The Sun.
London, England, 1848-07-25 00:00:00

George William Curie, wine merchant, Plymouth,
Aug. 10, at one, and Sept. 13, at eleven, at the Exeter
District Court. Hernaman, official assignee, Exeter;
Little, I )evonport; Stogdon, Exeter; Soles and Turner,
Alden; ianbury, London.
Marl, Riley, tobacconist, Sheffield, Aug. 5 and Sept.
16, at, ten, at the Leeds District Court. Freeman, official
assirgnee,Sheffield; Walter and Pemberton, Symond's
InT i; W. and B. Wake, Sheffield.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS EVENING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Their Lordships re-assembled at Five o'clock.
ECCLESIASTICAL DISTRICTS BILL.
The Commons amendment to this Bill were agreed to.
HEALTH OF TOWNS BILL.
Lord CAMPBELL presented the report of the
Select Committee on this Bill which was ordered to be
received.

SCOTCH REGISTRATION BILL.
On the motion of Lord CAMPBELL, this Bill was
read a third time and passed.
SCOTCH MARRIAGES BILL.
Lord CAMPBELL moved the third reading of the Bill
to Amend the Scotch Law of Marriages.
The Earl of HADDINGTON objected to the measure
as being an alteration of the law of the Church of Scot-
land with regard to marriages. This Bill admitted mar-
riage to be contracted as a civil contract ; if it were a
civil contract, why should parties be compelled
to go before a clergyman, and again to enter
into that contract in a more solemn manner ?
His impression was, that this Bill would
be to make marriage, instead of a religious contract, a
mere civil contract, and therefore he was opposei to the
measure, and moved that it be read a third time that day
six months.
Lord BROUGHAM considered that this Bill would
be a great improvement in the marriage law of Scotland.
The present law required no religious ceremonial. It
was taken from Constantinople, and enabled any boy of
14 and girl of 12 years of age, to contract a marriage,
before any peasant or any chambermaid at an
inn, and that was as valid a marriage as any
marriage celebrated by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
If this Bill were passed, tile scandal of Scotch mar-
lriages, as evasions of the English Marriage Act would
cease. He hoped they would place the marriage law of
the two countries on a better footing.
The Duke of ARGYLL supported the Bill, because
he believed they could not proceed upon a safer prin-
ciple than the one which it introduced. There
ought to be some statutable recognition of the irregular
marriages that take place in Scotland. He should sup-
port the third reading of the Bill for the reasons he had
stated.
Lord CAMPBELL said the measure had engaged the
attention of the Government for some years, and he
considered that no better opportunity presented
itself for its passing than the present. No
marriage was valid now in Scotland unless
it took place before a clergyman or a registrar. The ob-
jections which the Assembly had made were, in his
opinion, not tenable. Believing this Bill would be ac-
ceptable to the people of Scotland,• he cordially asked
their Lordships to pass the Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM contended that at the present
'moment persons in Scotland saying, before a chamber-
maid or a pot-boy that they took each other for man and
wife constituted a valid marriage, showing how ab-
solutely necessary was the alteration proposed.
After a few words from the Earl of HADDINGTON the
Bill was read a third time and passed.
(LEFT SITTING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
POOR-LAW UNION CHARGES (No. 2) BILL.
Mr. CHARLES BULLER (in continuation from
our Afternoon Edition) said he had no wish in

making the proposition for union rating, to pre-
vent owners of estates in different parishes taking that
direct interest which they now had in upholding the
condition of the labouring classes. The Hon. Member
then observed that the present law of settlement—the
power of removing paupers—was a great hardship
upon the poor, and he trusted that no long time would
elapse without Parliament relieving the poor man of
that great evil. He believed that a great change, affect-
ing the condition of the poor, might be made without
interfering with the general principle, that the charge
for the resident poor should be thrown on the particular
parish in which they had resided and laboured all their
lives. He proposed simply now that parishes should
at once cheerfully submit to the extension of the rate over
a whole union. it was provided in the Bill that
extra-parochial places should be chargeable with their
own poor, but there was a modification to enable them to
join with another parish, instead of keeping up a sepa-
rate parochial rate. He was perfectly aware that some
parts of the Bill would be considered objectionable, and
he trusted that the House would now consent to the
second reading, in order that they might discuss the de..
tails of the Bill in Committee.

On the motion for the second reading being put,
Mr. HENLEY opposed the Bill. The Right lion.
Gentleman had stated that he had no wish to break down
the present parochial system, but he (Mr. Ilenley) was
one who entertaiued the opinion that such would be the
effect of the present Bill. If the parochial system whioh
had been so many years established in this country, and
upon which large purchases of property had been made,
and long leases taken, was once departed from, he was of
opinion that the House would eventually be obliged to
grant a national rate for the maintenance of the poor.
The Hon. Gentleman had given an analysis of charges
which he thought ought to be thrown over a larger area;
but he had brought forward no argument to show that
such an arrangement was either advisable or necessary.
lie objected to throwing the support of vagrants and re-
movables over the whole union. They were now going, by
this Bill, to extend.the system for levying the rates, and if
they continued to tamper with the interests of the
people as they had lately done, they would be
obliged to concede one universal system of rating.
He wished now to offer a few observations upon that
part of the Bill which related to vagrancy. The Right
Hon. Baronet seemed to think that the vagrancy of the
present day was not so much owing to the law affecting
vagrancy as the manner in which that law was adminis-
tered; but in dealing with this subject they roust go
back to the events which occurred some thirteen or four-
teen years ago. At that time, in consequence of the
depression in the manufacturing districts, a great amount
of destitute poor were thrown upon all the large towns
in the country, and a great outcry was raised against
the then system of poor-law relief, which ultimately
led to the establishment of the vagrancy laws, and the
formation of certain regulations for the relief of the
casual poor of parishes. Those regulations had been
taken advantage of by the idle vagrant, and a monstrous
abuse had sprung up of parties, pretending to be desti-
' tute, going from parish to parish and levying
contributions upon the parochial funds. The Right
Honourable Baronet proposed to remedy this evil
by requiring; relieving officers to ibe more cautious in
the selection of parties to whom they administered re-
lief, but he warned the Right Hon. Gentleman not to be
too stringent in the regulations he inflicted on relieving
officers, or many parties who might be really deserving
of immediate relief would run the risk of dying of star-
vation. He thought if the relief of the casual poor were
placed under the control of the police fewer frauds
would be practised upon the parochial authorities by the
sturdy vagrant than there were at present. Vagrancy
had always been considered a crime in this country, and
he could see no reason why his suggestion should not be
adopted. At all events, he doubted whether the boards
of guardians would pay much attention to the subject.
Boards of guardians paid very little attention to any-
thing but the pounds, shillings, and pence, and as this
Bill would extend the charge of vagrancy over
a largo area the expense to each parish
would be reduced, the matter would be neglected by
boards of guardians, and the natural result would be an
increase in the vagrancy of the country. Referring now
to other parts of the Bill, he wanted to know upon what
principle of justice the man who had a yearly income of
100/. derivable from land, had to pay 25/. towards
the maintenance of the poor, and the man
who received 1,0001. a year from the funds: paid nothing.
Why should a coal-mine contribute towards the sup-
port of the poor and a lead-mine not? These were
anomalies in the law which ought to be remedied with-
out delay, and so ought the system of rating; for in
the agricultural districts of the south of England
a labourer, with a family of four children, could
only earn by honest industry 10s. a week, but if he went
into the workhouse his family involved the parish in an
expense of 18s. per week, so defective was the system
of rating and managing the union workhouses.
He did not think that bit by bit legislation, like the
Bill, was calculated to do any good, but he firmly be-
lieved that it would do great harm, as no one could tell
where it would end. He believed that this measure
would only increase the evil and was not
calculated to heighten the opinion of the country
towards the House. He believed that the effect of
the Bill would be to throw on agricultural districts
those burdens which had hitherto been borne by towns.
He could not see the justice of such a measure, and he
should therefore oppose the second reading, and move
that it be read a second time that day three months.
Mr. RICE moved the adjournment of the debate.
Mr. C. BULLER said if it met with the approbation
of the House, he should propose to resume the adjourned
debate on this Bill on Thursday morning next, at twelve
o'clock.

Mr. CHRISTOPHER said that the Bill was a most
important one, and he did not believe it could be done
justice to in the present session.
The debate was then adjourned to Thursday next at
twelve o'clock.
PAROCHIAL DEBT AND AUDIT BILL

The Committee on this Bill was postponed to Thurs,
day next at twelve o'clock.
ECCLESIASTICAL UNIONS.

The Ecclesiastical Unions and Divisions of Parishes
(Ireland) Bill, was read a third time and passed.
PUBLIC WORKS (IRELAND.)
The report on the Public Works (Ireland) No. 2 Bill,
was brought up.
The House then adjourned to Five o'Clock.

The House resumed at Five o'clock.
On the motion of Mr. GLADSTONE, the Farmers'
Estate (Ireland) Bill was ordered to be re-committed to
a Committee of the whole house on Friday next.
Mr. H. HERBET presented a petition from the
county of Kerry, praying for an inquiry into the defal-
cations of certain savings banks in Ireland.
Mr. MONSELL presented a petition from Limerick,
praying that some measure might be adopted to prevent
the desertion of seamen from ships in the port of Li-
merick.
Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Manchester
in favour of superannuation allowance to officers of poor-
'law unions.