The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-26 00:00:00

EDUCATION.

Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition on the subject
of education, and took occasion to , correct some mistakes
that had occurred in the course of his speech last night. The
noble and learned lord proceeded in complimentary terms
to comment on the conduct of the Emperor of Russia in the
endeavours he was making to emancipate and educate the
serfs in his empire.
The Bishop of OXFORD presented a petition praying
tie house not to sanction the bill for the abolition of church
rates.

SALE OF GAS BILL. •
Lord RE DESDALE moved the third reading of this
bill, the objects of which had been fully explained. The
noble lord said he had made certain amendments in the bill
—one was an extension of the time within which
inspectors were to be appointed. The bill originally
enacted that the inspectors should be appointed within three
months after the passing of the act, but he had thought it
expedient to alter the time to nine months. Another alte-
ration was that it was originally intended to have all meters
stamped within a year after the bill became law, but he now
thought it would be better to extend the time to 10 years, after
which it would become compulsory for all meters to bear
the stamp. Of course if parties were satisfied with
the performance of the meters there would be no compul-
sion to send them to be marked as correct. He also pro-
posed that as Liverpool was very well governed under a
local act to exempt it to a certain extent from the provisions
of the bill.

Lord KINNAI R.D thought there was great necessity for
some improvement with respect to the regulation of gas
meters. He could not agree in the propriety of
paying the inspectors created under the act from
the local rates. He hoped that, as the bill would be
very strenuously opposed in the other house, he would not
insist on pressing the third reading this session ; if he did
so, he should feel it his duty to move as an amendment
that it be read a third time this day three months.
After a short discussion, in which Lord Donoughmore,
the Lord Chancellor, and Lord Stanley of Alderley took
part,

Lard REDESDALE defended the bill, and thought the
wisest course to pursue was to read the bill a third time
in order that it might go down to the Commons, where it
would receive full investigation.
Lord EBURY trusted his noble friend would not press
his amendment.

Lord KINNAIRD said, as it appeared to be the wish of
the house that the bill should pass, in order that it might
go down to the other house, he would withdraw his amend-
ment.

The bill was then read a third time and passed.
[LEFT SITTING.]

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(THIS DAY.)

The SPEAKER took the chair shortly after twelve o'clock

PRIVATE BUSINESS

On the motion for the consideration of the Lords' amend-
ments to the Llangollen Railway Bill,
Mr. WHALLEY said that he had introduced bills into
Parliament with reference to this railway in order to pro-
tect his interest, the undertaking propoOng to traverse
a portion of his park. However, he deferred with submis-
sion to the wishes of the house, but as an important altera-
tion had been introduced in the Lords, by which powers
were given to the company to make a deviation which was
not necessary for the purposes of the railway, he con-
cluded by moving an addition to the clause to which he
alluded, which was to the effect that the company should
not be empowered to take more land than was originally
agreed to except by the consent of the Board of Trade.
After some discussion the house divided.
For the addition to the clause 69
Against
Majority _79
The Lords' amendments were then considered and agreed
to, and the bill was read a third time.

The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Eastbourne Water; Midlarld Great Western Railway of
Ireland (Sligo Extension); and Tottenham and Edmonton
Gas.

LONDON (CITY) GAS BILL,

On the motion for the 'consideration of this bill,

Colonel FRENCH moved that the London (City) Gas
Bill be re-committed to another committee, to be appointed
by the Committee of Selection, and that the committee
have leave to sit and proceed on Friday. He took objec-
tion to this bill because the company had contravened the
Act of Parliament of 1847, by which gas companies were
restricted to a dividend of 10 per cent., and any surplus pro-
fit was to be applied to the reduction of the price of gas
to consumers. The company had also, in violation of the
act of Parliament, raised their capital from £200,000 to
£300,000, and taken additional land.
Mr. BARROW said he was chairman of the committee
before whom this bill was investigated, and he defended
their conduct. It was considered by the members that
some irrelevant matter was brought forward with reference
to the financial part of the subject when they were hearing
evidence in regard to the sanitary point involved. They
decided that thy would not then deal with the former part
of the question, as there were numerous witnesses waiting
to be examined relative to the latter. and counsel then do-
cided on withdrawing the petition. In adopting that course,
he thought they acted wisely, for there was an over-
whelming mass of evidence adduced to show that, in a
sanitary point of view, there were no objections
to the works of the 'company being carried on without
alteration of their site. That evidence was comprised of
persons best qualified to give correct information, mainly
medical officers resident, the police and the Poor Law Board.
From their united testimony it appeared that the means
adopted by the company purified the refuse that accumu-
lated from the manufacture of gas. He believed if they
rejected the bill they would be doing an injury, not only
to the company, but to the public.
Mr. MASSEY was strongly opposed to the motion for
recommitting the bill.
Some further discussion ensued, in which Mr. Roebuck,
Colonel North, Mr. Williams, and other hon. members
took part.
Sir G. C. LEWIS considered that unless some extra-
ordinary grounds were shown they ought not to accede to
a motion like the present, and he did not think any such
grounds existed with regard to the committee before whom
this bill was tried. At the same time, he had considerable
doubt whether the committee had arrived at a correct con-
clusion.
After a few words from Mr. E. JAMES in support of the
committee,
The amendment was negatived without a division.
The bill was then considered, and ordered for third
reading.