The Sun.
London, England, 1856-02-27 00:00:00

Mr. ATHERTON said that, when twelve months bad
elapsed between the execution of the deed and the death
of the te-tator, he thought that the further relaxations
proposed by the bill might safely be adopted. The clause
would only cure the informality of certain deeds.
Mr. HENLEY said it was not desirable to have a
statute in full force, and to pass continual acts to remedy
the inecn•enienees which arose under that statute. Ile
should therefore support the amendment of his hon. and
learned friend.
Mr. HADFIF.LD supported the clause.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that he could not
concur in the objections which had been made to the
clause. The Mop t-Deja Act prescribed certaiu formali-
ties, some of which were material and some immaterial.
With those that wore material the clause did not pro-
pose to interfere. But a zreat number of cases bad oc-
enrred in which the iminatorial formalities had not been
observed, and it was now proposed to cure this defect.
Atter a few words from Mr. MULLINGS, and Mr.
MATINS, •the amendment was withdrawn.
Mr. A.THERTON proposed to add, at end of clause
:--" And no deed, assurance, •r instrument, 30 years
o!d, nor any deed, assurance, or intrunnent heretofore
eKccuted, as to which it shall he proved to the satisfac-
tion of the Clerk of Enrolments. in Chancery that the
acknowhdgment thereof by the grantor of the lands or
hereditaments to which the same relates, cannot be ob-
tained within six calendar months . after the passing of
this act, shall, for the purposes of the first recited act,
or of this act, require acknowledgment prior to enrol-
ment."—Agreed to.
The bill then passed.
COURT OF CHANCERY (IRELAND) BILL.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for IRELAND moved
that the select committee on the Court of Chancery (Ire-
land) Bill unrAiat of the following members :—Mr. Soli-
citor-General for Ireland, Sir James Graham, Mr. Ed-
ward Ellice, Mr. Henley, Mr. Walpole, Mr. Keogh,
Viscount Monck, Mr. Cairns, Mr. Macartney, Mr.
Henry Herbert, Mr. Win. Fitzgerald, Mr. Whiteside,
Mr. Da Vere. Sir Erskine Perry, and Mr. Kirk.
Mr. S. FITZGERALD moved the insertion of the
name of Sir F. Kelly, in the place of that of Mr. De
Vere. Ile thought it was desirable to have a practis-
iog English lawyer npoi the committee.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for IRELAND said
there were at present seven lawyers on the committee,
and only three Irish country gentlemen, and the hon.
member wished to strike out one of the latter, and to
add to the number of lawyers. Under these circum-
stances, and as he had asked the hon. member (Mr. De
Vere) to serve upon the committee, he (the Solicitor-
Genera') could not agree to the omission of the name.
Mr. WHITE=ADE observed that it would be of great
use to have one member of the English bar, who could
explain to the committee the effect of the valuable legal
reforms which had lately been accomplished in this

cou n try.
CA. DUNNE asserted that the committee was un-
fairly constituted, and would not satisfy the people of
Ireland.
It was then agreed that the name of Mr. Da Vere
stand on the committee.
On the motion that the name of Sir E. Perry stand on
the committee, the house divided, when there appeared—
I 9 or motion l2B
Against it
Majority in favour of the motion -59
On the motion that Mr. Kirk be one of the committee,
Mr. WHITESIDE said that after the division which
had taken place, he should not further interfere with
the nomination of the committee, but he would submit
to Government that, inasmuch as there was no doubt
that their object was to get a good law, they would
withdraw the name of the hon. member for Newry, and
place that great law reformer, Sir Fitzroy Kelly, on the
committee, especially as that hon. and learned gentle-
man had expressed his willingness to attend and give all
the a•isistance in his power. He did not make this sug-
gestion out of any personal objection to the member for
Newry, but because he thought that gentleman, like
the hon. and learned member for East Suffolk, and tier
Majesty's Solicitor-General, who were acquainted with
the practice of the Court of Chancery in England, ought
to be on the committee, if the Government were really
anxious to get a good law.
Mr. J D. FITZGERALD had no oljection to add
to the committee the names of the gentlemen referred to,
if lie could be assured of their attendance. With re-
ference to the name now before the house, he wished to
state that he had selected the honourable member for
Newry as the representative on the committee of the
mercantile interest. The honourable gentleman was
himself not only an extensive merchant, but he was
also a man of very great intelligence, and represented a
large .mereant ile district. •
Mr. WHITESIDE explained that he had mentioned
that Sir F. Kelly would attend on the committee if ap-
pointed one of its members.
Sir G GREY said that there could be no objection to
placing the two gentlemen mentioned by the hon. and
learned member for Enniskillen on the committee, but
that a notice to that effect should be given by him.
Mr. DISRAELI thought the proposition of Govern-
ment a fair one.
The necessary notice was then given, and the name of
Mr. Kirk agreed to.
ST. JAMES'S-PARK.

Sir B. HALL moved, as a select committee to con-
sider the plans for the proposed communication between
Pall-Mall and Westminster, the following names :—Sir
B. Hall, Lard J. Manners, the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, Mr. Disraeli, Lord R. Grosvenor, Lord Hotham,
Sir J. Past-in, Mr. Stephenson, Sir J. Shelley, Mr.
Hutchins, Col. Buldero, Mr. Drummond, Mr. S. Wert.
ley, Col. W. Patten, and Mr. Milnee.
Mr. HINDLEY complained of the proceeding as hur-
ried, and as one intended to anticipate the opinion ex-
pressed out of doors upon the subject. The right hon.
baronet had not given the house the chance which had
been given to the Irish inernb,ra in reference to the com-
mittee just appointed, of proposing any other names but
those in the motion. The hou,e had not tim, even to
give instructions to the committee that they should not
approve of any plans which interfered with the enclosure
of S Y and gem of the whole
metropolis. te'swhom he brought to see it
pat- k
Foreigners, the t
confessed that its beauty was not to he anywhere equal-
led. They should, then, not allow anything to interfere
with t':e enclosure, for, if they did, they might in as
good taste vie the committee instructions to pull down
Westminster Abbey. The enclosure, too, was small,
and the wonder was how the landscape gardener had been
able to make so much out of so little ground. He
should like to have been abfiri to move instructions to the
committee ; but, being prevented in that, the only course
left open to him was to object to the names proposed,
but as that was invidious way of proceeding, he
should not have recourse to it. He should,- however,