The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-21 00:00:00

REFORM BILL.

7 IIIr. E. JAMES asked the Secretary of State for Foreign I
Ai fairs whether, in the event of the Reform Bill being read I
a s ccond time during the present session, it was the inten-
tim of her Majesty's Government at once to proceed
with the bill, or to agree to any motion to refer
sudh bill to a select committee. He gave the noble
lord (Lord J. Russell) credit for sincerity in regard
to -the bill, but he considered that the Government was
gu Rty of apathy in reference to a measure of so much im-
portance.
?Lord J. RUSSELL—I beg to give the hon. and learned
gentleman the member for Marylebone my thanks for put-
tits, g a question which will tend to clear the course that the
Go vernraent mean to pursuewith regard to the Reform Bill.
The postponement of that bill has taken place partly in con-
sequence of there having been very long debates on the
fir Lancia measures of the session, and partly in consequence
of ' a resolution, which seems to have been taken by many
h. an. gentlemen, that this debate should not end before
Easter, and the evident inability of the Government to force
to a elose the discussionon the second reading, when a great
?portion of the house were determined, with the holidays
) before them, to oppose the concluding of the debate. It is
not, therefore, any fault or apathy on the part of the Go-
• 1 vernment that has caused the postponement of the ad-
journed debate on the second reading. However, that ad-
jomaed debate will come on again on Monday next ; and
I trust there will not be any very much prolonged further
discussion upon the second reading of the bill. It is then

ray intention, after the ordinary interval which usually
elapses between the second reading and the committal of a
bill, to appoint a day for the whole house to go into com-
mittea upon the measure. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gen-
tleman further asks me, what is the course which the Go-
vernment propose to pursue with regard to a notice given
by the hon. member for Salford, the Chairman of Commit-
tees of Ways end Means. It appears to me that that mo-
tion—though it is not so direct or straightforward as a
motion for postponing the second reading for six months
would have been—is, in facti a metion intended to destroy
the bill. (Hear.) It will therefore be treated by the
Government as if it were a motion for postponing the
second reading till that day six months, and therefore for
destroying it altogether. (Cheers.) It is obvlous that we
must oppose the hon. gentleman's motion, and for the
reasons which I have stated. But besides that, such a
course would be most unusual. I don't believe that there
ever was an instance when the very principal measure of
the session was referred to a select committee, it being
obvious that if a select committee were entrusted with the
alteration, and thereby with the fram:,ng of the bill, that
select committee would be tevng upon itself the most im-
portant functions of the executive. government. I can con-
ceive of there being gentlemen who even after the second
reading of the bill might think it advisable to move that the
committal of the bill be postponed for six months ; but I
cannot conceive that any great portiori of the house would
think of referring a bill of this importance—a great me=asure,
which affects the constitution of the country and the right
of voting of so many persons in the country to a select
committee of 15 gentlemen to discuss. Ile course which we
shall take will be to proceed wSth tlie bill, and to propose
that it be referred to a commute; of the whole house. In
that committee of the whole house the alteration of the
franchise and the disfra
r.chisement or partial disfranchise-
qient of constituencies can be considered. We have still
time enough this
ession to discuss and decide all those ques-
F
tions ; and I t;ast also that the bill will reach the House of
Lords in sufficient time for its consideration. (Hear.)
THE NEW STAMP ACT.

Mr. MITCHELL asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer
whether it was the intention of the Government to persevere
In exacting, under the new Stamp Act, a stamp duty on
every successive endorsement of delivery orders ? The hon.
member said that the docks and the in incipal wharfingers
insisted upon a new stamp for every fresh endorsement; so
that in the case of some articles in which there was much
speculation the tax might amount to as much as 10d. or 20d.
In the commonest cases it would be at least 3d., whereas
the understanding of Parliament when it agreed to the
measure was that it should be only a penny. It seemed
doubtful whether the docks and wholfingers were actiag
under positive instructions received from the department of
Inland Revenue, end he (the hon. member) was therefore
anxious to have the point cleared up.
Mr. HUBBARD also asked whether, in the event of dock
warrants or delivery orders being impressed with the re-
quired_ stamp, it would become necessary to affix other
stamps upon their transfer from tend to hand, with or all -
out endorsement, prior to their being acted upon ?
Mr. T. BARING understood that the Inland Revenue
had intimated that there was to be not only a change of 3d.
upon the dock warrant, but a further charge of 3d. upon
the weigh-note which represented the same property. Was
that the case ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, with
regard to the question which had been put to him by the
hon. member for Huntingdon, that he had not heard any-
thing on the subject of An intention to charge 3d. upon docu-
erienbi called weigh-notes. He would, if the hon. member
permitted him, ask for particular information as to the cir-
cumstances and statistics, before he assumed that the hon.
raembdr was correctly informed. But there were two obser-
vations which, perhaps, he might venture to make on the
subject. One was, that the Government had no authority
to construe the lan, ; and any opinion they might give ds to
the effect o( an Act of Parliament might possibly mislead, as
it could not be an authoritative opinion, and could have no
tafluence in a court of justice. If the intentions of the Go-
vernment were asked it might be their duty to give an
opinion. But with respect to the interpretation of the law,
that was neither a common, nor, in point of fact, a neces-
sary practice. In any case he would submitthat this ques-
tion of interpretation of necessity fell into the hands of the
revenue department; and he thought it was the most con-
venient course in all cases that the interpretation should in
the first instance be sought from them. With respect to
the question Of the stamp upon dock warrants, there clearly
could be no necessity for such a stamp upon their transfer
from hand to hand, either with or without an endorsement.
In any case that he was aware of—he spoke generally on
the subject, because he was not acquainted with the par-
ticulars of any circumstance that had arisen, but un-
doubtedly the intention with which the House of Com-
mons assented to a stamp upon dock warrants was that
a dock warrant should be sufficient for its purpose upon
having the stamp affixed. With respect to delivery
orders the case was not precisely analogous to that of
dock warrants ; but he would endeavour to give an
explanatioi In order to make a document liable to a stamp
as a delivery order, three conditions were required. The
first was that the goods ':must be in a warehouse or other
place, if on shore, where they were kept for order—he meant
that if the goods were ix a warehouse, or were not kept for
hire, there was no question of a delivery order. The second
was that the stamp only operated upon the delivery order
in the case of there being both a transfer and a delivery.
Whenever there was a transfer of property, accompanied
with what in law constituted a delivery, then there was a
liability to a stamp. He apprehended that it was a possible
case that the same delivery order should be so used as to
require both transfer and delivery by endorsement. In that
case undoubtedly it would become liable, as he believed,
under the terms of and in conformity with the act to a
' second stamp. But that was not the case, he thought, to
which the hon. gentleman referred; and he confessed that
he was misled by the question of the hon. gentleman, be-
cause he seemed to imply that in ordinary cases it had been
the intention of the Government to exact a stamp duty upon
every successive endorsement of a delivery order. Now
there was no such intention, and he was not aware that the
Government had taken any step whatever in that direc-
tion. If the goods represented by delivery order were
transferred by endorsement without what constituted de-
livery in law first taking place there would be no neces-
sity for a second stamp. As to the case of endorsement to
which the hon. gentleman had referred, and a charge of
another stamp, he could only say it had no sanction from
any officer of the Government, and if it had occurred it
could only have been through gross error.
After a few words from Mr. CAVE, the motion for the
adjournment of the house till Monday was carried.
CHARITY TRUSTERS.

Mr. MELLOR obtained leave to bring in a bill to remove
doubts as to the eligibility of certain persons to be trustees
of certain charities.
SAVOY AND NICE.

Mr. P. HENNESSY, who had given notice of a motion
in the following terms :—" That it appears to this house,
from the papers which have been placed before Parliament
by command of her Majesty, that the French Government
was ready to submit the question of the annexation of
Savoy and the arrondissement of Nice to France to a con-
gress of all the great Powers of Europe, provided that her
Majesty's Government would agree to have the question of
the annexation of the states of Central Italy, namely, Tus-
cany, Parma, Modena, and the Roman Leg,ations, also sub-
mitted to a congress of all the great Powers ; and that this
house regrets that those territorial additions to France and
Sardinia have been arranged without the convocation of
such a congress"—said that he should not proceed with the
motion that evening; but he begged to give notice that he
should bring it forward upon an early supply night.
ROYAL PROCLAMATION (PIETY, VIRTUE, &c.)
Mr. L. KING moved that an humble addr- ss be presented
to her Majesty, praying that she would be graciously pleased
to cause the royal proclamation for the encouragement of
piety and virtue, and for the preventing and punishing of
vice, profaneness, and immorality, issued at the commence-
ment of her Majesty's reign, to be revised, or to authorise
the discontinuance of reading the same at assizes and quar-
ter sessions, and in churches and chapels. He said that
this proclamation was read at the opening of every assizcs
and quarter sessions, and was also ordered to be read in
all parish churches four times in the year. It was ex-
tremely ill worded, and during the time when it was being
read persons of all sorts, witnesses and jui /men, were kept
waiting, to their extreme inconvenience. But although ma-
gistrates and judges obeyed the order, there was a class of
personseverbeen
who did not obey it—he meant the clergy. It had
n
church eenhisgoopdrofeolratmunateiola w
or his bad
read.ba Thefortuned clergy,
tobe in a
when thishe
thought, were extremely wise in not doing this ; they had
QOM MOW Qi Acittu3 their purepti9ll4 to pioty