The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-05 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PA BLIAiViE N r

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(This DAY.)
The SPEAKER entered the house at twelve o'clock. but
it was slot until twenty minutes past that public business
commences, owing to there not being sufficient members
in attendance.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Stockport District Water Bill was read a third time
and passed.
The South Essex Water Bill was read a second time.
CHURCH RATES.
A number of petitions were presented against the abolition
of church rates.

THE GALWAY CONTRACT.
111 r. CALCOTT presented a petition from Clare, in
favour of a continuance of the Galway Mail Contract.
NOVA SCOTIA.

Mr. CAIRD moved an address for a copy of the de-
spatches from the Government of Nova Seotia relative to
the gold discovered there.—Agreed to.
FRIENDLY AND ASSURANCE SOCIETIES.
Mr. S. ESTCOURT moved the second reading of tIMs
bill. He said he had not heard of the slightest objection to
the first clause. With respect to the second, he did not
seek to test on these societies any responsibility which they
were not at present liable with respect to the publication of
their accounts. The clause only required the society to make
a return of the receipts and expenditure during the year, the
date of the establishment of the society, the number of
members and the amount invested. By the third clause '
the county court was fixed upon in which penalties were
to be received, but he had seduced the sum, which origi-
nally stood in the bill at £5, to £l.
The bill was read a second time.

COUNTY VOTERS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
On the motion for going into committee on this bill,
Mr. MURE moved an instruction to the committee to
make the rules and regulations containrd therein conform-
able with those of the Act 19 and 20 Vic., chap. 58, in so
far as they are applicable to counties.
The SPEAKER said the instruction was informal, but
it was quite competent for the committee to deal with the
s4ject without the instruction being given to them.
On the SPEAK.ER putting the question that he do leave
the chair,
Mr. BLACKBURN said he had to move an amendment
to that motion. The bill which the hon. member proposed
to go on with contained no less than sixty faults,
which he himself had amended. He should therefore pro-
pose, as an amendment, that the bill be reprinted with the
amendments proposed, and that the house should on the
present occasion merely go into the committee on the bill
pro forms.
Sir E. COLEBROOKE said he had taken the utmost
trouble in framing the bill, and was therefore very desirous
to proceed with the consideration of it without delay. He
would leave the question as to proceeding with the bill in
hands of the house, although he thought they would not
have for some time so favourable an opportunity for dis-
cussing the bill as the present.
Mr. ROEBUCK complained of the manner in which
business was transacted on Wednesdays. He found there
was no less than sixty alterations proposed in this bill, and
he did not think that the hon. member was a fit person to
make such a law as he proposed. The Lord Advocate was
the proper person who ought to have introduced the mea-
sure. There was a system springing up of peddling into
the constitution on the part of private members on Wed-
nesday, and he thought the sooner the system was put an
end to the better.

The LORD ADVOCATE said he could not agree with
the statement of the hon. member who had just resumed
his seat. He was of opinion that private members had as
good a right to bring in bills as members of the Govern-
ment. His hon. friend (Sir E. Colbrooke) had paid great
attention to the subject,and he thought he was as competent
to deal with the question as any member in that house.
(Hear, hear.) With respects to the 60 amendments which
it was said had been made to the bill, it was certainly true
that there were that number:of amendment, bu t they were most
to the same effect, namely, the altering the month from Sep-
tember to August. The bill would effect a great improve-
ment in the registration in Scotland, and he thought the
present was a very favourable opportunity of considering
its provisions.

gir J. FERGUSSON thought the house would be in a
better position this day week to discuss this bill. The
changes proposed were very important, but the bill was most
loosely drawn up, and although it proposed only to assimi
late the county to the borough registration it required no
less than sixty alterations. Under such circumstances he
thought the bill ought to be postponed.
Mr. DUNLOP, under certain circumstances, was not
unfavourable to delay. He was, however, quite ready to
go on with the bill.
Mr. LOCKE said he should not have obtruded himself
on the house had it not been for the observations of the hon.
member for Sheffield. He thought the hon. member,
if he recalled his recollection for a moment, must
become aware that many of the most important
alterations of the electoral law had been introduced by
private members. (Hear, hear.) It was to the exertion of
private members that the Jews owed the present position in
that house. (Hear, hear.) Then, again, there was the law
that admitted members to Parliament without the property
qualification ; for that also they had to thank a private
member. (Hear, hear.) There was also another bill on
which the hon. and learned member invariably recorded
his vote he meant the ballot. (Hear, hear.) He though
the hon. member for Sheffield would wait for a very long
time before he found that measure brought forward by
members who occupied the Government side, or by those
who graced the Opposition side of the house. (Hear, hear
and laughter. His (Mr Locke's) opinion was that the most
important changes in the laws affecting the people had
been introduced by independent and private members of
Parliament.

Mr. C. BRUCE thought that on the present Wednes-
day when a very attractive proceeding was to take place (the
opening of the Horticultural Gardens), the hon. member
ought not to persist in his intention.
The amendment was withdrawn, and on a motion made
by the LORD-ADVOCATE for the adjournment of the debate
until Friday nest was agreed to.
WHITE HERRING FISHERY (SCOTLAND) BILL.
On the motion that the bill be read a second time,
Mr. CAIRD said he could not consent to this bill which
contained a very stringent penalty of a former bill. The
penalty to which he alluded was that if a person was found,
not simply dealing, but even having in his possession, such
a fish at a certain season of the year he should be subject to
a penalty of £2O. He thought the bill ought to be referred
to a select committee.

Mr. ELLICE was in favour of referring the bill to a
select committee.

The LORD ADVOCATE said he should not object to
the select committee if any result could be arrived at
during the present year. The inquiry would be so large
that it would be altogether impossible to arrive at a settled
conclusion this year.

The bill was read a second time, and ordered to be con•
:billed this day week.
CORK INFIRMARY BILL.

The house went into committee on this bill—Mr. MAS-
SEY in the chair.

The whole of the clauses were agreed to, and the bill was
ordered to be reported.
DWELLINGS FOR THE WORKING CLASSES

BILL.
This bill was read a second time.

CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OATH RELIEF BILL.

Mr. LOCKE moved the second reading of this bill.
He said he thought a great deal of misapprehension
existed as to the effect of this bill, as it had been thought
its provisions were more extensive than they really were.
His bill was simply for the purpose of enabling those who
have a conscious scruple to the taking of an oath by leave
of the jud go, to make an affirmation. That was the whole
of the bill, and it was confined to criminal cases,
and the reason he so confined its operations was because
the civil court possessed the power of allowing witnesses
to give evidence after having made an affirmation. All he
proposed to do was to extend the privilege of the civil to
the criminal courts. Notice had been entered on the paper
that it was the intention of an hon. member to move that
the second reading of the bill be taken:that day six months,
but he was quite at a loss to know on what ground, be-
cause the bill was totally different from that of the hon.
member for Tavistock as he had attached the same pen-
alty for making a false declaration as that for taking a
false oath, viz., an indictment for perjury. The hon. and
learned member here cited several cases to show the neces-
sity of the bill, and concluded by moving the second
reading.
Mr. S. ESTCOURT moved the adjournment of the
debate.
Mr. LOCKE hoped that the motion for adjournment
would be withdrawn, because he had for the last six weeks
been watching for an opportunity of bringing it forward.
The honourable gentleman, he did not think, had
ever read the bill—[Mr. Estcourt said he had.]
He (Mr. Locke) was delighted at that, because he
did not object to it, and he supposed his reason for moving
the adjournment of the debate was to give an opportunity
for some ene to come in who had. (Laughter.) Tb e Attoritey-
General had no objection to the bill, and under such cir-
cumstances he hoped it would be read a second time.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said he had been informed of the
operations of the bill. He did not think there was any
danger in allowing certain witnesses to make affirmations
in preference to taking an oath.

[LEFT SPEAKING.]

__—
CHELMSFORD RACES.—(This Day.)

BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.
BADDOW TWO••YEAR•OLD STAKES.
Farfalla
Lord Burleigh . 2
Misfire 3
Four ran.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.