainted
with the provisions of the Bill. The Noble Lord who
introduced the measure had said that bulls were per-
fectly necessary to enable the professors of the
Roman Catholic religion to act in a proper
manner. He (Mr. Estcourt) did not know how
correct that statement was, but he found that there had
existed for a great number of years a law prohibiting
their introduction into this kingdom, and he thought it
too much that at so short a notice the House should be
called upon to repeal that law, and consent to
the importation of bulls. He thought that the
provisions in the Bill regarding oaths should be postponed
until the subject could be considered in connexion with
a Bill of a more general nature. He hoped that the
Bill would not be pressed forward this session.
He considered this was not the way in which the House
should be treated. The Hon. Member concluded by
moving that the Bill be read a second time that day three
months.

Mr B. ESCOTT supported the Bill, but complained
that the previous Bill contained clauses which the pre-
sent did not, while the present Bill had important
clauses not in the other Bill. It was his desire, at a
future stage of the Bill, to submit some clauses to give
greater effect to the measure, and he trusted the Noble
Lord would have no objection to his doing se, or to their
introduction.
Mr. SPOONER entirely concurred in what had fallen
from the Honourable Member for the University of
Oxford, and if he pressed his amendment to a divi-
sion he would vote with him against the Bill. He
considered it was improper to press the Bill
forward at the present period of the session.
He certainly thought that this Bill ought to be post-
poned, for he conceived that the discussion should not be
taken now, at so late a period of the session, when
many of the Members had left London without any ex-
pectation that the Bill would at all be brought on at the
present moment, still less that it would be brought on at
all at this period of the session. On these grounds he hoped
that the Noble Lord would assent to the postponement
of the Bill till next session. Then, with regard to the
penalties to be imposed for the spread of sedition in this
country, he would beg to ask the Attorney-General
how, when under the oath of supremacy, they were
bound to resist the exercise of any supreme authority
in this country, whether ecclesiastical or civil, they
were to meet the influence of a bull quasi, a bull which
was purely an ecclesiastical docament emanating from
ecclesiastical authority ? No action at common law
could meet it, and these was therefore clearly a fallacy
in the assertion that sedition, spread by means of a bull
of the Pope, could be stopped by any such means.
Mr. HENLEY said he rose merely to give his rea-
sons for the vote he intended to give on this Bill. He
said the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford
complained of being called on to vote on this Bill,
which had been circulated only to-day, and the
more that it was at this period of the session.
If this had been a new matter, upon which they were
entering, he (Mr. :Henley) would have agreed
with the Hon. Member; but this Bill had been all but
substantially introduced by an Honourable Member at a
previous period of the session. The Ministers of the
then Government advised the withdrawal of his Bill,
because another was in the Upper House virtually
Including all the principles contended for in it. That
Bill recited, he believed, all the Acts which the present
Bill recited. This was the way he got over the question
of time. What, then, was there in the Bill itself which
any one could object to? He could not, for the life of
him, see anything to object to in the substance of the
Bill. It did harm to no one, and if it did no more good

to any one, the Bill ought to be passed out of -con-
sideration of the prejudices of their Roman Catholic
fellow-subjects. Indeed, it was happily becoming the
policy of the times, and, for his parr, he said, if there
was a mark against any man, in God's name let it be
removed. As for the Act of Supremacy, which had
been introduced on that occasion' he did not see
that the Bill at all interfered with that Act ; for
it was his opinion that all who at present took
the oath of supremacy would continue to
have to take it, if this Bill passed.
With regard to many parts of the Bill, he believed that
every Member in that House was in some way or other
subject to some of the penalties which it abolished. He
could see no harm or danger to any one institution in
the Bill, and therefore he should vote for a measure
which would in many respects be a very useful one.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading 79
For the amendment
Majority

The Bill was then iead a second time, and ordered to
be committed.
SUGAR DUTIES BILL.

On the motion being put for going into Committee on

this Bill,
Mr. V. SMITH rose to put a question of which he
had given notice, to the Under Secretary of State for the
Colonies. He wished to know if any alteration
had been made in Mr. Secretary Gladstone's
arrangement for the appointment of Under Secretary
to the Colonial Department? Mr. Gladstone had deter-
mined upon a gentleman for the office who had not
been previously connected with the department,
and this system was considered to be unjust to
the gentlemen connected with the Colonial-office.
Mr. Gladstone proposed to sweep away not only the
head clerkship, but also the probationary clerks of the
office, and he thought such a course of conduct was
highly objectionable, and caused a great amount of in-
jury to a very valuable class of persons, he alluded to the
clerks in the Colonial-office. The more manly course to
have adopted, would have been tocome down to the House
and state that there was a necessity for an Assistant-Se-
cretary. He would have gladly supported such a propo-
sition, but he objected to any insinuation to create a new
office. He had made this short statement in order to call
the Hon. Gentleman to the consideration of the question.
Mr. HAWES declined at the present moment enter-
ing into the subject involved in the question of the Hon.
Member. Until he had had more experience
of the office, and had consulted with the Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman the previous Secretary of
the colonies, he did not think he would be in a proper
position to give the answer required. The officer, how-
ever, who had been referred to had proved a most effi-
cient officer. With regard to the clerks in the office, he
would bear witness to their general efficiency, and he
fully and cheerfully gave his testimony to that effect.
Mr. HUME thought, if the clerks were so efficient,
they ought to be better treated than they were, and
should not have parties placed over their heads in the
way referred to.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, that in reference to the
office of Assistant-Secretary, the duty was a very pe-
culiar one, the party filling it having the examination
of all colonial matters. The appointment was, therefore,
a very important one, and should be carefully made.
H. e was quite ready to agree to the proposition that the
important business of legislation could not be
carried on without the services of gentlemen,
who were acquainted with the principles and the
practice of the law, and especially in the important
office of an Under-Secretary of State. But it seemed
to him that in this case the interests of the
senior clerks ought not to be neglected. The
duties of these gentlemen were sufficiently onerous,
and there were not too many persons to perform them.
The appointment of Mr. Rogers appeared to be a very
proper one, and he did not think that any want of
judgment had been made, or any erroneous feeling
exhibited, in putting a gentleman into that position
who was intimate wiih the routine of its duties.
The Earl of LINCOLN thought that as reference
had been made to the conduct of a Right lion. Friend
of his, he might be allowed to say a few words to the
House. He had held a conversation with his Right
Hon. Friends at the time on this very subject, though
not an official correspondence, and he could assure the
Hun. Member for Montrose, that the gentleman who
had been appointed to the Assistant-Secretaryship was
selected, not because he was a stranger, but because
he was 'a lawyer, gud acquainted with the duties of the
oaco,