The Sun.
London, England, 1866-04-12 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

MOUSE OF COMMONS—LAsT EVENING.
POSTMASTER-GENERAL BILL.
Mr. D. (.;:3IFFITIIS moved the second reading of this
bill, the object t.-f which was to remove the difficulty which
existed with respeo." to the Postmaster-General sitting in
the House of Commom:.•
The CHANCELLOR c,f the EXCHEQUER said he
understood the bill did not lay- down any rule with respect
to the Postmaster-General sitting in the House of Com-
mons, but only removed a certain difficulty which existed
with respect to that subject, and therefore he should
not offer any objection to the motion of the hon. gen-
tleman opposite.
The bill was then read a second time.
Earl Grosvenor and the Government.
A feeling of curiosity and surprise was created in the
houso at this point of the sitting in consequence of the
following little scene taking place :
Earl GROSVENOR (who, it will be recollected, is the
mover of the amendment to the Franchise Bill, which
threatens the existence of the Government) rose, evidently
labouring under some embarrassment, and said he wished
to know whether he might bo allowed to put a questien
on a subject of the greatest importance—
Mr. DODSON, the Deputy-Speaker, here interposed,
on the point of order, and the noble earl at once resumed his
seat, again asking, as he did so, whether he was not allowed
to put the question ?
Tho DEPUTY-SPEAKER, took no further notice of the
request of the noble Earl, but proceeded at once to call on
the clerk at the table to road the next order of the day,
when the noble earl immediately rose from his seat and
left the house.
The above trifling incident seemed to give rise to much
conversation amongst the sprinkling of members present
when the matter occurred, and rumour in a very short
time after was rife that the noble earl intended either to
withdraw or greatly modify his amendment had ho been
allowed to put his question.
VALUATION OF LANDS AND HERITAGES
SCOTLAND (BILL).
Mr. DUNLOP moved the second reading of this bill.
The LORD ADVOCATE, on the part of the Govern_
meat, objected to the motion, on the ground that the mea-
sure was no improvement on the law es it existed, whilst
he regarded it as a retrograde step in the way of progress.
After a short discussion the house divided, when there
appeared—
For the second reading 33
Against it BO
Majority • . —47
The bill was consequently lost.
CATTLE SHEDS IN BURGHS (SCOTLAND) BILL
This bill passed through committee.
INNS OF COURT BILL.
The motion for the second reading of this bill was
postponed.

VACCINATION BILL

On the motion for going into committee on this bill,

Mr. BRUCE explained the provisions of the bill, which
he said was to consolidate and amend the law with respect
to compulsory vaccination of all children within three
months after birth in England and Wales. The principal
causes that had led to the comparative failure of former
acts was the ill-regulated nature of the districts as at pre-
sent arranged. The bill would also give power to the
guardians to prosecute those persons who, after notice, re-
f used to have their children vaccinated.

Mr. HENLEY did not think the bill, as it at present
stood, would realise the expectations of the Government.
The great cause of failure of all former acts was, in his
opinion, that the parties upon whom devolved the duties
of public vaccinators were not properly paid. The pre-
sent bill did not remedy that evil, and therefore he had no
very great hope of its efficiency.
Sir R. PEEL thought there were many matters in the
bill which required reconsideration, one of which was the
clause that called upon the parent of the child to take it on
the seventh day after vaccination to the public vaccinator
in order that a supply of healthy lymph might be secured.
Then the remuneration of the gentlemen called upon to
carry the act into opeation required to be considered and
increased.

Mr. IL LEWIS objected to the bill, and moved that it
be referred to a select committee, where all its provisions
could be well and thoroughly considered.

Sir J. C. JERVOISE seconded the motion of the hon.
member for Marylebone.
Mr. HIBBERT had no objection to the bill being re-
ferred to a select committee, provided the commitee was pre-
cluded from taking evidence, because that would endanger
the passing of the act altogether during the present ses-
sion. He thought the best thing the Government could
do was to take the matter altogether out of the hands of
the guardians, and place it under the Privy Council, then
vaccination would be more efficiently performed than was
now the case under the present arrangements.
After a short discussion,

Mr. BRUCE expressed his willingness to adopt the
suggestion of the hon. member for Marylebone, and the
bill was therefore ordered to be referred to a select com-
m4tteo.