The Sun.
London, England, 1869-07-29 00:00:00

O V ERCR 0 IVDING RIVER STEAMERS.
-
BOW-STREET-THIS DAY.

Edward Mills, captain attic river steamer Elfin,
attended before Sir Thomas Henry .to answer a.
summons taken out against him, at the instance of
the Commissioners of Police, for an infringement
of the Merchant Shipping Act. The charge
made was that the defendant, as captai❑ of
the vessel, had, on the sth of July,
a greater number of passengers on board
his vessel then she was authorised to carry by the
certificate granted by the Board of Trade. Tho
registered number of passengers was 475.
The facts of the case were as follows :—On the
sth of July, the police having been directed to put
the provisions of the Act in force, the Elfin
was seen going to Gravesend, and the police
being of opinion that she had a greater number of
passengers were on board than she was authorised
to carry. Her return was looked for, and when
she arrived at Blackwall-pier the officers went on
board, and, previous to the passengers leaving the
vessel at Temple-pier, counted no less than 713
passengers, being 238 more than she was allowLd to
carry. The officers counted two children as one adul',
but children in arms were not counted at ath The
learned gentleman who appeared for the Board of
Trade said a dill-is:Ally had been imported into the
case by another steamer discharging her passenger 4
across the Elfin whilst the passengers were being
counted, but it was contended that there c3uldnot
by any possibility have been more than 30.
➢lr. Fly, who attended on the part of the Wool-
M•ich Company, said the manner in which the
officers had counted the passengers was highlj
objectionable, altogether unreliable. It could not
be said for certain how many crossed from the
other steamer.

Mr. Orton, for the Board of Trade, said he was
in a position to prove that it could not be over 30.
The penalty on conviction is /20, and £5 for
each passenger, over and above the licensed number.
Sir T. Henry said it was most important that the
provisions of the Act should be put in force, an .1
it was only to be regretted that the counting had
not been carried out in a more satisfactory manner.
Ile thought it would be impossible to_ convict crt
the vague evidence, but he hoped thatlbe effect of
the proceedings would be to caution captains of
river steamers.
The summons was therefore dismissed.

IMPERIAL PAILLIA J ENT

HOUSE OF OF COMMONS..—YE.STERDAY.
The SPEAKER took th 3 chair at the usual hour.
OUTRAGE IN IRELAND.

Mr. FORTESUUE, in reply to Sir F. lIEYtMTE, saA
that the Government were doing all in their power to put
down agrarian clime in Ireland. The subject was one of
the utmost difficulty, but still he hoped, with the assist-
aLte of the loyal and peaceably disposed portion of her
Majesty's subjects, they would be successful. All the pro-
tection in the power of the Gove:.n:nent would, of coursn,
be given to life and property.

ABOLITION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT BILL.
Mr. GILPIN moved the second reading of this bill.
In so doing he expressed a hope that the time had nee,
arrived for Parliament giving its assent to a measure
for the abolition of capital punishm. ut, more so because it
had been shown that the carrying out the extreme sen-
tence of the law did not deter crime or stop the hand
of the murderer. He .coald not unierstand the persis-
tency with which the m'asuro had in former sesions
been opposed by the ureLbiihopi and bishops; but hop .tt
they would now be induced to Live their sanction to the
present bill, and thus put an end ti the immoral ty arising
from the system of capital punishment, which had bee
successfully abolished is many p trts of the world with
success.

Mr. FOWLER suit he thought that if any further
argument were wanted in favour of the bill of t':e boa
member for Northampton they cuul I be found in ti,
blue-book pub!ished sine° the law of capital punts
men& was abolished it, all cases except in urd••,..
In every case crime had decreased, and that bad
in consequence of jades n,t having the fear of cap:t • I
ptinishrnent before their eyes for sucu crimes as forgery,
arson, cud the like offences. He thought a step in the
right direction had been made is abolishing public execu-
tions, because it bad been clearly shown that public
executions did• not deter the band of the murderer.
Another good that would result from the abolition of
capital offences was making the punishment a cer-
tainty, instead of as now allowing it to depend upon
the determination of the Home Secretary. At present
there was no certainty that the verdict would be carried
out, because the Home Secretary had a power which he
did not think it was right should he possessed by any
ono. He knew that the Home Secretary was per-
secuted by memorials being presented for a commutation
of the sentence of death, and no more :memth-able case
had occurred than that of William Palmer, the Rugby
poisoner, a greater scroudrel than which never existed
in the history of crime. Ns sooner had sentence
been passed than the Homo Secretary was persecuted by
memorials in favour of a commutation of the sentence, on
the ground that some doubt still existed as to the bringing
home clearly the crime to Palmer. Now this state of things
ought not to exist, and the only way to put an end to
them was to abolish capital punishment, and to make
the verdict of a jury and the sentence of a judge certain
of being carried out. He seconded the motion for the
second reading.
Mr. J. D. LEWIS opposed the motion, and moved
that the bill be read a second time that day three
months. Ho contended that there was no in-
disposition of a jury to convict where the evidence was
clear that wilful murder had been committed. lie thought
the house ought to pay •some attention to the cpiniou of
the judges on the;subject of the abolition of capital punish-
ment, and that opinion was in nearly every case adverse
to such a proceeding.
Atter several hon. members had addessed the house for
and against the bill,
Mr. BRUCE said he could not give his vote in favour
of the second reading of this bill. He thought the
present law was necessary to protect human life, and
he did not deny that . some minor altera-
tions might be necessary. The mode in which the ,
sentence of death was carried out had entirely put a stop
to those scenes of immorality which heretofore were the
accompaniments of a public execution, and therefore he
could not advise the house to give its sanction to the bill
now under consideration.

The house divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading
Against it
Majority —GO
The bill was consequently lost.
GAME LAWS (SCOTLAND) BILL.

Lord ELCHO moved the second reading of this bill, the
object of which was to define more clearly the conditions
under which all persons might kill game in Scotland.
Sir D. WEDDERBURN opposed the motion, as be
considered no case had been made out for the interfering
with existing arrangements.
The LORD ADVOCATE opposed the bill on the
ground that sufficient information was nut at present be-
fore the house to justify legislation.
The subject was under debate at a quarter to six, at
which hour the discussion closed.