The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-20 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(This DAY.)
The SPEAKER. took the chair shortly after 12 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Mid-Sussex and Midhurst Junction Railway Devia-
tion Bill and the Petersfield Railway Bill were considered
and ordered for third reading.

_
The Edinburgh Royal College of Surgeons Bill was read
a second time.

TITLES OF PUBLIC BILLS.

Sir M. PETO asked the Chairman of the Select Com-
mittee on Standing Orders, whether any, and, if any, what
precautions are taken to secure that the titles of the public
bills submitted to this' house shall truly disclose their ob-
ject and effect; exile particularly, whether his attention
has been drawn to the contents of a bill introduced under
the short title of the " Highways, Roads, &c., Bill."
Colonel W. PATTEN said that when the bills were
prepared a description was given of their object, in accord-
ance with which the title was selected. Leave was given
to bring in a bill to enable the gas companies to break up
highways, which was entitled Highways Bill, and consi-
dering- the object he thought that title was incorrect.
PROFESSIONAL OATHS ABOLITION BILL.
Mr. E WART, in moving the second reading of this bill,
said the object of the measure was to do away with unneces-
sary oaths, which were an incumbrance ou the conscience
were frequently evaded, and had other disadvantages.
The bill applied to the legal profession, for other professions,
such as medical men and schoolmasters, had succeeded in
relieving themselves from such oaths as lawyers were com-
pelled to take. In support of his views he referred to
the Select Committee of the House of Lords
in 1834, which recommended the abolition of
these oaths, which not unfrequently tempted persons,
whose consciences were not very tender, to commit perjury.
The bill proposed to do away only with those oaths which
were required of lawyers in their mere professional cape •
city, and did not deal with such oaths as were imposed on
lawyers in a judicial character.
Mr. NE WDEGATE complained of a day on which her
Majesty held a levee being selected for the discussion of
this important subject, and he hoped the hon. member
would, considering the thinness of the house, not press his
motion for the second reading to-day. If, however, the
motion were persevered in, he gave notice that on the order
of the day for going into committee he would move that
the house resolve itself into such committee that day six
months.

Mr. A. MILLS said he would support the bill, because
it did not propose to interfere with the oaths taken on en-
tering the civil service. • .

DENMAN supported the bill, and considered the
reason assigned by the hon. member (Mr Newdegate) for
the postponement of the discussion futile. He contended
that these oaths were not, and, from their nature, never
could be treated with reverence. He alluded to the case of
a gentleman with whom he was acquainted, who was emi-
nently qualified from his learning and abilities to adorn the
bar, but who was prevented from entering the legal profes-
sion from an objection to taking the oath of supremacy and
adjuration, though he did not object to the oath of alle-
giance.
Sir G. C. LEWIS considered that it would not be desir-
able to enter into any lengthened discussion on the bill at
the present stage. He would support the bill, though he
did not think much of the value of those oaths which it
proposed to abolish, as they never formed the subject of an
indictment for perjury. In a time of disturbance these
oaths would be useless, for a constitution rested, as in this
country, on the affections of the people. His objection to
the bill was that he did not consider it went far enough.
Mr. S. ESTCOURT did not object to the bill, but
thought before going into committee the Government ought
to lay it before the law officers of the Crown, in order to
ascertain whether it would have any other effect than what
on its face it professed.
After a few remarks from Mr. Henley, Sir G. C. Lewis,
and Sir Francis Goldsmid, the bill was read a second time
and ordered to be formally committed to-morrow.
AGGRAVATED ASSAULTS ACT AMENDMENT