The Sun.
London, England, 1860-08-24 00:00:00

THE SUEZ CANAL.

In reply to Mr. H. SEYMOUR,
Lord PALMERSToN said it was quite true that the
unfortunate Pasha of Egypt had been induced to take a
very large number of shares in the Isthmus of Suez Canal
Company, an undertaking which, as he had formerly stated,
was one of the most remarkable attempts at delusion prac-
tised in modern times. Several persons in Paris have also
been induced to take shares in the undel taking. However,
the progress of the works showed clearly that the under-
taking was impracticable, for it would require an amount of
labour and money beyond the power of any company
to supply. An unsuccessful attempt had been made to
induce the Pasha of Egypt to take more shares. He
was not aware that there were any negotiations going on
by the British and French Governments in reference to
this undertaking. Mr. Cobden had received no instruc-
tions on this subjeet. That gentleman was authorised to
act with Lord Cowley in carrying out the commercia.
treaty.

THE ISTHMUS OF DARIEN.
Mr. BRADY asked the First Lord of the Treasury if
there were any political difficulties in the way of the pro-
ject for the junction of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans by
a ship canal across the Isthmus of Darien, from Caledonia
Bay to the Gulf of San Miguel.; and, if the Government
were prepared to co-operate with the Emperor of the
French, who had offered to send a vessel of war and a staff
of engineers to survey the line, which his Majesty has de-
clared to be perfectly feasible.
Lord PALMERSTON said there was no political im-
pediment to the construction of a canal crossing the Isth-
mus of Darien. On the contrary, there was an agreement

between the English and the American Government by
which protection was to be given to the canal when made.
ItAppeued, however, that the undertaking was impracti-

cable. _
COMMUNICATION BETWEEN RAJUSA. AND
CORFU.
On the order of the day for the third reading of the Con•

solidation Fund (Appro-priation) Bill.
In reply to Mr. S. _FITZGERALD,
Mr. LAING said that the Austrian Government had
communicated to the Government of this country informa-

tion to the effect that they could not carry out the conven-
tion they had entered into with this country to complete
the communication in question, on a guarantee of a pay-
ment by this country of £15,000 a year for 25 years. The
Austrian Government now required that the guarantee
should be increased from 25 to 50 years. No doubt the
communication with India through the medium in ques •
tion was most desirable, but three attempts had already
been made to carry out that communication, and with-
out success. However, Government would do all
in its power to effect this communication with
India as soon as it could be shown that there was any
reasonable chance of success.
APPROPRIATION BILL.

In reply to some observation of Mr. HANKEY,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
. .

this bill had been printed three times, and he did not think
that it was necessary to incur the expense of printing sepa-
rate copies for each hon. member. However he thought
it might be advisable to have a few copies struck 'off and
placed in the vote office.

CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION:
BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
EXCHEQUER BONDS OR BILLS (£2,000,000:
BILL.

This bill was read a third time and passed.
ENDOWED CHARITIES BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
NAVAL DISCIPLINE BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
DIVORCE COURT BILL.—PRIVILEGE.

On the order of the day for resuming the adjourned de-
bate on the second reading of this bill,
Lord 'PALMERSTON said that he fully concurred with
the right hon. gentleman (the Speaker), that the fifth clause
of the bill was an infringement of the privileges of the
house by the House of Lords. He thought hon. members
would do well to adopt the recommendation of the right
hon. gentleman—namely, notwithstanding the informality
of the bill, not to reject it. The House of Lords had sub-
sequently abstained from acting in regard to other bills as
they had done with respect to this, and he would move
that the bill be read a second time. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. GRAHAM said though in the first instance he
thought they should reject the bill, still on consideration he
agreed with the noble lord the First Lord of the Treasury.
The peers had been under an impression that they had
powers with regard to money bills, and he thought that the
time had arrived when some check should be imposed on
them. He thought that check had been given by the right
hon. gentleman the Speaker.
After some remarks by Mr. E. James, Mr. Bouverie,
Mr. Melina, and Mr. Whalley,
Mr. WHITE suggested that the bill should be rejected,
in order to mark their disapprobation of the conduct of the
other house.
Mr. HENNESSY withdrew his motion that the bill
should be laid aside.
The SPEAKER explained that the effect of what had
taken place would be to confine the practise to which the
House of Lords had resorted to within proper limits, and
that any bill in future coming from that house in regard to
money should be in the form of suggestion. (Hear, hear.)
The amendment was then withdrawn.
On the motion for the second reading,
Mr. MALINS objected to the principle of this bill. The
hon. and learned member said that no less than 19 mar-
riages had been dissolved in the Divorce Court in only six
hours, according to the statement of the hon. and learned
member for Marylebpne (Mr. E.-James). There were be-
tween 200 and 300 applications for dissolution of marriage,
and he considered that the interests of society demanded
that every precaution should be taken to prevent the
solemn ties of marriage being dissolved by collusion be-
tween parties who might have grown tired of each other.
He had a very high opinion of the learned judge who pre-
sided in the Divorce Court, but he considered that the
Court should consist of three, or at all events two judges,
in dealing with a matter of so much importance as dissolu-
tion of marriage. He trusted that now, at the close of the
session, this bill would not be passed, and he gave notice
that if they went into committee on it, he would moy_en
that.ee
its operatipn would be.limited to one year. He would
this
day by moving that the bill be read a second time. this
day six months.
Sir G. BOWYER seconded the amendment. He had,
on a former occasion, designated the Divorce Court an en-
cumbered estate court, for the transfer of women ; and he
believed in a large number, if not a majority, of cases
decrees of dissolution of marriage had been procured by col-
lusion. He considered the court as a place which was resorted
to by pereoas of morbid tastes, and, in many instaneec, it

was frequented by persons who wished only to obtain hill
formation as to the best means of obtaining a dissolution of
marriage. The court was therefore not only one for grant-
ing divorce, but also a school for tracing the mode of get-
ting such divorce. He strongly objected to giving sole
jurisdiction to one judge.
Mr. E. JAMES said that the bill before the house was
merely introduced for the purpose of facilitating the vast
amount of business that had flowed into the Divorce Court,
and the principle as to the advantage or disadvantage of the
court as an institution was not involved. He contended
that a single judge was responsible individually, and there-
fore was likely to be more attentive than if he sat with.
other judges. He alluded to the case of a gentleman whose
wife had eloped with his footman, and who was at present
receivinc, £3,000 a year from him. That ease was put down
for Julflast, and it was probable that it would not come on
till July next. In the mean time the adulterer would be
enjoying the alimony granted by the husband; and if the
latter died before the case came on for trial his children-
and his property would be at the disposal of the faithless
wife. There was no necessity whatever for more than one
judge, and when other judges were called in to decide on
matters of form, they sat looking at each other like the
Rcman augurs, and wondering what they were brought
there for. He thought that some of the clauses might be
altered with advantage, but he trusted that the house
would not reject the bill.
Mr. SPOONER supported the amendment, as he con-
sidered vesting full jurisdiction in a single judge would be
prejudicial to the interests of society.
Mr. HENNESSY also supported the amendment.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he felt very deeply
the delay that had taken place in bringing forward this bill,
but if they retraced the business of the session they would
perceive that that delay had been caused by compulsion. He
could only have brought it on after 12 o'clock at night,
and would be justly exposed to the censure of the house if
he adopted that course. He said that the bill was unfairly
treated, and it was a measure merely for dispensing with the
necessity of having the presence of 'three judges on all
occasions when a dissolution of marriage was applied for ;
but it left it to the discretion of the Judge-Ordinary to call
in the assistance of judges when he deemed it desir-
able. There were clauses in the bill that rendered
the evils apprehended by certain honourable members
most unlikely to occur ; and, with regard to collusion,
after the most careful investigation he could not find any
ground for a reasonable belief that there had been more than
four or five instances of collusion in the cases that came
before the court. He believed that a full court would not
afford the same facilities for detecting eollusiqn that would
be provided under the present bill.
After a few words from Mr. GniFFirn,the house divided—.
For the second reading.. 43
Against it .. ll
Majority —32.
The bill was accordingly read a second time
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL appealed to the house
to go into committee on the bill without delay.
Mr. MALINS said that he felt bound to bow to the ma-
jority of the house, and therefore would not offer any fur-
ther impediment to the progress of the bill.
Mr. HENNESSY could not consistently consent to the
further progress of the bill.
The house then went into committee on the bill.
The various clauses having been agreed to with verbal
amendments,
Mr. MALINS moved the addition of a clause limiting
the operation of the measure to the 31st of July, 1861. His
object in proposing the amendment was to afford time for
the reconsideration of the question next session.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he would accept
the amendment if the hon. member would substitute 1862
for 1861.

Mr. MALINS assented to the suggestion, and the clause
as amended, and preamble, were agreed to.
The bill passed through committee and the house re-
sumed.

TRUSTEES, MORTGAGEES, &c.,_BILL.

On the order for going into committee on this bill,
Mr. MALINS said that he believed no learned member
of the house was aware that the Government would pro-
ceed with the bill this session, and he hoped they would
postpone it till next year.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he should not feel
surprised at legal gentlemen opposing the bill, as the object
was, to a great extent, to remove the immense encum-
brances of legal phraseology, and he trusted he should be
enabled to carry out that principle throughout legislation.
(Hear.) He trusted the house would agree to go into com-
mittee on the bill.
The house then went into committee on the bill.
On clamie 1,
Mr. MALINS said he had heard of no objection to the
bill being advanced by any member of the legal profession
on the ground named by the Attorney-General; but as the
measure affected a large portion of the profession he thought
they should have a better opportunity of considering it.
Clauses 1 to 3 were then agreed to.
On clause 4,
Sir F. GOLDSMID moved an amendment restricting the
power of trustees to invest money arising from the sale of
freeholds in leaseholds which had not less than 60 years to
run.
The AT T ORNEY- GENERAL expressed his concurrence
with the motion, and the clause was amended accordingly.
Clauses up to 35 were agreed to.
On clause 36,
Mr. BUTT complained of the great rapidity with which
this bill had been passed through the house, allowing ne
time whatever for the examination of the clauses.
Mr. MALINS said he hoped that if the hon. and learned
Attorney-General should be in office next year, both he and
the Government would prevent this monstrous? state of
things again occurring. There had been really no time for
the discussion of the measure. It had been brought on at
the last moment, and they were obliged to run through it;
and though they were both law reformers he ventured to
predict that such proceedings would endanger the cause.
THE CHURCH TEMPORALITIES (IRELAND)
ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.

The amendments to this bill were considered.
Mr. BUTT moved the expulsion of clause 43.
Sir J. GRAHAM concurred in the motion, believing that
it would have the effect of depriving parish clerks who were
freeholders of their right to vote at elections.
Mr. DEASY said the clause had not been prop osed by the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and he should r.ot object to
its' expulsion.
The clause was accordingly struck out of the bill. The
other amendments were agreed to, and on the motion of
Mr. Deasy the bill was read a third time and passed.
THE POOR -LAW OFFICERS SUPERANNUATION
BILL.
On the motion of Sir G. C. LEWIS,
The order for the second reading of this bill was dis-
charged.

THE UNION OF BENEFICES BILL.
The amendments to this bill were considered.
Mr. H. SEYMOUR moved the following clause : That
no church, house, building, land, and heredibllment shall be
sold under the provisions of this act, unless public notice
thereof shall have been given in the London Gazette, and in
three of the London daily papers, and tenders invited for
the sale thereof, and that such property shall be sold to the
person sending in the highest bona fide tender.
Mr. BO UVERIE opposed it on the ground that it might
prevent a public body purchasing the site of a church which
might be required for public improvements.
After some further discussion the clause was necatived,
and the other amendments were agreed to,
On the motion that the bill be read a third time.,
Mr. MALINS, on the part of the lay impropriator of the
tithes of Great St. Helen's, wished to correct a misstatement
which had been made by the hon. member for hull in re-
ference to the amount of tithes. It had been stated that
the tithes had been purchased for the sum of £3,ooo—that
the income was £1,700 a-year, and that some of the tithes
had been raised from 15s. to as much as £lO 10s. Nov he
held in his hand a statement of the gentleman to whom re-
ference had been made, in which he asserted that the in-
come was not £1,700, but was under £350, that the legal
amount authorised to be raised was 2s. 9d. in. the pound,
and the highest amount ever levied was ls. in the pound.
He felt it but just to make this statement, and he would
add, that although the gentleman belonged to the legal
profession he had never had a lawsuit on the subject of
tithes in his life.
Mr. TITE said he had spoken of two parishes, and it was
in the other parish where the litigation commenced. It was
not denied that the gentleman had purchased the rectory
for a very small sum.
Mr. MALINS—At a public auction, for, in. reality, the
sum of L 6,500.
Mr. TITE said the rector was paid only £2oo' ta-year, and
he had himself, when churchwarden, gone mune I the parish
to raise a sum for him for additional remuneration. He
had merely stated the facts as he believed they existed in
the parish, and he begged it to be distinctly -understood
that he had spoken of the forbearance of the gentleman to
whom reference had been made by the hon. and learned
member, but he should be glad to put all the facts right if
more time could be given for the purpose, and il7 they were
of more importance.
. The bill was then read a third time and pass :a.
THE MINES REGULATION AND INSPECTION
BILL.

The Lords' amendments to this bill were their considered .
Mr. AYRTON moved as an amendment upon the Lords'
amendment in reference to the education of chi ldren' that
they should receive three hours' instruction a day three
times a week. Ile would strike out "twenty 1 sours," and
substitute three days.
Mr. CLIVE agreed with his hon. and learned friend that
the Lords had rapidly and unceremoniously uau done all the
labours of the Commons with respect to these billls. How-
ever, as the mining population seemed to think it a great
improvement on the existing law, he should „recommend
the house to agree to the Lords' amendments, with the
alteration suggested by bis hon. and learned friend.
After au observation from Mr. CRAUFURDt
Mr. KINNAIRD hoped that some further inquiry would
be institutei on the subject between this and nex t session.
Sir G. C. LEWIS regretted the changes which the Lords
had thought right to make in this bill, but still • thought it
would be better to pass it in its present form thz m to make
the alterations suggested by the hon. and learned member
for the Tower Hamlets.
The amendment was agreed to, as were the remainder of
the Lords' amendments.
LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) BILL.
The Lords' amendments to this bill were CO3 laideredt in
some of which the house concurred, and disagre e to others.
GUNPOWDER, &c., BILL.
The Lords' amendments to this bill were considered and
agreed to.
POOR RELIEF, &c.-, (IRELAND) 13 ILL.
Upon the motion that the Lords' amendments; to this _
bill
be agreed to,
Mr. HENNESSY asked the house to disagr 30 with the
_
amendments, which consisted of amendmnt:,Thd 'striking out
clauses introduced by himself of great urgency necessity.
Mr. CARDWELL opposed the motion of the hon.
gentleman.
BILL.
The Lords'RalmFeLnEdments
VOLUNTEER were then agreed to.,
The Lords' amendments to this bill were cousidered and
agreed to.

FORTIFICATIONS, &c.
,
Sir DE L. EVANS moved that an humble address should
be presented to her Majesty, praying that she would be
graciously pleased todirect be carried into ef feet the re-.
to
commendations of the Royal commission on tt Le national
defences, in paragraphs 166 and 158 of the report to her Xs"
jesty, for the construction of a fortified work on shooterl"
hill, calculated for a garrison of 1,600 men, to 4 mist in the
protection of Woolwich dockyard and arsenal t, and as an
important element in the means of defence fort he metropo-
lis ; also praying her Majesty would be eTI cic susly
.pleased
to direct that a Revd - - - commission should be :appointed to
examine and report
,
available to an invading army advancing egaif nst London;
might be) occupied or
prepared to obstruct or defeat an enemy on the obstacles or positions which 4.--- her Majesty on the li aes of march
on t h ese lines of
advance ; and eh the points ci, appui or suppari ; of the na-
tional forces in their operations or manceuvres; i in the vici-
nity, and for the defence of the metropolis ef i the empire.
His opinions with regard tothesefortifications en direly eon..
cured with those of the Royal commissioners.
An Horn. MEMBEIt here moved that the house's e counted.
There being only 16 members present the house i adjourned
at eight o'clock.

A Malta letter, dated Aug. 18, says :—" Another
French steam transport arrived to-day. She comes
from Oran, and has on board six officers, 400 men,
and 400 horses, for Beyrout. There have been no
naval movements since my last. It is reported that
three months' provisions are to be sent to our squad-
ron at Naples, and that the Mediterranean fleet is
shortly to be joined by the Orion and the Melpo-
mene, from England. The question between the
Imperial and local Governments as to the improve-
ment of Malta harbour seems to be quite settled.
Three tenders were made in England for the con-
tract, giving lists of prices ; but, as both Govern-
ments wish to have tenders for the whole of the
work the two lowest bidders have been requested to
come here, in order, after inspection of the locality,
to make such tenders. Mr. Scamp, the Deputy
Director of Admiralty Works, having been one of
the commission who made the estimate, is expected
here about the middle of September, to give the con-
tractors any explanations they may require ; and an
engineer connected with one of the gentlemen who
tendered for the work is already on the spot. Dur-
ing the last week measurements have been taken,
and the ground bored in several places at the Mar-
sa, in the Great Harbour, and at the head of the
Pieta Creek, in the Marsamuscetto Harbour, under
directions from the local Government and the Naval
Department. From signal flags which have been
erected, and other circumstances, it is believed that
the original plan. of connecting the two harbours
by means. of a ship canal is once more under con-
sidera ton. lam informed upon good authority
i that tis the desire of the Imperial Government to
execute both projects at one and the same time,
and that naval authorities here are of opinion that
the canal is absolutely necessary to complete the
harbour scheme as at present proposed."
The Adder, paddlewheel steamer, Mr. S. Mun-
chin, master, which has been making good defects
at Chatham dockyard, is completed, and will be un-
docked next spring tides.
The following appointments were made yester-
day at the Admiralty :—Lieut. F. J'. D'Aguilar, to
the Imaum ; E. W. F. Boxer, naval cadet, to the
Melpomene ; and G. E. M. Kay, acting third-class
assistant-engineer, to the Asia.