The Sun.
London, England, 1858-07-02 00:00:00

Lord DUNGANNON opposed the second reading of
the bill. The frequent return of Baron Rothschild Nay
no argument for his admi,sion, seeing that those who
returned him well knew that be could not be admitted.

The Earl of CARDIGAN said that although he had
been a consistent supporter of the present Government
for upwards of 38 yearn, he for one could not c.insent to
stultify every vote in favour of the bill. He admitted
their lordships wire placed in a very awkward and un-
p!easant position, but he could not see any reason why
there *mould be any change among them with regard to
this subject. He should give a decided vote in favour
of the noble lord's amendment.
Their lordships then divided. The numbers were—
Content—Present
Proxies
—143

Non-contents—Present
Proxies
—97

315jority
The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
be committed on Monday nr

MUNICIPAL FRANCHISE BILL.

On the motion of Lord ABINGER, this bill, with
amendments, was read a third time and passed.

OATHS BILL.

On the order that the report of reasons to be offared to
the Commons for the Lords insisting on their amend-
ments be taken into clnsidention,
Lord CAMPBELL suggested that the report should
be taken into consideration that day six months, with
the view of a bill being introduced next session f;r the
modification of the oaths at pre6ent in force.
The Earl of DERBY could not assent to the proposal
of the noble and learned lord. In point of fact, both
houses of Parliament were agreed, their only difference
being with regard to the introduction of Jaws into Par-
liament—a difficulty which was now in a fair course of
removal by the measure that had been carried that night.
He thought both bills should be sect down to the other
house together, and with that view he would !propose
the consideration of the report being postponed until
Tuesday next.
After a short conversation, in which Earls Granville
and Stanhope and Lord Redesdale took part, this course
was ultimately agreed to. _ _ _

The Public Gr3ande and Playgrounds, the County
Courts District, the Durham County Palatine Jurisdic-
tion, and the Stanhope and Vialsingham Rectories Bills
were read a second time.

The Ceuuty Management Bill pasted trough com-
mittee.

Their lordships adjourned at a quarter past 9 o'clock.

ROUSE OF CO M LIONS—YEgTERDAY.
EDUCATION (IRELAND).
Lord NAAS (for Mr. H. Herbert) moved for copie4
of report of the committee of the National Board of
Education in Ireland, appointed on the thh eay of
September, 1857, to inquire into the conduct of Mr. J.
W. Kavanagh, bead in,pector of national 5choo.1;; of ap-
pendices t the foregoing report, marked A, B, C, D,
E, F, G, H; of extracts from the minutes of the pro-
ceedings of the 27ch day of November, 1857, with re-
spect to the report f the committee appointed to in-
quire into the conduct of Mr. J. W. Kavanagh, head-
inspector of national schools; and, statement of
further proceedings connected with Mr. J. W. Ka-
vanavb, subsequent to the order of tho board, dated
the 27th Nov., 1857, depressing him Irons the rank of
head inspector to that of district inspector of the first
class.

TRINITY COLLEGE,•DUBLIN.
Mr. FAGAN a-ked the Chief Secretary for Irelane,
whether since the visitation lately held at Trinity Col-
lege, Dublin, a Queen's letter has been issu',:d by the
Government to the col'ege board, carrying out certain
reforms i❑ Trinity pursulnce of the recom-
mendations of the Royai Commissioners ; and whether
he has any objecti.-m to state to the house the nature of
the proposed reforms ?

Lord NAAS said that many communications had
lately taken place bet peen her Mhjesty's Government,
and the :tuthcrities of Trinity Culiege, arid communica•
tions had also passed between the provost and senior
fellows and the junior I,llows ~f the college, awl he was
happy to say that a scheme bad been agreed upon be-
tween the junior and senior fellows, by means of which
coneideraW.e improvements were to be effected in the
institution--changes of a in-,st important character,
which would aft', ct the educational, adnoinMrativo, and
financial condition of the college. He was also informed
that a draft of a Qieen's letter would be forthwith sub-
mitted to the Government, and he hoped from the course
of proceedings that hal been taken that there Wilo4 every
prospect of a most fortunate result being obtained, and
he believed that impr::vernent would be effected in Tri-
nity College, Dubin, which would r:nuove many difficul-
ties and unfortunate differences which had lately occurred,
and which would in a very great degree tend to the gene-
ral efficiency or the institution. (11,3 r, hear.)
Mr. FAGAN esid the answer of the noble lord was so
se.tisfactGry that he should not press the motion of which
be had given notice on a former day.

THE OFFICERS AT LTICKNOW.
Mr. KII`.NAIRD asked the Secretary of State for
War how soon the officers who composed the garrison of
Lucknow will be gazs:tod to their brevet rank ; and how
soon the medals promised for the patient endurance
and bravery of that heroic band, as well as to the gallant
captors of Delhi, will be issued ?
Gen. PEEL said that the officers who composed the
garrison of Luuknow were gazstted to their brevent rank
on the 24th March last, comprising the major and cap-
tains of the 32d Regiment. Since then the seven lieute-
nants had been promoted to companies. In answer to
the second question, he bad to say that her 'Majesty had
approved of the medals, and that they hzd been forwarded
to the President cf the Board of Control prior to their
distribution.

Mr. KINNAIRD inquired whether the Company's
officers would be included ?
Gen. PEEL said he had forwarded to her Mhjesty
every recommendation that had been received if um the
Company.

I - THE WARRANTS OF 1854.
l Lord A. V. TEMPEST asked Mr. Sidney Herbert
I whether it was a fact that the commissioners appointed
to inquire into the operation of the warrants of 1854
have declined to receive verbal evidence ; and whether it
was the case that no minutes are made of the proceed-
ings of the cornmi,sion, or the opinions of the iudividual
members of that commission ; whether, should the above
ho the case, he had any objections to state the reasons that
'had influenced the commission to adopt such a course ?
Mr. S. HEIZBER.T said he bad no objection to answer
the question. It was perfectly true that the commission
did not think it rgbt to take oral evidence. Many mat-
ters referred to %ere only matters of opinion, not affect,
and they did not think it necessary to receive evidence
upon them. Another reason was that many of the ques-
tions affected not only the warrants of 1854, but fresh
interests which were rising up every day. Commissions,
es the noble lord knew perfectly well, differed very
materially from committees. No record was taken in
commissions as to differences cf opinion amongst the
members, but those members who dissented from the
report could put in a report of their own, as was done by
the right hon. gentleman the member for Coventry (Mr.
Ellice) on the subject of the purchaee of comrniAsione, and
in another in which he (Ur. Herbert) presided. On both
those occasions objeccions were put in the way he had
mentioned. He believed the report from the commission
would be iu the hands of the Secretary of State early
next.week..

..•
The amendment was negatived without a division, and
the clause wo4 agreed to.
On clause 8, providing for the appointment of the
first members of the Council,

Mr. V, SMITH asked whether the words "or have
been theretoflre snob directors " were intended to give
the Court of Directors poser to choose not only from
existinz directory, but also from those who, having filled
that office, had rotirzd ?

Lord SiA7NLB7I7;;id that the wards were intended
! to give that power, but he apprehendel that the election
would take place principally from the existing body,
Mr. V. SMITH said that this would throw upin the
directors another invidious task, and therefore he moved
that these words should be omitted.
The committee divided, when the numbers were—
For the amendment
Agaie..3
Maj,,nty
Sir J. GRAHAM remarked that he was censured
the other evening for raising a discussion upon the
unlimited -tran,f,.r of power to the Minister of the
Crown, under clause 3, with regard to the expenditure
of the Indian revenue both at home and in India, and
with regard also to the distribution cf patronage. Hews
glad to say, however, that i i at disms,ion bad been pro-
ductive of great advantages. The PreNident of the Board
of Control had ascertained the views cf many treTnbers
in different parts of the house, and the consequence

Lord V. TENIPEST inquired whether the course
adopted by this commission was the same as had been
taken by commissions in wLich theright hon. gentleman
had acted?
Mr. HERBERT replied that it was exactly the same
in every respect.
Col. NORTH inquired whether the evidence the nom-

.
ported religious toleration. The time had now arrived ImiOsion did stake would be published, or any of the let-
when the question must be settled. It was not to be i tors they received bearing on the subject would be
pectedt he House of Commons would longer submit.too appended to the report I
the rejection of measures of this kind, and in order to Mr. SoIIERBERT said the report would be in the
prevent a collision between the two houses he hoped the hands of the Secretary of State next week, and no doubt
bill would pass. The noble duke, who spoke with his he would deal with it in a judicious manner. The appen•
back towards the gallery, was understood to review at i dix to the report would contain all the information
some length the attempts at legislation for the admission which the commissioners thought necessary to justify
of Jews to Parliament for upwards of 10 years past, and the conclusion at which they had arrived.
said the Jews were so small a race that there would LIEUTENANT SALKELD.
,
never (if the measure passed) be more than three Jes ts. Mr. KER SEYMER asked the Secretary of State
at one time members of the other house. (Laughtef.) for War for an explanation of the circumstances under
He thought the fear of uuchristianisiog Parliament was which the Victoria Cross was withheld from the late
without foundation, for he did not believe any Jew Lieut. Salkeld ?
would be returned to Parliament except for a metropo- General PEEL expressed his regret that the hon.
litan borough. gentleman had not communicated with him before put-
The Duke of RUTLAND was opposed to the bill. ting his questi In on the paper. It had never been con-
No new facts had been stated, no new principles bad templated to withhold from Lieut. Salkeld the Victoria
been enunciated, nor had any new arguments been urged Cross. So far from that being the case, he and others
sufficient to induce him to change his opinion. He called were recommended for the honour by Sir Archdale
upon their lordships to reject the bill. Wilson, and their names were duly gazetted. Unfortu-
Lord REDESDALE opposed the bill, and should nately, they never lived to receive them. They had ap-
support the amendment. peered in the Gazette, and if they had survived, her Ma-
Lord BROUGHAM enterer.' on a defence of the jesty would have approved the recommendation, and
principle of Lord Lucan's bill, and said that circum- the crosses would have been presented to them. They
stances had lately arisen which had given a different were now being prepared for presentation to their rela-
complexion to the question. It had recently come to tives. (Hear, hear.)
the knowledge of both Houses of Parliament that a
BEDDING AND CLOTHING FOR TROOPS TO
member of the Jewish religion might perform nine-tenths
INDIA.
of his duties in Parliament without taking the oaths,
Mr. ALCOCK asked the Secretary of State for War,
and he saw no reason why he should not be allowed to
w
perform the remaining tenth. If he (Lord Brougham) whether he had made any fresh arrangements for the
gratuitous supply of bedding and clothing, adapted to
the climate, to her Majesty a troopsin India ?
understood the principle of the bill it meant this, that ,
if the house should be of opinion generally that a person i
Gen. PEEL said that with regard to any gratuitous
of the Jewish religion could not take the oath of abjure-
supply of bedding it was vested in the East India Com-
tion " on the true faith of a Christian," the house might
pany. He had made application to Sir Colin Campbell
thereupon make a general resolution so as to remove the
objections which would be fatal in the case of a Jew. to get gratuitous supplies of clothing for the troops, and
(Hear, hear.) There was, however, one material cir-
he was endeavouring to bring about that the troops
cumetance which in his opinion should induce their should have reduced sea-kite.
lordships to alter their course, and which should put an THE SLAVE TRADE.
end to all interference and all doubt. It had now been Mr. HUTT inquired when the slave trade papers of
the ear would be laid upon the table ?
Mr.y W. S. FITZGERA.LD said he should be pre-
duties of a member of either House of Parliament with• ascertained that by the law and constitution of Parlia
went any person might perform nine parts in ten of the
pared to give an answer to the question to-morrow.
out taking any oath, or undergoing any formality what COMMISSION ON LIGHTHOUSES.
-
ever. He held that there were Christians who sat daily i
Lord C. PAGET inquired when the royal eammission
Mr. in Parliament who differed as entirely from what was
to inquire into lighthouses would be appointed ?
the teaching of the Church in all important matters of HENLEY said there was no intention to delay
religion as the Jews did. . theissuing of this commission. The delay had arisen
The Bishop of OXFORD said he could not alter his simply insonsequence of the pressure of public business
vot Men who rejected the Saviour must in all things at this period of the session, when it was impossible to
-.
and thoughts differ from Christians, and should not be
give attention to the formation of the commission, and
trusted to make laws for them. He had advocated the
theinstructions under which it was to act. There should
be no unnecessary delay in the appointment of the coin-
admission of Roman Catholics to Parliament, but could
not admit the Jews. Lord Brougham's argument went mission.
not merely to let in the Jews without oaths, but all men
without oaths. What had happened to induce so general
a change of views I—nothing. Nor could it be said that
the wish of the people was with this bill. In this in-
stance, the House of Commons notoriously did not repre-
sent the people. The people were apathetic on the point.
How could they legislate hereafter for the Church in
Parliament ? The Jew once admitted, what could keep
out the Ma.hommedan, the Hindoo ?

LONDON CORPORATION BILL.
Mr. LABOUCHERE asked the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer what were the intentions of the Government in
rela;ion to the bill for the regulation of the Corporation
of tho City of London ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer
had statel the other night tbat he did not think the Go-
vernment would be able to go on with it during the pre-
sent session. It would be :convenient if the right hon.
gentleman would state whether or not he intended to
abandon it. (Hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
would take the earlie,t opportunity the state of public
basinese, would allow, to state generally what were the
intentions of the Government with regard to measures
before the house. R-rbaps, therefore, the hon. gentleman
would not press him upon that point at present.
CHELSEA BRIDGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
Sir J. SHELLEY said that this bill had been long on
the paper, and ho t,hould be glad to know what was to
be done wit:i
Lord J. MANNERS said that as a debate of some
length had taken place on a previous evening be thought
that when the order came on the division might be taken
at once.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. BILL.
The house then went into committee on this bill.
On dawn, 7.
Mr. GLADSTONE rose, in conformity with the
intention Lettad expressed the other evening, to pro-
pose ae ito amendment the addition, et the end of
the 20th line in this chose, of these words :—" And
it shall consist cf the following members." The
object of his amendment was that the first mem-
bers of the Indian Council should be named in the
act of parliament. Ile did not think any private mem-
ber of the house ought to assume the responsibility of
submitting the names of the persons to be entrusted
with the-e functions. Their selection would devolve
upon the Government, who should subject their choice
to the review of Parliament, and if the names so recom-
mended were ultimately accepted the nomination of the
new council would have all the weight and authority
which would be derived from its having been sanctioned
by the judgment of both house,. By the act of 1853 it
was provided that the number of the directors of the
Ease India Company should be reduced, and the task of
making that reduction was imposed upon the then ex-
isting Court of Directors itself, and the directors were
accordingly obliged to exclude several members of the'r
own body. It was understood that this had been found
by the Court of Directors to be an extremely painful
and invidious duty; and it was obvious that ohjections
of feeling must attach to such a mode of proceeding.
His great object, however, in making this motion was,
that the Indian council should be clothed with the
greatest possible amount of moral weight and influence
consistent with maintaining intact the responsibility of
the Secretary of State. This end, he thought, would
be best attained by naming the original members of the
council in the bill. It had been the practice of Parlia-
ment to follow this course when it was constituting
bodies which were to be invested with subordinate func•
tions of government of an arduous nature ; and the more
onerous the duties to .be discharged, the more weight
would be given to those who were intrusted with them if
their appointment received the express approval of Par.
liament. The commissioners chosen to carry out the re-
form of the two universities were specifically named in the
act of parliament relating to that subject, and the same
remark applied to the case of the Otarity Cotnneis,doners.
Moreover, when Mr. Fox introduced hie lodic Bill, he
proposed to divide the Government of India into two
departments, one wf which was confided to a superior
commission composed of seven members, and the other
to an aei.,:tant-commis.sion consisting of nine members,
and the names of both sets of commissioners were sub-
mitted to Parliament. True, that bill was rejected, but
its rejection turned upon entirely different considerations.
Upon the grounds of precedent applicable by just ana-
io4y to this case, and also upon the grounds of reason,
it was therefore desirable that the committee should add
whatever it could in the way of mined weight and influ-
ence to those who wore to perform the difficult task of
supporting and advising the Secretary of State at this
critical juncture in administering the government cf
India. His proposal would, therefore, give the new
neatheil the benefit of a good start, viithaut in any de-
gree fettering the discretion or impairing the responsi-
bility of the Indian Minister. The right hon, gentleman
concluded by moving his amend vent,
Lord STANLEY thought it would not be cenvenien t
to adopt the proposition of the right hon. gentleman,
which would do awey entirely with the principle ot elec-
ting a part of the Council by the members cf the present
Court of Directors from among themselves, mine would
place in the hands cf the Government, eubject to the
sanction of Parliameet, the nomination of the whole,
No-:, it was the object of the Goverornent not to make
any nee lees c,:anges, but to follow as f,r as they could
the analogy of that which aetualv existed. They had
tound a Council cemp)sed par ly of nominees and partly
of mem Oen elected by the C Jett of Proprietors ; and they
Lad worked upon that nsa basis. They proposed teincri ase
the number of nominees and to reduce the number of
elected members, so as to bring them to nearly equal pro.
portion,. But in reducing tale elected members of the Exist-
ing Council they preferred to leave in the hands of the
body the choice of those who should be members of the
new Council. Is was said that this course was proposed
in 1853 and very reluctantly adopted. The change-
made in 1853 were ceria,nly reluctantly effected, but
upon much larger and more general grounds, by the
then existing Court of Directors. After having been in
t-equent comnennicatiori with those who represented the
Court of Directors, he had not heard anything which in-
duced him to believe that, if called upon to p-rforrn this
public duty, they would shrink front its discharge on
account of private feeling. The proceeding on which
they were invited to enter a ae the less invidious because,
as only one-third or one-fourth of their whole number
would be chosen, exclusion would be the rule, and there
could not therefore be the same expectation on the part
of each member that be would be one of those chosen as
there would be if the majority were to he elected, and
only a few left out. One great reason f leaving the
choice in their hands was, having acted together, they
would be better acquainted with each other's capacities
for the transaction of business than the Government
could be. The bill also contained a provision that the
members of this ceuncil should not be capable of sitting
in Parliament, and the duty of the directors would there-
fore be less ievidioes than it would have been if they
had been called upon to exclude certain members from a
body which was otherwise to remain the same. The
Objection to inserting the names in the bill was, the
adoption of such a course would seriously retard the pro-
gress of the measure. The Government could not none-
nate these memb:re without some time for consideration,
and a delay of even a week or 10 dap] would at this
period of the H:44,1011 be very inconvenient.
Sir E. PERRY supported the amendment. He did
not think that the mode of selection proposed in the ball
would lead to the appointment of the best seven mem•
berg of the Court of Directors, especially as it was re-
ported to be the intention of the court to select none of
its nominated members.