The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-03 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair schortly after 12 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills were considered and ordered fur
third reading :—Epping Railways (Dunmow Extension)
and Llanelly Railway and Dock Company.
The following bills were read a second time :—Caledo-
nian Railway (Branches to Lanark, dm), Caledonian Rail-
way (Lesmahagow Branches, &c.), Newry, Warrenpoint,
and Rostreyor Railway, and Portadown, Dungannon, and
Omagh Junction Railway.
PETITIONS.

Petitions were presented against the Poor-law Medical
Relief Bill ; against the reduction of the wine duties ;
against the Fire Insurance Bill, &c. &C.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE.

On the motion cf Mr. BRAND leave of absence for 10
days was granted to Colonel Biddulph on the ground of ill-
health.
AGGRAVATED ASSAULTS ACT AMENDMENT

BILL.
•
, Lord RAYNHAM, in moving the second reading of this
bill, said the question involved in this measure was one of
great importance. It was brought forward from a feeling
that the law was inadequate to meet the class of offences
with which it was proposed to deal, and it was a general
conviction that some amendment was demanded. He pro-
posed that for those offences magistrates should be enables
to inflict on the offender corporal punishment, and in the
event of a second conviction the infliction of that punish-
ment was to be rendered compulsory. He contended that
the substitution of that punishment for a lengthened ini-
prisonmentwould be a mercy to wives who suffered with their
children from the imprisonment of their husbands, on whose
exertions they were dependent for the actual means of
subsistence. He admitted, however, that in many cases
the imprisonment was desirable, for there were some of the
working class whose conduct was so brutal to their wives
and families, that their being confined for a particular pe-
nod was an unquestionable benefit. It was objected that
corporal punishment tended to render more brutal the party
on whom it was inflicted ; but, even admitting that
such were the case, it was not a principle of jurisprudence
to consider what might be the conduct of an offender after
punishment, but to impose such punishment as would de-
ter parties from the commission of crime. They per-
mitted the lash in the army and navy, and it was not shown
that the effect on soldiers and sailors was to make them.
worse than they were before they had been punished. He
did not see why they should be more tender in regard to the
backs of civilians than they were of those of th military
and navy. There was no innovation of the law, because
the power of inflicting corporal punishment was exercised
by magistrates for certain offences, and there was one party
who was sentenced to six months' imprisonment in Here,.
ford witk hard labour and to receive 36 lashes, though his
offence was only stealing a pair of boots and two umbrellas.
The noble lord having stated that he proposed to abolish
fines, expressed a hope that the Government would not
oppose the second reading of the bill. He contended that
the infliction of corporal punishment would have a powerful
moral effect in the neighbourhoods where the offenders re-
sided. The argument that corporal punishment should hot
be inflicted except through the medium of a jury was
puerile, for the intervention of a jury had reference to the
mode of trial in particular cases, and not to the punishment
awarded for the commission of an offence. He believed it
was admitted by all persons that the present law should be
amended, and he hoped that, even if his propositions were
not acceded to, the house would allow the bill to go into
committee, where it could be modified to meet the
views of honourable members. The noble lord read a
list of cases in which husbands had behaved with the
greatest brutality towards their wives and children, and
entered into details to show that the punishments inflicted
were totally inadequate to the character of the offences
committed. He considered that the measure was a mode-

rate one, and entitled to the favourable opinion of the
house.

Mr. CLIVE denied that the bill was a moderate measure.
It provided•that for the first offence there should be in•

flicted 12 months' imprisonment and 50 lashes, and for the
second offence 18 months' imprisonment and 150 lashes.
The reason why the present law was inoperative was owing
to the indisposition of wives to prosecute their husbands,
and, when the punishment was rendered severer, that in-
disposition would be increased. He was satisfied that
practically the bill would not work well, because
magistrates would be reluctant to inflict punishment of
that character. He was ready to take on himself the whole
responsibility of recommending the rejection of the bill,
which he proposed should be read a second time that day
six months.

Mr. E. JAMES seconded the amendment,
Mr. D. GRIFFITHS supported the bill. The law
at present might be considered logically sufficient to
meet assaults such as those contemplated in the
measure ; but they had to deal with such a brutalised
class that it was found inefficient in repressing social
offences. He deprecated the tenderness exhibited in
regard to the infliction of corporal punishment, as related
to adult civilian offenders, when it was resorted to in the
army and navy. He agreed in the suggestion of an hon.
member near him that in respect to persons convicted of this
class of offences corporal punishment should be inflicted in
as degrading a manner as possible, and after the mode
adopted towards school boys. (Laughter.) However, he
considered it would be desirable to refer it to a select com-
mittee.

Mr. WARNER approved of the principle of the bill as
to the necessity for the amendment of the law, and con-
demned the extent of sentiment favourable to criminals

which at present prevailed in this country. He agreed with
the hon. member who last addressed the house as to the
advisability of referring the bill to a committee.

Mr. DILLWYN supported the proposition for going
into committee, and strongly advocated the retention of
corporal punishment.

Mr. S.ESTCOURT opposed the bill as being imprac •
ticabl; and entrusting too great a power into the hands of
magistrates.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said there was no increase in
the offences in question, though no doubt cases
of this kind were reported more fully in the
newspapers, which arose from the increased interest with
which they were read by the public. He did not believe
that any increase in the severity of punishment would di-
minish offences, and would have the effect of increasing
the reluctance of wives to prosecute their husbands.
After a few remarks from Mr. Brady, Mr. Coningham,
Col. North, Mr, Walter, Col. Dickson, and Mr. Bonham-
Carter,
Mr. CLAY said ho would agree to a motion for an in-
quiry into the present law with a view to its amendment,
but he could not agree to this bill. Hon. members seemed
to assume that there were none but good women in tie
world, but unfortunately there were many very bad ones.
(Hear.) He was informed by a police magistrate in a dis-
trict that conferred on him great knowledge of the habits of
the lower classes, and he stated that since the frequency of
punishment for wife beating drunkenness had increased
among wives in the district, with whom it was a common
threat to their husbands to give them "a sixer."
Sir B. LYTTON and Alderman COTEIAND supported the
bill.

Lord RAYNHAM replied briefly, and the house divided.
The numbers were—

For th 9 second reading
Against
Majority —s4
The announcement was received with loud cheers by a
Large house.
The bill was accordingly read a second time. _ _

Some discussion arose-a; to whether the bill should be re-
ferred to a select committee, or debated clause by clause by
a committee of the whole house. It was ultimately ar-
ranged that the bill should be committed pro forma to-
morrow.

Sir M. PETO, one of the tellers, stated that there was
an error in the numbers, which should have been for the
second reading 109, instead of 139, which reduced the ma-
jority to 24.
The Malicious Injuries to Property Act Amendment Bill
was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on
Wednesday next.

The house went into committee on the Fisheries (Scot-
land) Bill.
Mr. BUCHANAN moved an omission in the first clause
abolishing. the right of proprietors to fish in preserved water.
Some discussion ensued, in the course of which
The LORD ADVOCATE said that some hon. members
did not understand the object of the clause, which was
merely to prevent persons adopting improper means, or
more properly poaching, to catch fish. It was most desir-
able to prevent fisheries being injured with lime, and he
proposed to introduce a clause at the end of the bill to pro-
tect the rights of proprietors.
With this understanding the amendment was not pressed.
Clauses 2 and 3 were agreed to.
On clause 4, which conferred power of arresting persons
suspected of intention to commit poaching, a short discus-
sion ensued, some hon. members considering that the
clause was too stringent.

The clause, with some amendments, was agreed to.
On clause 5,
Mr. BUCHANAN moved the omission of the words "or
any justice of peace," the object of which amendment was
to deprive justices of the peace of jurisdiction in cases of
poaching.
The house divided, and the numbers were—
For the clause l2B
Against it
Majority —B7
_

The clause was accordingly agreed to.
On clause 6, an amendment was moved making two wit-
nesses necessary in securing a summary conviction against
a person accused of poaching.
The remaining clauses were agreed to, and the bill was
reported.
The hone then resumed.

TENURE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LAND
(IRELAND) BILL.
On the
il,hbel motion !for postponement of the second reading
of this
a Mr.A
day siltAtinGgUflo thehchGlorvi es rhn mme
ono
it tboo
rappointwere
waiting most anxiously.
Rr
tEhiaspbpiella,lefodrtwo
Mr. CARDWELL said that ho had every desire to pro-
ceed with this bill without delay, but could not name an
earlier day than Tuesday the 15th, nor could he pledge
himself to bring it on that day.
LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. HENNESSY moved the second reading of this bill.
The hon. member entered into a brief review of the state
of Ireland, and said that his bill contained a clause giving
retrospective compensation for 20 years, which was the
period recommended by the present Lord Chancellor of
Ireland.

It being a quarter to rix o'clock, by the rules of the houso
the hon. member was interrupted in his address, and
The house adjourned.

STATE Op TRADE.—A reference to our usual re-
ports from the manufacturing districts, and elsewhere, will
serve to show that the trade of the past month has been
anything but satisfactory. In fact, complaining has been
all but universal, and the dispute among the money dealers
has tended not a little to aggravate the evil. No doubt the
stagnation of our home trade has been mainly caused by the
unsettled state of things as connected with the Anglo-
French Treaty, added to the ungenial state of the weather.
It is to be feared that the season is too far advanced for us
now fully to make up for the ground that has been so far
lost, but we must hope that, ere long, summer will burst
upon us with all its genial influence, and that the season
will yet prove a busy one, although somewhat nipped of its
usual length.—Lilwall's Mercantile Circular for May.
HEROIC CONDUCT AND ITS UNFORTUNATE RE-
SULTS.—CharIes M'lntyre. a Scottish farrier, was on Good
Friday walking through Kensington-gardens, and observed
a child fall into the Serpentine. He plunged into the
water, and acoomplished his object of rescuing the drown-
ing child, but thoughtlessly made his way home in dripping
clothes on the top of an omnibus. He caught cold, was
seized with erysipelas, and died at 11 o'clock on edes-
day night in Middlesex Hospital. He was much esteemed
by all who knew him.