The Sun.
London, England, 1856-04-04 00:00:00

[PRICE 4D. STAMPED SD•

andsindeed, to take the whole subject is its broadest sense
into consideration, and for that purpoe he would suggest
an addition to the amendment. With regard to the ques-
tion of how far transportation was now carried out, it
must be remembered that there was but one place to which
convicts could be sent, and that was Western Australia,
and all persons who were transported would be sent there,
consideration being had to the nature of the labour which
was required in that colony. In reality there had not been
a sufficient number of convicts who were of that kind that
were required in that colony, and consequently not sa many
had been sent as were required. It mast be borne in mind,
however, that the colony was not capable of receiving a
very great number of convicts ; and it must also be borne
in mind that convicts could only be sent so long as the co-
lonists were willing to receive them. At' present the sys-
tem was working extremely well, and the convicts in the
great majority of instances had conducted themselves pro-
perly. There was no great body of sub: antial settlers in
that 'colony, in consequence of the groat change which had
taken place in the prospects of the other portion of Austra-
lia. The whole of this subject would be referred to the com-
mittee, and that committee would prosecute its iinjuiry into
every branch of the-system which was under consideration.
Mr. ADDERLEY hoped that the practice of expatriat-
ing felont would never be revived, and commented at some
upon the vinous plans that had been adopted for
the management of convicts at home, especially as regarded
the attempts to' establish reformatory schools 'or otherwise
instruct and reclaim the inmates of our criminal prisons..
After a few words from Mr. BAIN-ES,
Mr. NE WDEG.A.TE remarked upon the advantages that
Might be obtained by. utilising the labour of convicts in
the colonies, and upon the better chances of reforming the
criminal when transferred to a new-country, and removed
from his old haunts and associates.
• Sir S. NORTHCOTE suggested that among other topics"
the treatment to be adopted towards prisoners upon their
discharge should form a. subject of inquiry by the select
committee.
Mr. J. FITZGERALD urged the revival of transporta-
tion, feeling convinced that it was the most eligible form
ot secondary punishment. . a .
Mr. SCOTT briefly replied, and havhieraibissented to
modify the terms of-his motion, -
Sir G. GREY withdrew his amendment, and the rose-
lution, in its remodelled shape, was agreed to.
SPECIALTY AND SIMPLE CONTRACT DEBTS,
Mr. MALINS obtained leave to bring in a bill to
abolish all distinctions between specialty and contract
debts. According to the law as it now stands, specialty
creditors had a preference over simple contract creditors,
when the payment was to be made from real property.
When the property was insufficient, the specialty creditors
swept all away, leaving nothing for the simple contract
creditors. • • • •
CRIMINAL APPROPRIATION OF -TRUST
. PROPERTY.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved for leave to bring
in a bill to amend the hew relating to criheinal appropria-
tion of trust property held by persons as trustees or bailees,
The hon. and learned gentleman said that the necessityfor
this bill arose from the insufficient protection which the
law at present afforded against misappropriation of property
by persons entrusted with it in the character of trustees or.
bailees. ' Udder the common law, a person who obtained
lawful 'possession of property could not be made criminally
responsible for its fraudulent appropriation. For in-
stance, if a 'carrier, who was entrusted with goods to carry,
stole them, he could not be made criminally responsible ;
if goods were deposited with an artisan or tradesman for
repair, Stc., he also might have appropriated them to his
own use, without making himself criminally responsible.
The courts, however, had been astute enough to apply, to
some extent, a remedy for this defect in 'the law, by hold-
ing that if a carrier broke open the parcel entrusted to him
and appropriated any portion of the contents to his own
use, he was guilty of larceny. So, if a tradesman removed
the watch from the watch-case, and sold the case, he also
was held to be guilty of larceny. Such was the state of the
common law untilcertain exceptions had been int • laced by
the Legislature. If servants keep the property of their mas-
ters, the statute law now declared them to be guilty of era-
bezzlement ; and 'bankers, agents; and factors were also
made criminally responsible if they misappropriated pro-
perty deposited with them ; but to this day a trustee who
misappropriated trust property was only civilly respons-
ible, and the Insolvent or Bankruptcy Courts would clear
him from the consequences. He proposed to do away
`with that anomaly, and to put all persons entrusted with
funds for trust purposes on the same footing as bankers
iu respeCt to securities deposited with them. He
also proposed to do away with the technical rule of law by
which, if a pereon acquired property for a special purpose,
and afterwards misappropriated Who was not held guilty
of larceny, as it appeared to him (the Attorney-General)
that it did not matter whether a person had the felonious
intention at the time he got possession of the property or
only at the time of misappropriating it. (Hear.)
Mr. WALPOLE wished to know whether, as a trustee
was to be made criminally responsible, he would barelieved
from his civil responsibility ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that a trustee would
still be liable in the civil courts.
Mr. MALINS highly approved of the bill, as he had con-
tinually seen the necessity of such a measure in the course
of his professional-practice. .
Mr. BOWYER also agreed in the general provisions of
the bill, but it would require to be dealt with with great
care and attention, lest it should inflict great hardship upon
trustees, who performed a most thankless office, and who
generally committed breaches of trust not with any criusi-
sial intention, but to oblige the pirties beneficially inte-
rested. If they were to add to the liability of trustees the
risk of a criminal prosecution it would make their position
a groat deal more dangerous. That fear would make
tees very much alarmed. He merely mentioned this as
a caution to the house iu entertaining the measure in
question.
The ATTORNEY-XENERAL begged to assure the
house that he was most sensibly alive to the danger which-
had been pointed out by the hon. and learned member,
but he thought that danger had heea avoided by the word-
ing of the bill.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
JOINT STOCK BANK DIRECTORS' ELECTION
BILL.
Sir J. SHELLEY moved-for leave to bring in a bill to
amend the law relating to the election Of-directors of joint
stock banks in England. The act which related to this
subject was passed in 1844, and by the 4th section of that
act it was provided that retiring directors should not be
re-elected fora period of 12 calendar months. The object
of the present bill was to enable shareholders if they
thought fit, to re-elect at once directors that might be le-
tiring. The bill would not interfere with the election of
new directors—with infusing new blood into the direction.
It wgs evident that by the act as at present constituted, as•
soon as & director was sufficiently experienced in his busi-
ness, although he might be the best man in the direction,
he was incapacitated from farther serving the shareholders.
He might mention that five of the principal joint stock
banks at present existing were established before this act
came into force, and were therefore not subject to its pro-
visions. The present sot applied to three other banks,
and if tho principle were good for any, it surely would be
good for'all. His object was to leave the whole direction
in the hands of the shareholders themselves, upon the
principle of self-government which now. so extensively pre-
vailed. The bill was a very short one, and did not affect
anything but the ineligibility of directors to re-election
until after a period of 12 calendar months.
The CHA.NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
had no objection to the introduction of the bill. He had
considerable doubts as to the policy of altering the provi-
ions of the present act, which had been very carefully con-
sidered by Sir. R. Peel. •The same principle was followed
with respect to the election of the Governors of the Bank
of England. As at present advised, he thought there was
not nil:iciest ground for altering the existing law, but any
objections which he had to make he would reserve, to a
future occasion.
' Mr: JOHN. MACGREGOR, in seconding the motion,
said that Sir R. Peel had 'expressed to him his doubts
whether it would not he necessary to make some change
in the law. The very best and most responsible man 'had
been often kept out of the direction in a state of suspense
for four years. He was very glad that the hon. baronet
had brought forward this bill.
Leave was then given to introduce the bill.
NATIONAL EDUCATION IN IRELAND.
Mr. MACARTNEY moved for certain papers connected
with the Board of National Education in Ireland..
Mr. 'WILSON said there was no objection to lay the
documents on the table, provided they were cOmplete,
which they were not.
Lord 3. MANNERS thought the'estimates as to the
National Board should be postponed until the report of the
commissioners was before the house.
After some further discussion, in which Mr. BLACKBURN
and Mr. WALPOLS took part,
The motion, limited to the production of the "minutes,"
was agreed to.

POOR LISPS•

Mn. It he moved for lea7e to bring in a bill to
amend the laws relating to the relief of the poor. In the
first place, he proposed by this bill to. do away with the
largo number of parochial and in
7hich were scattered
throughout the kingdom, and in which., though they had a
considerable population, no rate was raised for the relief of
the poor. In those places cases of the greatest hardship
arose from their being unable to relieve necessitous persons.
Taking the last census as the basis of his arrangement,or
t he
proposed to add those places to adjoining parishes, o
make them independent parishes for the purposes of poor
rate. There was another point of considerable importance
in the bill ; lee proposed to take power to dissolve the Gil.
bert unions, which existed in souse counties as long ago as
1835. A committee made a strong report against the con-
tinuance of those unions, in consequence of the abuses con-
nested with them, and the time had now arrived when
they might be advantageously dealt with, with advantage
to the public and to the unions themselves. Another pal*
of the bill had reference to the appointment of the district
auditors of poor-law unions. Those auditors, 49 in num-
ber, were each appointed to separate districts, consisting
of a certain number of unions. Originally they were ap-
pointed separately
.for each union ; but, in 1845, an act
was passed providing that
each district should be regu-
lated by the amount of population. At that time the
auditors were paid out of the poor rates of the union ; but,
is 1816, it was proposed, he believed, as a kind of com-
pensation to the landed interest for the repeal of the corn
laws—(a laugh)—that they should receive payment out of
the Consolidated Fund. That payment, which amounted
to between 13,0001. and 14,0001. a-year, therefore, now
came out of the national exchequer, but the appointment
of the auditors remained vested in the chairmen and vice-
chairmen of the different boards of guardians belonging to
the unions comprised in the district. Now, he thought
those who paid ought to appoint; and, as the central go-
vernment paid these officers, who exercised most respon-
sible functions—and, in point of fact, formed the pivot
Upon which the whole administration of the poor-law turned
—it was highly desirable that they should be appointed by
the central authority, who was responsible for the admi-
nistration of the poor-law. He proposed, as vacancies
arose, that power should be given to make larger districts,
and that the appointment of auditors should be vested in
tho Poor-law Board. A committee had made a strong
recommendation in favour of that arrangement. He
also proposed to place the appointments of registrars of
births, deaths, and marriages under local acts, with whom
the Poor-law Board had nothing to do, in the hands of
the guardians belonging to the different unions.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE, though agreeing with the main
principles of this bill, could hardly understand why it had