The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-28 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS—LONDON CITY GAS BILL.
Sir W. CUBITT having withdrawn his opposition to
the further progress of this bill, it was, after a few words
from Col. FRENCH, read a third time and passed.
The Pneumatic Despatch Company Bill was read a second
time and ordered to be committed.
SALMON FISHERY BILL.'
On clause 1 being proposed,
Mr. HOPWOOD suggested that as the bill contained
many important provisions, it ought to receive full consi-
deration, which would be impossible during the present
session. He therefore suggested that the bill should be
postponed.
Col. W. PATTEN concurred in the suggestion, and
added that it would be desirable that the provisions of the
measure should be considered by a select committee, with a
view to amend the laws relating,not only to the taking, but
to the sale of salmon out of season.
The suggestion was adopted, and the Chairman having
left the chair, the bill was dropped.
RAILWAY COMPANIES ARBITRATION BILL.
On the motion of Col. W. PATTPiN this bill went through
committee, and was reported withotif amendments.

... 2

IMPRISONMENT FOR SMALL DEBTS BILL.
The house having gone into committee on this bill.

Mr. COLLIER,Who had introduced the measure, ex.
plained that he did not seek to interfere with the existing
law relating to debtor and creditor, or with the jurisdiction
of county courts, as was supposed by the writers of certain
letters in the public journals; but his object was simply to
enact that no commitments should in future be made with-
out hearing, as was now the practice. At present there was
a difference of opinion among the county court judges on
the provisions of the existing statute, some of them holding
that they have power to commit a debtor to prison who does
not appear on a judgmnt summons, and without inquiry;
others entertain the opinion that they are bound to hear the
debtor before they commit him to prison. A return
moved for last year by the Attorney-General showed that
last year no less than 8,000 persons had been committed on
judgment summonses. It must be remembered that these
imprisonments did not discharge the debts, but was in-
tended as a punishment for not obeying the orders of the
court. In tome cases at Durham, for instance, the persons
so committed were treated as felons. A letter from tire

governor of Carlisle gaol showed him that he had received
into his custody two girls so committed, one for a debt of
£lBs. Bd., and the other for lls. 10d. The writer added
that he had one old man who had been committed seven

mes for a debt of £9, and had. been in custody at various

times for twelvemonths, a longer imprisonment than be
would have been sentenced to if he had stolen the money.
These were real cases of cruelty, and the object of this bill
was to remove the only stigma on county courts, and to
render them a popular source of the administration of
justice.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL was of opinion that
those county court judges who adopted the practice of com-
mitment without inquiry had put a wrong construction on
the act. This construction had been adopted by thirteen
or fourteen out of the iiixty county court judges, and there-
fore he thought the public was indebted to his hon. and
learned friend for having introduced this measure. The first
section of the bill had received the approbation of the ma•
jority of the county court judges ; but with regard to the
second clause of the bill they were of opinion that it would
tend to upset altogether the system of credit now in opera-
tion with the labouring classes, and would be productive
of much misery to that class in times when employment
was scarce, owing to the fluctuations in trade, and therefore
its enactment would be impolitic. This was set forth in
the report of the standing committee of the County Court
Judges, which had been formed at the instance of the late
Lord Chancellor (Lord Chelmsford), with a view to ex-
amine and inquire into the operation of the County Court
Act, and the provisions of the bill now under consideration.
The report was, worthy of consideration, and he trusted
would induce the house to be of opinion that it would be

impolitic to interfere with the law at present in force, with
respect to credit for small amounts. When the committee
came to the second clause he hoped these considerations
would not be lost sight of.
Mr. HENLEY observed that the commitment without
inquiry was in peenam, and in the nature of a criminal pro-
cedure. It never could be intended that a man for a small
debt should be committed time after time without inquiry.
He therefore supported the first clause, which would set at
rest this system which operated so cruelly upon the poorer
classes. There ought to be but one remand when fraud was
proved, as was the practice of the Insolvent Court, and not
commitments ad infinitum.
Mr. CLIVE said that his experience as a County Court
Judge had led him to believe that none but fraudulent
debtors were ever committed. He, however, concurred with
his hon. and learned friend the Solicitor-General, with re-
spect to the first clause of the bill, which he thought to be
unobjectionable. With respect to the second clause it was
not yet under consideration.

Mr. PAGET expressed his fears that an attempt to do a
great right would effect a serious evil upon the working
classes, by such an enactment as that which the second
clause would carry out. He should therefore move "that
the chairman do now leave the chair."

Mr. E. JAMES could not believe that the stability of
the system of credit would be endangered by the abolition
of imprisonment for debt. That fallacy had been exploded
by the committee which sat on the question of the abolition
of arrest on mesne process, and experience had shown that
credit had not been endangered by the abolition of arrest
for debt under £2O. He supported the bill, and trusted
that some limit would be put to the terms of imprisonment
ordered by County Court judges.
Major STEWART drew attention to the fact that in his
county the majority of county court commitments were for
debts incurred with hawkers who travelled the country,
and induced wives to take their wares unknown to then.
husbands. He knew many instances in which, for debts
incurred with these hawkers, young females, under 19 years
of age have been committed for several terms. He therefore
hoped that this bill would receive the sanction of the Legis.
lature.

Mr. AYRTON called upon the hen. member for Not-
tingham (Mr. Paget) to withdraw his amendment and to
allow the bill to proceed. The house could not better
occupy its time than by the consideration of this measure.
Mr. HODGKINSON objected to the change in the law
proposed by this bill, and supported the amendment moved
by the hon. member for Nottingham.
Mr. PAUL concurred in the views enunciated by the
hon. and learned gentleman the Under. Secretary for the
Home Department (Mr. Clive), and hoped the committee
would be allowed to proceed with the bill.
Sir G. C. LEWIS thought the committee was in a position
to proceed with this measure, and seemed to be disposed to
do so. He would, therefore, join in the suggestion that
the amendment ought to be withdrawn, and the committee
allowed to go on seriatum with the clauses o' the bill. He
denied that the system of imprisonment originated with the
present county-ccurt judges, but the practice had been im-
ported by some of the county-court judges who had been
judges of the old Courts of Request.
Mr. PAGET withdrew his amendment, and the claus e
was agreed to, as was also the preamble, and the bill was
ordered to be reported without amendments.
HIGH SHERIFFS' EXPENSES BILL.

On the question that this bill be now committed,
Mr. WISE moved as an amendment that " the house
resolved itself into committee on this bill on this day three
months." The object sought to be effected by this bill was
so trifling as not to be worth the paper on which the bill
was printed. It purported to diminish the expenses of the
sheriff, but it did not deal with those of the dinners, the
equipages, and the like, of these high functionaries, but
simply with the javelinmen and other minor expenses not
worthy of being the subject of legislation. The bill sought
to charge county rate with something like £lO,OOO per an-
num for the expenses of the shei ifs, who already received,
under a vote of this house, a similar sum for providing
lodgings for the judges and matters of that kind. He gave
the bill his decided opposition, and trusted the house would
be spared the trouble of going into committee with it.
Sir J. V. SHELLEY thought the bill ought not to be
postponed, as it might be disposed of in a very short space
of time. It would do away with the gingerbread parapher-
nalia of the javelinmen, who usually did not belong to the
soberest class of the community, and on this as well as
on other grounds he was prepared to support the bill.
Mr. DEEDES opposed the bill, which proposed changes
which ought not to be conceded without full deliberation.
This would be ensured by referring the subject to a select
committee.

Mr. HENLEY remarked that the bill proposed to sub
stitute the police for the javelinmen in keeping order in
court, but he doubted whether any of the Police Acts
gave the High Sheriff ally power or authority over the
police force, and therefore he should object to the bill, and
should support the amendment.
Major PARKER also opposed the bill, which would en-
tail upon counties the expense of an increased number of
police.

Sir G. C. LEWIS said that some objections had been
made to the bill to which he did not think it justly liable.
He did not think that these javelinmen or Sheriffs' re-
tinue were at all necessary in these peaceful times, and be
did not believe that any, addition to the county police would
be necessary for the preservation of order in court at the
assizes. On the whole, he was of opinion that the bill,
though crudely drawn up, was deservmg of consideration.
Mr. HUMBERSTON thought that the whole subject of
sheriffs' expenses should be considered by a select commit-
tee, and a bill brought in by and on the responsibility of
the Government.

Lord HENNIKER supported the bill, and urged the
house not longer to delay its progress.
Mr. HUNT also supported the bill, which went to estab-
lish a practice which had already been acted upon in the
county which he represented. The system worked well,
and it had been found that the police were more effective in
maintaining order in court than the county javelinmen
ever had been.
Mr. J. LOCKE thought that if the case was such as
stated by the late speaker, the passing of this bill was wholly
unnecessary. The magistracy could assist the change
without legislation.
Mr. E. JAMES held that the bill was necessary in order
to relieve the sheriff from liability to be fined by the judge
if he had not provided the retinue of a proper number of
javelinmen, as now required by the old law.
Mr. D. GRIFFITH briefly replied, amidst loud cries for
a division.
The house then divided, when the numbers were—
-12 1
For the motion
115
For the amendment
Majority —3
CORPORATIONS BILL.
The bmilluwNalscclopnsAecrently lost
The house then went into committee on this bill. Clause
1 was agreed to without any discussion. On clause 2 being
put,
Mr. S. ESTCOURT obected to it, and a division with-
out any debate took placj.
On the division the numbers were—
For the clause .............. 127
Against it..
gajority for the clause.. 2
The preamble having been agreed to, the house resumed,
and the billt owNasproeiredeoßwipthooßutAaTmieonxdrnent
On the order of the day for the second reading
Mr. of this
bill being
CreadVE proposed to postpone the.bill to Monday.
Sir J. V. SHELLEY ho dth
whether they really intended to proceed with the bill at all.
b e
Pe e Government would state
at hope, as the utviost ex-
Mr. E. JAMES joined in th
to the
citement prevailed on the subjectin
rithueKCni,ty with respect
After mea
afseur
few words
from
Sir
JAMES
Mr. G. CLIVE regretted the momentary absence of the
Home Secretary, but observed that he would be in his place
and be able to answer thee appeal made to the Government
before six o'clock arrived
The order of the day; was then postponed to Monday
next,

GREENWICH HOSPITAL.
On the motion for going into committee of supply, Sir C. NAPIER complained that no attention had been
Paid to the subject of the management of Greenwich Hag-.

pital to which for several successive years he had called the
attention of the house and of the Government, and there-
fore he should.persist in the motion, of which he had given
notice, by now moving, as an amendment, that " an humble
address be presented to -her Majesty, praying her. Majesty
to appoint a commission to inquire into the management of
Greenwich Hospital."
Mr. WHITBREAD opposed the motion on the ground-.
of the expense and the length of- time (six months) which
the inquiry would occupy. He trusted it would be left to
the Government, so recently come into office, to avail them,-
selves of the autumn recess to inquire into the revenues, the
expendittire, and the management of the great nautical
tablishment at Greenwich. ' -
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE thought that fire or six naval
Pfficers might be appointed as a commission to inquire into
the matter during the recess, and that expense ought not to
stand in the way of inquiry.
Sir G. PECHELL supported the amendment, though he
thought the abuses did not exist so much at Greenwich as
at the naval head-quarters, the Admiralty, at Whitehall.
Mr. LYGON urged the postponement of this inquiry till
next year.
Mr. BRISCOE said that, it being admitted that evils
requiting correction existed, and no attempt at remedyhav-
ing been mads, he should support the amendment now
moved by the hon. and gallant admiral (Sir C. Napier).
Mr. LAING opposed the amendment, and urged that the
inquiry ought to be left in the hands of the Government in-
stead of an inconvenient and expensive commissior.
Mr. J. LOCKE remarked that the promise just made
had been made by successive Boards of Admiralty vs, ery
year since 1842. No inquiry had, however, been made;
the evils were not remedied, and he should cordially sup-
port the proposition of his hon. and gallant colleague.
Mr. T. HANKEY was not prepared to refer so impor-
tant a question to a commission of four or five old •admirals,
and could not concur in transferring the inquiry from the
Executive Government to an indefinite body.
After a few words from Mr. SPOONER,
Sir F. T. BARING said he had considerable suspicion
of inquiries conducted by committees, and thought it better
to leave the inquiry to the Government, who should be held
responsible for providing- a remedy for abuses and evils
which were admitted to exist.

notMprr.eßpatßtoUleeak:eslitP supported'
rtthede Gotheveanimmenednmtentihfeoromhern7s_
sion was wanted in order to exhibit to the house the exist-
ing evils, and then it would be the duty of the house to
hold the Government responsible for providing a remedy.
Mr. ANGERSTEIN opposed the amendment.
The house then divided, when the numbers appeared—
For.the original motion 142
For the amendment B2
Majority —6O
The house then' resolved itself int.; a committee of
' SUPPLY.
On the vote of £15,985 to defray the expenses of the
National Gallery being proposed,
Mr. CONINGHAM moved as an amendment to reduce
the vote by the sum of £650, charged as travelling ex-
penses. He reminded the committee that last year the
house had struck offthe charge of £650 for the salary of tra-
velling agent, but that sum appeared in the present estimate
under the item of travelling charges, and what he asked
had been the result of this outlay for travelling charges ?
Why, eight ipictures had been purchased at an outlay of
£3,000, and he ventured to assert that those pictures, so
far from being worth £3,00p, were not worth £l5O.
. Mr. W. WILLIAMS regretted that the hon. member
had limited his proposal to the striking oft the charge for
travelling expenses when there was a balance of £8,500
already voted, which had not yet been expended. ,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ex-
plained that the vote of £lO,OOO had been secured for five
years, and he hoped it would not now be interfered with,
especially as an important sale, that of Lord Northwick's
pictures, was on the eve of taking place. He thought
£650 a trifling charge for travelling expenses. Next year
it might be well to take the whole subject of the National
Gallery into consideration.
After a few words from Sir C. BunitEd, which were
wholly inaudible,
Mr. DANBY SEYMOUR inquired what arrangements
had been made by the Government for the removal of the
Royal Academy from the National Gallery to Burlington-
house. He deprecated the expense incurred by the erection
of temporary buildings at South Kensington, and asked if
the late Government had pledged their successors to any
particular plan for a permanent building.
Lord J. MANNERS reminded the hon. member that the
arrangements of the late Government had.been explained
at great length by the late Chancellor of the Exchequer
many months ago.
Mr. R. SPOONER supported the amendment moved by
the hon. member for Brighton. It was notorious that this
country paid a price for pictures which was never thought
of by other countries.

Mr. TITE had seen every gallery in Europe, and was
convinced that the British National Gallery was no dis-
grace to this country. He opposed the amendment.
Mr. BENTINCK supported the amendment, and re-
marked that all these votes ought to be cut down until it
was known that the defences of the country were properly
and efficiently provided for. ,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had not
had an opportunity, during the short time he had been in
office, of reviewing the arrangements made by the late Go-
vernment with respect to the removal of the Royal
Academy from Trafalgar-square, or the disposal of the site
of Burlington-house.
Lord J. MANNERS said that no definite arrangement
had been made by the late Government with respect to
Burlington-house, and therefore the question was entirely
open.

Mr. STIRLING opposed the amendment, and defended
Sir Charles Eastlake from the imputations cast upon the
management of the National Gallery.
After a few words from Mr. Cox-ma-rum in explanation,
The committee divided. The numbers were—
For the original vote l7l
For the amendment
Majority
—l3l
Mr. R. SPOONER then moved to reduce the vote by the
sum of £lO,OOO, which appeared in the estimate " f9r the
purchase of pictures." During the last 12 years no less
than £2,000,000 had been expended under the head of arts
and sciences, and he objected to such an appropriation of
the public money, when it was proposed to make a man
earning £2 per week pay an income tax.
Mr. CLAY expressed his intention to support the pro-
posed reduction on the ground that he was dissatisfied with
the existing management of the National Gallery.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS also suorted the amendment.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that, on neither of the grounds urged against the vote could he
assent to its reduction as proposed.
After a few words from Mr. CONINGRAM in support of
the proposed reduction,
The committee divided. The numbers were—
For the original vote 136
For the amendment ..... . 61
Majority ................. —72
The original vote was then agreed to.
The next votes of £6,349 for scientific works and experi-
ments, of £5OO for the geographical society, and of £l,OOO
for the royal society, were agreed
ip without discussion,
and the house resumed.
The Income Tax Bill was read a second time, and ordered
to be committed to-morrow.
The Boundaries (Ireland) Bill was read a third time and
passed.
The Local Government Supplemental Bill went through
committee and was reported with amendments.
The Dwellings for Labouring classes (Ireland) Bill also
went through committee.
The Militia Ballots Suspension Bill, and the Military
Savings Bank Bill were severally read a second time and
ordered to be committed.
The committal of the Church Rates Abolition Bill was
postponed until to-morrow.
Mr. MONSELL reporred from the Wakefield Election
Committee, that the committee had resolved that Mr. W.
H. Leatham had not been duly elected for the Borough of
Wakefield ; that the-last election was a void election, and
that Mr. W. H. Leatham had by his agents been guilty
of bribery, and that corrupt practices had prevailed
at the last election, but that it did not appear that it had
been with the knowledge or consent of the sitting member.
Mr. LEFROy reported from the Dartmouth Election
Committee that Mr. Schenley had not been duly elected,
that the last election was a void election, and that Mr
Schenley had by his agents been guilty of bribery. -
The house adjeurnec) at six o'clock.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-JULY 27.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL.

Motion made, and Question put, " That Clause Two stand
part of the Bill :"—The Committee divided ; Ayes, 127,
Noes 85,

AYES-127.
Angerstein, W. Gower, F. L. O'Connell, D.
Arnott, J. Greenall, G. O'Donoglue, D.
Ayrton, A. S. Gregson, S. Packs, C. W.
Bagwell, J. Gordon, B. Paget, C.
Ball, E. Gurney, Samuel Pease, H.
Pechell Bass, M. T. Hanbury, R., jun. , Sir G.
Baxter, W. E. Handley, John Pigrott, Francis
Bazley, Thomas Hardcastle, Jos. A. Pilkington,Jamea
Beale, Samuel' Henley, Lord Pinney, Wm..
Biggs, John Hennessy, J. P. Pryse, Capt, E. L.
Black, Adam . Hoare, Joseph Proby;Lord. G. L.
Brady, John ' Hodgkinson, G. Puller, C. W.
Brand, H. B. Hodgson, K. D. Ridley, G.
Bristow, A. Hinnberstone, P. S. Robertson, D.
Browne, Lord:J. T. Hutt, W. Roebuck, J. A.
Buller, J. W. James, Edwin Russell, A. J. E.
Butler, C. S. Jervoise, Sir J. St. Aubyn, J.
Buxton, C. Keating, Sir H. Salt, Titus
Calthorpe, F. H. Kershaw, J. Scholefleld, W. Clay, James King, Hon. L. Seymour, H. D.
Clifford, C. C. Kingscote, Lt.-Col. Shelley, Sir J. V.
Clifford, H. M. Knatchbull-Hugss Smith, J. B.
Clive, George Laing, S. Somerville, Sir W.
Colebrooke, Sir T.E. Langston, J. H. Stafford, Marquis of
Coningham, Wm. Lawson, W. Stansfeld. J.
Locke,mycE McEvoy,
--0 J . E
Craufurd, E. H. J Lee, W. Steel, John
Crook, Joseph Levinze, Sir R.G.A. Sykes, Col, W. H.
Davey, R.
Trelawny, Sir J. S.
Davie, Col. P.
Denison, W. H. F. Turner, J. A.
Deasy, Richard Lyons, Dr.
L 1 W
Lys ley, W. Verney, Sir Harry
y, E. Walters, R.
Dodson, John G. Mackinnon, W. A. Weirrs, J.
Duff, M. E. Maguire, J. F. West ead, B.
Duke, Sir James Martin, P. W. Whalley, G. H.
Evans, T. W. Martin, J. Whitbread, S.
Ewart, J. C. • Matheson, A. Wickham, H. W
Ewing, H. E. C. Miller, William Willcox, B. M.
Fenwick, Henry Mills, T. Williams, W.
Ferguson, R. Monk, C. J. Wise, J. A. Forster Charles Monsell, Rt. Rn. Iv.
Fortescue, Hon. D. Morris, D.
Fortescue, C. S. Napier, Sir C.
Freeland, H. W. Noble, J.
Gavin, Major North, F,