The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-10 00:00:00

ROUSE OF COMMONS, June 9.
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four
o'clock.

ROYAL ASSENT.
;he Royal Assent was given to-day, by commission,
he following Public and Private Bills :
Tobago Relief and Immigration into British Guiana and
Trinidad Bill.
The Indemnity Bill.
The Removal of Aliens Bill.
Insolvent Debtors' (India) Bill.
National Monument of Scotland Amendment Bill.
Clifton Bridge Bill.
Leicestr Navigation Bill.
Folkestone Waterworks Bill.
Lambeth Waterworks Bill.
Stirling Waterworks Bill.
Birkenhead Dock Company Bill.
Morley Gas-light Bill.
;Iristel and Clifton Gas Amendment Bill.
6outhampton Gas and Coke Bill.
Worcester New Gas Bill.
Shrewsbury Market Bill.
Magdalen Hospital Act Amendment Bill.
Sufferance Wharves, &c. (Southwark) Bills
Leicestershire Lunatic Asylum Bill.
s,iverpool Docks Bill.
Dover Landing Pier Bill.
;Manchester General Cemetery Bill.
Price's Patent Candle Company Bill.
Leishman's Estate Bill.
llaxwell's Restitution Bill.
Heneage's Divorce Bill.
The Lord Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor.
Lord Campbell, and the Earl of Shaftesbury.
Their Lordships resumed shortly after Five o'clock.
The Earl of EGLINTON presented several petitions
••-;ainst the Scotch Registration Bill; also a petition
-om Glasgow against the repeal of the navigation-laws.
The Earl of GALLOWAY presented several petitions
againstthel Diplomatic Relations with Rome Bill; also
a petition from the General Assembly of the Church of
Scotland against the Scotch Registration Bill.
SPANISH PENSIONERS.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY complained that
the return for which he had moved, of the Spanish
pensioners on the English Government, did not furnish
the information which he required, and that there were
several persons on the list who had no claim whatever
to receive any pensions from the English Government,
and he wished to know who had given these pensions to
these unworthy individuals, and for what services these
pensions had been granted.
Lord MONTEAGLE said that the Government with
which he had been connected had invariably confided in
the Horse Guards with regard to the persons on this
list. He objected to the production of the names as in-
sulting to the objects of the public charity. These were
not pensions granted by the Crown; they were charities
annually voted by Parliament.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said his Noble Friend
(the Marquis of Londonderry) was entirely mistaken.
This was a private charity, and had always been
was
a
ministered in the spirit of the original grant, w
charity, and charity only.
After a few words from the Earl of MINTO, the sub-
ject dropped.
Earl FITZWILLIAM gave notice that on Monday,
the 19th inst., he should bring the present condition of
Ireland under their Lordships notice.
PETITIONS.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH presented several peti-
tions against the Scottish Births, Deaths, and Marriages
Registration Bill.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented several petitions
with a similar prayer.
PENINSULAR MEDALS.
The NOBLE Dust then asked why the Peninsular
medals had not been yet distributed?
Earl GREY said it was a work of great labour and of
great time to engrave the name of each person and of
each action upon every one of these medals. He had
seen Mr. Wyon on the subject, and he believed that the
distribution would soon take place.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY objected to this
system of ex post facto rewards, which he designated as a
prostitution of orders.
The Duke of RICHMOND protested warmly against
this attack ors those who had shed their best blood in de-
fence of their country, whose valour had procured
lacerations for those who now complained that decora-
tions were prostituted by being bestowed on those who
had shed their blood in defence of their country.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he had ap-
plied the term prostitution to the new arrangements un-
der the civil order only.
REGISTERING BIitTHS, &c. (SCOTLAND) AND
MARgIAGE (SCOTLAND) BILLS.
Lord CAMPBELL hoped the House would not re-
fuse to enter upon a consideration of these two Bills,
which involved no political or party question, and were
intended simply for the social improvement of Scotland.
The first of these Bills had reference to the registration
of births, deaths, and marriages. As the law now stood
there was no register of births, there was only a register
of baptisms of those who were within the pale of the
Established Church. The register of marriages was still
more detective; and, with regard to deaths, it was not
compulsory to make any entry of deaths or burials. Now,
ee proposed to assimilate the law of Scotland to that of
England, and to make the registry of births, deaths, and
marriages compulsory. The expense he proposed to pro-
vide for by an assessment, which would be very trifling
.n amount. He believed that all the opposition to the
Bill came from interested parties—the sessions clerks—
who would not, as he believed, be injured at all, for the
registration, as now carried on by them, of baptisms,
&c., would not be interfered with. The object of the
second Bill was to amend the law relating to marriages
in Scotland. Anything more defective than the law as
it existed in this respect could not well be imagined.
There were several ways by which marriages might be
contracted in Scotland—first, by the marriage ceremony
performed by a minister of the church; secondly, with-
out any minister or ceremony whatever, but simply by
an acknowledgment before witnesses that the parties
were man and wife; thirdly, by a promise proved. And
• there was yet another mode—via., if the conduct of the
parties was such as to lead to the supposition that
they were married the law assumed them to be
so. These various kinds of marriages might be
proved at any time, and by any evidence ; and
there were many instances in which marriages were de-
clared to be invalid in consequence of some proof being
afterwards produced that one or other of the parties had
been married before in one of the doubtful and objection-
able modes he had mentioned, and that the first husband
or wife was living at the time of the second marriage.
This was a state of the law which occasioned great un-
certainty and great evil. He proposed by his Bill that
marriages be contracted in Scotland for the future only
in one of two ways, viz., in the church by the marriage
ceremony performed by a clergyman, or before a public
functionary to be called a registrar. He had inserted a
provision to guard against clandestine marriages—that
no marriage should be solemnized, unless one or other
of the contracting parties had resided in the parish for
fourteen days preceding. It had been suggested that
these Bills should be referred to a Select Committee.
To that course he had no objection, and would, there-
fore, move that they be read' a second time and com-
mitted to a Select Committee.
Lord BROUGHAM seconded the motion, and ob-
served that nothing could be more unsatisfactory or
uncertain than the present law relating to marriages in
Scotland .
The Earl of SELKIRK, in order to enter his protest
against the second reading of the Registration Bill on
the journals, would move that it be read a second time
that day six months ;' but he did not propose to give the
House the trouble to divile. He objected to the Bill,
because he believed the Abject might be attained by
means of the existing parish register, without all the
cumbrous machinery it was proposed to bring into ac-
tion, and the consequent expense to the country. The
poor-rates had been increasing in Scotland for some
time past in a ratio they could have no conception of,
and were still increasing ;• and it was especially the
duty of Parliament, at a time when the people were al-
ready overburdened, not to throw upon them any addi-
tional impost. He also objected to the Bill, as imPosing
penalties for not doing that which in many cases it would
be impossible to do.
The Earl of EGLINT3N, while admitting that the
present system of registration of births, deaths,
ecteandd
marriages in Scotland required amendment, obj
altogether to the principle on which this Bill proceeded.
His first objection was, the large amount of patronage
which would be created by the measure—the number of
new offices, he believed, would be not fewer than 2,000.
Ile believed that the existing machinery, with some
slight alterations, and the assistance of a few additional
clerks, would be found sufficient for all the purposes re-
quired. Then there were many clauses of the Bill alto-
gether impracticable. With reference to the Marriage
Bill he did not object to the principle, but there were
many details which would require alteration in Com-
mittee, and therefore he should reserve his right to vote
against the third reading, should such alterations not
be made.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said that, in his opinion,
the two measures before the House had no necessary
connexion. A complete system of registration would
be most desirable, and alterations in the marriage law
might also be necessary; but that was no reason why
their Lordships should mix up two such distinct ques-
tions in one set of legislation. He thought that the
Letter course would be to proceed with the Registration
of Births Bill at once, and to postpone the Marriage
Bill for fare consideration.
The Duke of ARGYLE objected to the Registration
Bill on account of its centralising character. He feared
that its operation would be to destroy local control
altogether. He also objected to the principle of rating
by means of an addition to the poor-rate. In his
opinion that fend, which of all others should be kept
distinct, and applied only to its specific purpose, was a
tax raised from the wealth and industry of the country
for the support of the poor and helpless.
The Duke of MONTROSE said that the clergy of
,Seotland had great apprehensions that the effect of the
Carriage Bill would be to produce great annoyance
amongst the people on account of the double fee which it
required on the solemnization of marriage. lie thought
that in oases where marriage had been previously solem-
nized by a clergyman, the registrar should not be en-
titled to any fee. He objected generally to the compul-
sory character which pervaded the whole Bill.
.After a few words from Lord WHARNCLIFFE,
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH did not wish to be un-
derstood as giving an unqualified consent to the Bills
before the House. He quite agreed with his Noble
Friend (the. Earl of Aberdeen) in thinking that there
was no necessary connection between the Registration
and Marriage Bills.
The Marquis of BREADALBANE supported the
Bills, and stated that they were generally approved of
in the part of Scotland with which he was connected.
After an observation front the Earl of MINTO, the

THIRD READINGS.
The following Bills were,read a third time and passed:
Arbroath and Forfar Railway (additional Capital).
Glasgow, Paisley, and Greenock Railway (Amendment
and Branches, &c.)
Manchester Corporation Waterworks Act Amendment
(No. 2).
Midland Railway (Branch to Ripley, &c.)
Midland Railway (Gloucester and Stonehouse Junction).
Scottish Midland Junction Railway (Amendment and
Branch to Laurencekirk).
Waterford and Kilkenny Railway Act Amendment.
LONDON AND SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY
(NEW WORKS, &c.) BILL.
The report on this Bill was further considered and
agreed to.

PETITIONS.
Colonel REID presented a petition from the Windsor
Society of Odd Fellows, praying that they might be
placed on the same footing as friendly societies.
Lord D. STUART presented four petitions from St.
Pancras in favour of the Charter.
Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from White-
chapel in favour of the Health of Towns Bill.
Mr. B. ROCHE presented a petition from Kilmarnock
complaining of the conviction of Mr. Mitchel, and pray-
ing that her Majesty would dismiss her present advisers
and restore Mr. Mitchel to his family and society.s from
Mr. G. THOMPSON presented fifty petition
Preston in favour of a reform in Parliament. Als? pe-
titions from the Tower Hamlets, containing 4001 sign-
atures, complaining of the proceedings of the pis into
otno
Sunday last, and praying for a searching uuiry in
their conduct. The petition stated that four persons
from
wecreevioenreylseTriaouosmlyrinsjourNedpbryestehnetepdolsicpee.titinn
be
tween 400 and 500 inhabitants of the metropolis, praying
that interments in towns might be prohibited.
Mr. R. PALMER presented a petition from Plymouth,
praying that no alteration might be made in the naviga-
tion-laws.
resented petitions in favour of Par-
Mr. BRIGHT pperson
namethed
liamentar yresiding
treatment ;
in also
Manchester,petition from
complaininga
o
also
itehel'
Mr. Watson,
ua ofj
presented a large number of peti-
tions
u.EM r -
a
in favour of Parliamentary reform-7 from different
parts of the metropolis, 1 from Chester, 99 from Preston,
and 18 from different parts of the country.
Mr. COBDEN presented petitions from several families
to the same effect.
On the motion of Dr. BOWRING, copies of reports
to the naval department since last July, on the effects
of chloride of zinc as a disinfecting and deodorising
agent, were ordered to be laid on the table.
VAN DIEMEN'S LAND.—DISMISSAL OF MIS.
JUSTICE MONTAGU.
Mr. E. DENISON, seeing the Right Hon. the Under-
Secretary for the Colonial Department iu his place,
begged leave to ask him a question. It would be in the
recollection of the House that, a few nights ago, a ques-
tion was asked the Right Hon. Gentleman in reference
to the removal of a judge in Van Diemen's Land, when
the Right Hon. Gentleman stated that a dispatch upon the
subject had only just arrived from the colony, and it had
not then received the attention of the Government. Now
he (Mr. Denison) saw that a notice stood on the paper
upon the same subject, and he thought it was not just to
the public service, or fair to the individuals con-
cerned, that a question of this sort should remain unde-
cided for an unlimited time. As the House was
about to separate for a few days, he took the
liberty of asking the Right' Hon. Gentleman whether the
dispatch had received the consideration of Government,
and whether he was able to give any information to the
House on the subject?
Mr. HAWES said the dispatch went at great length
and in detail into the grounds upon which Mr. Justice
Montagu had been removed .from the office of Judge
of the Supreme Court of the colony, and he was bound
to say that the Governor appeared to have acted with
the greatest caution and deliberation, acting in con-
junction with the Executive Council and under the ad-
vice of the law officers of the Crown. The simple facts
of the case were these :—Mr. Justice Montagu was sued
for debt in the Supreme Court, and he pleaded that an
action could not be maintained against him in that court.
The Chief Justice held that the plea was a bad one.
The plaintiff then complained to the Governor, and
upon a full investigation of the whole circumstances of
the case, the Governor, through the advice of the
Executive Council, and acting under the advice of the law-
officers of the colony, came to the conclusion that there
was no other course to pursue except that of removing
Mr. Justice Montagu from the office of Judge.
ROYAL COMMISSION.
Sir A. CLIFFORD here appeared at the bar, and
summoned the House to the House of Peers to hear the
Royal assent given by commission to several Bills (for
which see Lords' report).
The SPEAKER, on his return, enumerated the Bills
that had received the Royal Assent.
DISMISSAL OF MR. JUSTICE MONTAGU.
Mr. E. DENISON hoped the Hon. Gentleman
would continue his statement from the period at which
it was interrupted by the entrance of the Usher of the
Black Rod.—(Laughter.)
Mr. HAWES said he had very little to add,
except that the authorities and Governor of fiVan
Diemen's Land acted with great caution and deliberation
before the dismissal of Mr. Justice Montagu was de-
termined upon. He was fully heard, but his defence was
deemed very unsatisfactory. He was bound to
add that the determination was in some degree
based upon the fact that previous Secretaries
of State and successive Governors had complained of the
conduct of this gentleman in respect to pecuniary trans-
actions. He had on various occasions received the
severe animadversion of Secretaries of State.
As he had appealed to the Privy Council,
it was only right that he should say thus much in ex-
planation and in justification of the course the Colonial-
office had felt it incumbent upon it to adopt.
THE CASE OF MR. LOW.
Mr. DISRAELI was understood to ask a question
of the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) with respect to
the regulations under which chaplains were appointed
to foreign stations.
Lord PALMERSTON said the Hon. Gentleman had
stated his question in a very imperfect manner; he should
therefore have to answer that which he wished to ask.
The Consular Act stated that chaplains for foreign sta-
tions were partly to be paid by the residents and partly
by the mother country, and that they were to be ap-
pointed and removed by the Secretary of State for the
Foreign Department. When he first came to exercise
the powers which this Act vested him with
he felt that it would be very undesirable that a Secretary
of State should himself select chaplains, as it was not
unlikely he might displease the flock for whose
1 spiritual teaching he was to be appointed. He,
therefore, thought it more convenient to adopt the
Scotch principle, and to leave it to the residents in those
parts to choose their] own chaplain—(Hear, hear)—for
part of the stipends were paid by their voluntary con-
tributions, and the other out of the revenue. In the case
of Mr. Low and others, the chaplains appointed were
mentioned to him in order that he might confirm their
appointment. As he thought it necessary that these
appointments should have the sanction of ecclesiastical
authority, the Bishop of London was requested to
ordain the ministers. It appeared that Mr. Low
had rendered 'himself very obnoxious to his flock
by the adoption of what were called Puseyite prin-
ciples, and other conduct, which was not relished by them.
Afterwarkpm application was made to the Bishop of
London teadmonish the Rev. Gentleman with the view
of inducing him to alter his course, but these efforts
failed to bring about a reconciliation between the Rev.
Gentleman and his flock, and he (Lord Palmer-
ston) at last felt it to be his duty to call upon the
residents to choose another chaplain. They did so, but
then the Bishop of London, acting no doubt with con-
scientious motives, refused to cancel Mr. Low's license,
or to grant a fresh license to the newly selected chaplain.
Under these circumstances he had felt called upon to dis-
pense with the license, and in future it was not his inten-
tion to raise these unpleasant questions by requiring a
foreign chaplain to be licensed. It would be his duty, of
course, to see that the party selected by the residents
was a fit and proper person to fill the office of chap-
lainli,eebnustinitg._(was not his intention to raise any question as
to
Hear, hear, and Laughter.)
Mr. DISRAELI said, then the House and the country
were to understand that the Noble Lord had recalled
a chaplain who was licensed, and sent out one who was
not?
Lord PALMERSTON was understood to reply in the
affirmative.
DISMISSAL OF A JUDGE IN VAN DIEMEN'S
LAND.

Mr. ANSTEY, referring to the question of Mr. E.
Denison, wished to ask the Under-Secretary for the
Colonies whether the demand for debt was made up on
Mr. Justice Montagu before, or after, that Learned
Judge gave an adverse judgment to the Crown in refer-
ence to 15 per cent. duty which it was proposed to levy
upon the colony ?
Mr. HAWES said he had already stated all that he
knew in reference to this matter. The dispatch of the
Governor in no way alluded to the judgment mentioned
by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman.
Mr. HUME wished to know if any paper had been
received from the colony complaining of the removal of
the Judge.
Mr. HAWES said his Noble Friend the Secretary for
the Colonies was in possession of no other information
than that which he bad already detailed to the House;
but he might state that Mr. Justice Montaov's dismissal
had no reference to any judgment he mighte previously
have given.

LAW OF SETTLEMENT.
Mr. HEATHCOTE wished to know whether the Pre-
sident of the Poor-law Commissioners was prepared with
any remedy for the system which now prevailed amongst
Irish paupers of Obtaining relief every night in the va-
rious metropolitan parishes. In some instances as many
as between 300 and 400 were in the habit of obtaining
relief at night and quitting the union in the morning.
Mr. C. BULLER, said the subject had long occupied
his attention, and he hoped shortly to be in a position
to introduce a Bill to amend the existing vagrancy laws.
He would not promise to the House that he would be
able at once to remove an evil which had been of such
long growth, and was now so extensive, but be hoped
soon to adopt measures which would greatly mitigate, if
not wholly remove the evil. He had already brought
a Bill into the House on the subject and be
hoped, after the Whitiamtide recess, that he sitould have
an opportunity of stating the general course of action
which he would recommend the authorities throughout
the country to pursue, and which, aided by legislative
measures, he hoped would result in remedying the evil.