The Sun.
London, England, 1859-03-16 00:00:00

THIRD EDITION.

SUS OFFICE, Seven o' Clock.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(This DAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at twelve o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Findhorn Railway Bill was read a third time and
passed. The following bills were considered and ordered
for third reading :—East Suffolk Railway, Lands Improve-
ment Company, Weymouth and Melcombe Regis Markets
and Pier, the Salford Borough (No. 2), and the'Ecton and
Welton Exchange Bills, were read a second time and
ordered to be committed.

PETITIONS.
Several petitions were presented praying for the esta-
blishment of Intermediate Schools between the Upper and
Lower Schools in Ireland; for the separation of certain
Poor-law Unions; from a Chamber of Commerce,
in favour of Lord John Russell's Bankruptcy and
Insolvency Bill, by Lord John Russell; from various places
to the same effect, for the adoption of Vote by Ballot and
Extension of the Suffrage ; against the Government Reform
Bill ; for the repeal of the hop duty, &c., &c.
TRAMWAYS (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion for the house going into committee on
this bill,
Sir ROBERT FERGUSON said that he wished the
bill to go through committee pro forma and be reprinted.
The bill was accordingly committed pro forma and the
house resumed.

- -------
BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. BAINES said that the strongest feeling prevailed
in the district which he represented in favour of the
bill, which he believed, with some alterations that might
be made in committee, would remedy the evils which were
admitted to exist, and which were the ground of complaint
from one end of the country to the other. From the state-
ment of one of the Commissioners in Bankruptcy, it ap-
peared that there was a waste of no less than 50 per cent.
of the assets of the bankrupt. There was also a strong
feeling in favour of abolishing the difference between bank-
rupts and insolvents, and the complications of the present
law, which this bill would effect. The bill proposed to
do away with no less than 20 acts of Parliament on
the subject, and consolidate into ono act of Parliament the
whole statute law. The measure further proposed to faci •
litate voluntary arrangements which were most difficult at
present, and also to reduce the expenses attendant on bank-
ruptcy and insolvency proceedings.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL concurred in a consi-
derable degree with the remarks of the hon. member. With
regard to the principle of the bill, he thought there was no
doubt they would receive the sanction of the house. With
regard to some points there was much difference of opinion,
and he suggested that after the second reading of the bill it
should not be proceeded with further until the bill in the
House of Lords came down to this house, and then both
measures would be before hon. members.
Mr. VANCE approved of the bill generally, and parti-
cularly that part of it which related to dealing with the
effects of a deceased bankrupt ; but he objected to the pre •
ference given to friendly societies over other creditors. He
was also opposed to some other parts of the bill.
Mr. J. D. FITZGERALD agreed with the leading
principle of the bill, and particularly with the provision
which proposed to terminate the difference between bank-
rupts
and insolvents, and to do away with that nuisance—
the Insolvent Court as separated from the Bankrupt Court.
Mr. W. CRAWFORD said that a large and influential
meeting had been held in the City of London on this
subject, and a committee was appointed to investigate the
merits of the bill of the Lord Chancellor and that of Lord
John Russell. That committee comprised a number of
those engaged in trade, and they came to the resolution
that the former ought to be rejected, and the latter adopted,
as being a great benefit to the commercial community.
Mr. COWAN approved of the bill, and expressed a hope
that a provision would be introduced by the noble lord
(Lord J. Russell) to prevent fraudulent debtors flying
from their creditors and evading their just claims by becom-
ing nominally traders in Scotland, and availing themselves
of the Scotch laws.
Mr. MOFFATT approved of some portions of the bill,
but objected to others, and considered that it should be
referred to a select committee.

Mr. AKROYD supported the bill, and considered the
present bankrupt law was quite inoperative. He was
anxious, however, to see some provision made by which an
examination might take.place Into the character of a bank-
rupt who was not able to pay the whole of his debts. He
thought such provisions were necessary to protect the com-
mercial community against those who engaged in gambling

in trade.
Mr. ITEADLAM and Mr. CROSSLEY supported the bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he was happy to perceive that
the bill was so favourably received by the house, and he
had no objection to adopt the suggestion of the Attorney-
General, by not proceedinn, further with the bill after its
present stage until the other bill was before the house.' He
would almost despair of success if the bill were referred to
a select committee, and he thought, considering the consti-
tution of, the house and the assistance they would receive
from the learned Attorney-General, that they were quite
competent to decide on a bill of this description. There was
no political principle involved in the measure, and they must
admit that it was of great importance to a commercial coun-
try like this, where, he was sorry to say, gambling existed
to a large extent, that the principle of the bankruptcy laws
should be settled.
The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed this day fortnight.
REGISTRATION OF COUNTY VOTERS (SCOT-
LAND) BILL.
Sir E. COLBROOKE moved the second reading of this bill.
The LORD ADVOCATE said that as the bill could be
fully considered in committee, the Government would not
oppose the second reading. If the Government Reform
Bill passed the second reading, it was proposed to bring in
the Scotch Reform Bill before Easter.

ELECTIONS, &c., BILL.
On the motion of Mr. COLLINS, this bill was read a
second time, and ordered to be committed pro forma to-
morrow.
LUNATIC POOR (IRELAND) BILL.

On the motion for going into committee'on this bill,
Colonel GREVILLE moved that the house resolve
itself into such committee this day six months. He
strongly objected to the bill, which had widely de-
parted from the recommendations of the committee
on this subject. He strongly objected to the
bill, as introducing the principle of taxation without repre-
sentation, and to different other provisions.
Lord NAAS deprecated the opposition given to the bill at
this stage, when its principle was discussed on the second
reading. He contended that the bill carried out the spirit,
and, in the important points, the letter, of the report of
the committee. He defended the composition of the com-
mittee, which could not be accused of any partiality towards
the political party of which he was a member. The prin-
ciple of the bill was to vest the appointments in the grand
jury, who he considered were the best fitted to exercise this
duty. The Government had adopted the recommendation
of the committee as to the propriety of removing lunatics
from gaols and workhouses to lunatic asylums, where they
would receive proper medical treatment. To show the
necessity for making additional provision for the poor on
this subject, ho would mention that no less than 3,500
lunatic poor in Ireland were without proper accommoda-
tion. It was to be hoped that these asylums would re-
ceive, in addition to paupers, persons who could contribute
something towards their support, but could not avail them-
selves of private lunatic asylums, which in Ireland were
very costly. In fact, with the exception of the appoint-
ment of a central body, they had carried out the recom-
mendations of the commission. He quoted the authority
of the report in question to show that there was the greatest
necessity for the amendment of lunatic asylums in Ireland.
The instructions of the privy council were systematically
disregarded, and the management of these institutions was
at variance with that adopted in the modern management
of such asylums. It appeared that there were 530 gover-
nors of lunatic asylums in Ireland, of whom only 276 last
year attended, and the fact was that these institutions were
generally managed by two or three persons residing on the
spot.
Mr. J. D. FITZGERALD said that the motion of the
gallant member would throw out the bill, and as he con-
sidered they were called on to legislate on the subject he
would suggest to him to withdraw it, and he (Mr. Fitz-
gerald) would bring forward the motion which stood on the
paper in his name. He strongly objected to different pro..
visions of the bill, and in the first instance to the power it
proposed to confer on the Lord Lieutenant, the power of
erecting lunatic asylums without even consulting the grand
juries. He contended the principle involved in that provi-
sion would not be tolerated in this country, and he strongly
recommended the formation of a 'central board to have
a controlling power in reference to this matter.
He considered that a select committee would be the most
proper body to refer the bill to, instead of submitting the
details to a committee of the whole house, who could not
carry out the necessary alterations with the same efficiency.
Colonel GREVILLE said he would consent to the
withdrawal of his moticn.
The motion was-accordingly withdrawn.
Mr. FITZGERALD then moved that the bill be referred
to a select committee ; that it be an instruction to the com-
mittee that they have power to make provision that the
costs, charges, and expenses of providing for and maintain-
ing the lunatic poor in Ireland shall be raised by a rate or
rates to be made, assessed, and levied in the same manner
as the rates for the relief of the destitute poor under the
Irish Poor Relief Acts.
Mr. BRADY supported the amendment. He did not
wish to throw the bill out, but
ato improve it so as to ren-
der it efficient in dealing with question of such vast im-
portance.
Sir W. SOMERVILE also supported the amendment.
Col. FRENCH trusted the noble lord (Lord Naas)
would agree to the course suggested in the amendment.
Mr. OSBORNE considered the bill was so defective that
he did not think could be' ever made a good measure.
He strongly objected to the power conferred by the bill on
grand jurors, who were a fugitive body, and were elected
by the high sheriff, himself a fugitive official. Besides, there
was no security that the whole grand jury system might not
be abolished, and then they would have to confer the power
in question tonter body. He urF9d on
fort
noble lord
(Lord Naas) accede. to the proposition for referring the
bill to a select committee.
Mr. GREGORY advocated the bill being referred to a
select committee.
Lord NAAS said the hon. member for Ennis misrepre-
sented one provision of the bill, namely, giving an absolute
power to the executive to erect lunatic asylums without the
authority of grand juries. That was the state of the
law at !present; but he proposed that grand juries
should have the power to appear before the lord-
lieutenant to show ground a,,ainst the erection of
lunatic asylum in their locality. He would accede to the
wish of the Irish members, and consent to the bill being re-
ferred to a select committee. but ho trusted that legislation
on the subject this session would not be shelved.
After some further discussion,
Mr. J. D. FITZGERALD said that he would not move
the instruction to the committee, as he understood it would
be informal to do so.
After a few words from Mr. M'EvoY and Lord C.
HAMILTON, the motion for referring the bill to a select
committee was agreed to.
OATHS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
On the motion for going into committee on this bill,
Mr. S. ESTCOURT said he considered that there should
be some explanation given by the hon. member who intro-
duced the -bill. lie supposed that the object of the hon.
member was to restore the declaration of abjuration taken
by Quakers, which was affected by the act of the house
last session.
Mr. BOUVERIE said the object of the bill was y simpl
to restore Quakers, in regard to the declaration they were
to make, to the same position they were in prior to the act
alluded to.
Der,BENTINCK could not tee how Quakers could