The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-15 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, March 14.

The LORD CFIANCELLOIt.tOOk his seat upon the Wool-
sack at Five o'clock.

PETITIONS.

Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition from Edin-
burgh against the Marriage Bill. He hoped the Bill
would never be re-introduced.
Lord BROUGHAM presented several petitions in
favour of the Copyhold Enfranchisement Bill.
The Earl of ST. GERMANS presented several peti-
tions to the same effect.
The Earl of ENNISKILLEN presented petitions
from Newton Butler, and seven other places in the
county of Fermanagh, against Papal aggression.
SALE OF ARSENIC BILL.

On the motion that their Lordships do resolve them-
selves into Committee on the sale of Arsenic Bill,
The Earl of MOUNTCASHELL asked whether the
Bill would apply to the sale of corrosive sublimate?
Lord CAMPBELL begged to observe that corrosive
sublimate was not arsenic. He had been horrified while
on circuit at the light manner in which many of the
peasantry had seemed to treat the subject of poisoning
by arsenic, and he highly approved of the Bill.
This Bill then passed through Committee.
DESIGNS ACT EXTENSION BILL.
This Bill then passed through Committee.
. THE CENSUS.
Lord STANLEY, in moving for papers relating to the
forthcoming census, complained of the powers: as-
sumed by the Secretary of State under tho Census
Act. Now, under the provisions of the Act, the
questions to be put, and to be answered under a penalty
were defined ; but the Secretary of State had re-
quired of the enumerators to demand answers to
questions not named in the Act ; for instance,
in the instructions issued by the Secretary of State
answers were required on the subject of education. Now
those questions were not authorised .by the Act, and
yet anwers were required on the subject of all schools.
Now under this scheme, the head master of Eton would
have to give the history of 700 boys. With regard to
private schools, this return was of the most inquisitorial
character, and it even demanded the income and expen-
diture of each school, and this was to apply to all
private schools, -and called upon each individual
schoolmaster to make a return of all his
receipts and disbursements. This was moat
inquisitorial and was not required by the Act. Then,
with regard to literary institutions, a returt was re-
quired of the books in the library. What had that to
do with the census?. It Was vexatious to require these
returns. At the last .census, as there was not then
subsisting any registration of births, deaths, and mar-
riages, a special clause ;was introduced into the Act,
authorizing the enumerator to demand the required in-
formation. Now the Secretary of State demanded an
account of the number of churches and chapels erected
since 1800, and of the cost of each. What had that to
do with a census of the population? They a'so required
an account of the endowments of churches and of Dissents
ing chapels. They also required to know the number of
sittings in each church distinguishing free sttings from
other sittings, which was not required as regarded Dis•
senting chapels, which would seem to sup-
port the idea that Church property was pub-
lic property, as it was demanded of the
Church the number of free sittings, which demand was
not made of Dissenting congregations. This reformation
might be valuable, but they had no right to demand it
under the provisions of the Act. He 'thought the Se-
cretary of State bad exceeded his author ty, and he
thought it right to draw their Lordships' attuition to it.
Earl GRANVILLE said that complaints had been
made of the very meagre, nature of the information
afforded on former occasions of taking the csnsus. He
believed there was considerable doubt as to whether the
penalties could be levied upon persons refusing to furnish
the information required on the subject of educa-
tional establishments, and it was not the' intention
of the Government to attempt to enforce those
penalties against persons refusing'; to give the iniorma-
tion, yet; still' it was so desirable to collect statistics on
that subject, that the Government had felt thcy were
authorised in asking for that information, and he had no
doubt but that in the great majority of instances that
information would be freely furnished.
The Earl of HARROWBY thought that unless they
could obtain the information, required from all parties
they would be led astray.-
The Earl of MALMESBURY was quite satisfied
with the manner in which the schedules were drawn up
for the purpose of ascertaining the differed employ-
ments of-the population; but lie entirely concurred in the
observations of his Noble Friend (Lord Ststeley) upon
the other schedules. The answers to those questions
would only furnish false. premises on which to ground
fallacious arguments; and he hoped it was not too late to
withdraw those objectionable questions.
Lord BROUGHAM sild 'there could be no doubt
bat that these questions vier° put witheut authority,
and that no tine could. -Ito inflicted on those
who refused to answer them, yet still he should
be sorry to see them withdrawn, as he thought
that much valuable information would be communicated
by persons who would voluntarily answer them. Much
valuable information on the subject of education had
been obtained by answers voluntarily made to circulars
Earl GRANVILLE assured their Lordships that
the only object had been to obtain information which
might be valuable to the public, and he was pre-
pared even now to modify the schedules if it should be
thought necessary.
After a few words from Lord Redesiale and explana-
tions from Lord Stanley and Lord Brougham, the motion
for a return of the orders issued by the Secretary of
State on the subject of the census was agreed to.
INCOME-TAM

Lord BROUGHAM explained' that• the observations
which ho had made last night on the subject of income-
tax collectors did not apply to Scotland, as the collec-
tors were not affected by Government. He had
also to state that he understood the papers to
which he alluded last night were not returns,
but notice papers, which notice papers ought to have
been destroyed, and he understood that the
Government had this day issued orders to the income-
tax collectors to de troy all auch papers,
PREVENTION OF OFFENCES BILL.

Lord CAMPBELL, in moving the second reading of the
Prevention of Offences Bill, called the attention of their
Lordships to the many cases of ,
acts of violence, which had taken place accompanied with
in various parts of
the country. There was a class of delinquents who were in
the habit of breaking into dwelling houses during the night,
especially into those situated in lonely places, using all kinds
of violence to effect their purpose, and plundering them of
money, plate, and such other articles as it was found most
convenient to carry away. Some of the band engaged in
such outrages were then sent to dispose
of the plate and
other articles stolen, and on a subsequent day they met and
divided the proceeds of the booty. These persons, he might
also observe, had hiding places, where they thought they
were secure in setting the law at defiance. Now, it was in-
dispensably necessary for the security of her Majesty's sub-
jects that some measure should be taken to prevent the oc-
currence of such outrages. Prevention- Rey better than cure.
As the law now stood, if a man was taken up with picklocks
and other instruments of housebreaking, he could not be
punished, but he proposed to enact that in cases where such
articles were found on a suspicious person, and where
there was reasonable ground to believe that they were in-
tended to be used for purposes of housebreaking, such per-
son should be liable to be punished,
and on a second convic-
tion to be transported beyond seas. He believed that such
an enactment would have a most material effect in preventing
the use of such articles by this class of persons. The
most material clause in the Bill, however; related to the use
of chloroform for the purposes of robbery, A most respect-
able physician had done him (Lord Campbell) the honour to
write him a letter, which he had printed; and there he stated
that the fear arising from the use of chloroform in this way
was altogether imaginary—that no strong man who made re-
sistance could possibly be chloroformed. He believed that
was true ; but in the case of those who -were not strong, and
unable to resist* it might happen to many of that class that
chloroform would be employed most effectively for facilitat-
ing robbery. The gentleman to woose letter he had referred
stated that a person thus attacked might refuse to breathe,
and that he might turn away his head. But, suppose a wet
handkerchief was put to his nostrils, and held there, the man
must breathe, and thus inhale the particular gas that came
from the chloroform. It stood, indeed, on record that since
the discovery of chloroform persons had been convicted be-
fore the competent courts of using that article, for the pur-
pose of robbery.—(Hear, hear) Be hoped, therefore, their
Lordships would be of opinion that those who made such
an attempt should not be guilty of a misdemeanour only,
as was at present the case; but that any person who tried
to commit a robbery by means of cholorform, ,or such like
substances, though he did not succeed, should, if convicted,
be held guilty of felony, and liable to be transported beyond
the seas.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble and Learned Lord then
moved that the Bill be read a second time.—
The Bill was read a second time accordingly.
PASSENGERS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
Cs the question-that the report on this Bill be received,
The Earl f MOUNTCASHELL proposed a clause to the
effect that a return should be made annually to Parliament
of the name, &c., of every person convicted under the Pas-
senger Act, and and of the circumstanees atten ding each
such case. Such a return would have the effect of inducing
greater care and caution en the part of the masters of emi-
grant-vessels, while it would act as a stimulus to agents
and others to employ greater precautions against losses at
sea before vessels lett the harbour.
Earl GREY opposed the clause. The Noble Earl pro-
posed that returns should be made annually to that House
of the name and all the circumstances connected with every
conviction, nr t only in the United Kingdom, but throughout
the colonies. Nothing could be more inconvenient than to
requ're by Act of Parliament a return of this kind. He
might not object to such a return for a single year in order
to show the working of the measure, but such a return
would, he ventured to say, be not only useless but an abuse
of the powers of legislation.
The Earl of MOUNTCASHELL, notwithstanding what
had fallen from the i oble Earl, was satisfied that the
clause which he proposed would be one of the most effica-
cious in the Bill.
The gallery was then cleared fora division but none took
place.
The clause proposed by the Earl of Mountcashell was ne-
gatived, and the Bill reported.
The House then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 14.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
The Sheriffs of London appeared at the bar of the
House, and presented a petition from the Lord Mayor,
Aldermen, and Corporatio❑ of London, assembled in
Council, in favour of the Ecclesiagtical Titles Bill.
NEW WRIT.
A new writ was moved for the borough of Thirsk in
place of Mr. John Bell, deceased.
SECOND READING.

On the motion for the secondreaciiiig of the Caledo-
nian Railway (Amendment, Continuation, &c.) Bill,
Sir R. IL INGLIS said that not having any interest
in this railway, but being convinced that the principle of
the Bill was unjust, he should move that the Bill be
read a second time this day six months.
Mr. B. SMITH supported the second reading.
f;Tr. GLA DSTONI.I,. though he did nc,t :mend to vote
on the question, as he was a party concerned, could not
forbear entering his protest against the provisions of the
Bill. They were contrary to all principles ()rioting'