The Sun.
London, England, 1861-07-02 00:00:00

PETITIONS.

Some petitions were presented praying for the opening
of the British Museum and other national institutions on
Sunday, and for the restoration of the Galway subsidy.

FACTION FIGHTING IN IRELAND.

Mr. SCULLY asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if
his attention had been called to the published address of
the chairman of the county of Tipperary, Mr. Sergeant
Howley, Q.C., to the grand jury at the recent quarter ses-
sions of Cashel, with reference to a document directing that
cases of faction fighting shall no longer be tried at the quar-
ter sessions, but sent to the assizes ; and, would the Chief
Secretary state the nature of that document and the grounds
for it?

Mr. ROEBUCK considered that the hon. and learned
member was out of order for asking for this explanation.
The SPEAKER said that the hon. and learned member
was in order, and therefore he could not interfere.

Mr. CARDWELL, said that the object of the document
was not to offer any affront to magistrates of the quarter
sessions, but merely to secure a selection of the parties
who were to try those cases from a more extended area,
and therefore inspiring more confidence in the results of
trials of this character.
THE DERRYVEAGH EVICTIONS.

Mr. SCULLY asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if
he intended to propose any inquiry, either through a royal
commission or select committee of the House of Commons,
into the recent evictions from the lands of Derryveagh, in
the county of Donegal, or as to the statements published
by Mr. J. G. Adair, J.P., attributing a guilty knowledge
of murder and other crimes to the evicted inhabitants; also
as to tilt, several allegations made in Parliament on Mon-
day, the 24th day of June, that Itibbonism existed in that
district; or, if indisposed to originate an inquiry, would the
Chief Secretary be prepared, on the part of the Govern-
ment, to support or sanction a motion for an inquiry pro-
posed by an independent member.
Mr. CARDWELL said it was not intendel to propose a
committee on the subject.
ALLEGED NEGLECT OF IRISH AFFAIRS.

Mr. SCULLY gave notice that to-morrow he would ask
the First Lord of the Treasury whether the hon. member
for Clonmel offered to resign his position as one of the Lords
Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury, upon the ground
that Irish interests had been disregarded by the present
Administration, and has such offer been finally accepted;
and, if so, has the vacancy so created been filled up, and is
it intended to fill it, and when ?
SALVAGE OF VESSELS.
Sir H. STRACEY asked the President of the Board of
Trade if it was his intention to introduce a bill to remedy
the defects in the law relating to owners and salvors of
vessels.

Mr. M. GIBSON said that some portions of the defects
in the law had been remedied already by the provisions of
the Admiralty Court Act, and the provisions of the Mer-
chant Shipping act were considerably extended. The law
as it stood at present remedied the defects of the law as re-
garded British vessels, but it was necessary, in order
to extend it to foreign vessels, that there should be an in-
ternational arrangement.

Sir H. STRACEY inquired whether the right hon.
gentleman would support a bill on this subject if he under-

took to introduce such a measure.

Mr. M. GIBSON said he could not undertake to make
such a promise without seeing the bill of the hon. baronet.

PUBLIC INCOME AND EXPENDITURE.

Sir S. NORTHCOTE moved for a return of the total
income of each year from 1829 to 1860-1 inclusive as esti-
mated in the Budget, and of the actual income received ;
the total expenditure so estimated and the actual expendi-
ture ; the surplus or deficiency so estimated and the actual
surplus or deficiency; the Exchequer balance at the com-
mencement of each year and the increase or the decrease of
that balance at the close of the year; the balance of money
raised by the creation of debt or of money applied to the
reduction of debt; and the excess of advances or repay-
ments ; together with the date of each budget.—Agreed to.
THE LUNACY LAW IN SCOTLAND.
Mr. LESLIE asked the Lord Advocate whether he in •
tended to introduce, during the present session, a bill to
amend the Lunacy Act in Scotland ?

APPROPRIATION OP SEATS (SUDBURY AND
ST. ALBANS) BILL.
On the motion for the consideration of this bill as
amended,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE contended that the bill had been
so mutilated that it should be rejected, and that it was quite
unprecedented to bring a bill which was really a new mea-
sure. Ile considered the metropolitan constituencies had
not been properly treated, and that the claims of Middlesex,
Chelsea, and Kensington had been overlooked in a
most shameful manner, considering the intelligence
and importance of these districts. The bill pro-
posed to give the four additional members to
the
diWefst Riding
g of Yorkshire, and yet Wakefield, one of the
sranchiboroughs, was situate in that Riding. (Hear,
hear.) In the whole of his Parliamentary experience he
was not aware of such a departure from Parliamentary
practice as was the case in reference to this bill, for at this
stage there were six new clauses introduced, and between
20 and 30 amendments made. Ile called an the house to
reject the bill, and moved, as an amendment, that it should
be considered that day three months.
Mr. SCULLY seco vied the amendment,

Mr. CONINGHAM also opposed the motion.
Mr. HADFIELD supported the motion, and drew atten-
tion to the wealth and population of the West Riding,
which he contended fully entitled it to the additional repre-
sentative.

Lord J. RUSSELL said that there had been no case
made out for the rejection of the bill. The measure as
originally introduced proposed to give an additional mem-
ber to the West Riding, one to South Lancashire, one to
Birkenhead, and one member to Chelsea and Kensington.
The three first propositions only received the sanction of
the committee, for the proposal to give an addi-
tional member to either Middlesex or Chelsea and
Kensington was rejected. He thought that the original
proposition of the Government was the more pre-
ferable. The question, however, had been decided by the
sense of the house, and there was no tenable argument
azainst giving the additional representative to the West
Riding, merely from the fact that it happened to contain
within it the corrupt borough of Wakefield.
Lord FERMOY supported the amendment, and con-
tended that the metropolis had been treated in a very
unjust manner in the distribution of these seats. He con-
sidered the bill a very important measure, and he argued
that the Government were acting in an unseemly manner
in respect to the subject of reform by not going to the
country.

The house divided, and the numbers were—
For the consideration of bill as amended 204
Against it
Majority

Mr. STIRLING then moved the following amendment :
—That from and after the Ist day of November,
1861, the Universities of St. Andrew's, Glasgow, Aber-
deen, and Edinburgh shall be entitled collectively to return
one member to serve in Parliament. The hon. member
moved other amendments also, the effect of which was to
carry out in detail the preceding alterations which he pro-
posed. He called attention to the great importance of these
universities, which had been of the greatest advantage not
only to Scotland, but to this country also, for they
had provided first class education without any
restriction on sectarian grounds, a desideratum which had
only recently been supplied in England. He expatiated on
the extent and intelligence of the members composing the
Scotch Universities, and said that if such institutions were
permitted to have a voice in the legislature the represen-
tatives would not be found unworthy to take their place by
the side of the representatives for the English Universities.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that the motion of the hon.
gentleman was in fact calling on the house to rescind
a resolution to which they had come in com-
mittee after considerable discussion, and after a large
majority had expressed their opinion. He argued
that from the constitution of Scotch universities
up to a recent period they were not to be placed in the
same position as the English and Irish universities. In
the Reform Bill of 1832 there was no proposition to enfran-
chise the universities, and although a great improvement
had lately taken place in their constitution, by which
graduation was necessary, still he did not think the time
had arrived to give them a superior claim to the seats to be
disposed of as compared with the West Riding and South
Lancashire.
Mr. C. BRUCE supported the amendment.
Sir J. GRAHAM stated the reasons which induced him
not to press on that occasion the claims of the London Uni-
versity, which he had given notice to bring forward in the
event of a member being refused to Chelsea and Kensing-
ton ; and having stated his views to the Senate of the Lon-
don University, ho was acting in accordance with their
decision in postponing their claims to a more favourable
opportunity.
Mr. BLACKBURN contended that the Government was
wrong upon their own pi inciples, and that it was unfair
that Scotland should not have a greater representation.
Mr. G. DUFF advocated the claims of the Scotch uni-
versities.
Mr. BAILLIE hoped that Mr. Stirling would rest satis-
fied with having brought the justice of their case before the
house; but as the house appeared to be almost unanimous
in favour of preferring the claim of South Lancashire, he
hoped he would not press his motion.
Lord J. RUSSELL expressed a hope that this advice
would be taken, as nothing could be gained by dividing the
house.

Mr. STIRLING was quite satisfied with the discussion
his motion had elicited, and with the permission of the
house he would withdraw his motion.
The clauses were then withdrawn.

Mr. COLLINS, who had a notice on the paper to move
clauses to the effect that the West Riding of Yorkshire
should henceforth be divided, and that two knights of the
shire should be returned for each division, said that clauses
so similar in nature had been proposed by the right hon.
baronet (Sir G. C. Lewis) in the name of the Government,
that he thought he should best consult the wishes of the
house by withdrawing the clauses. (Hear.)
The clauses were then, by permission, withdrawn.
Sir G. C. LEWIS then moved the following clause :
" After the dissolution of this present Parliament the West
Riding of the county of York shall be divided into two di-
visions, to be called respectively the northern and southern
divisions ; the northern division shall contain the Wapen-
takes of Staincliffe and Ewecross, Clare, Shyrack and Mor-
ley ; the southern division shall contain the Wapenstakes of
Barkston, Ash, Osgoldcrosa, Strafforth and Tickhill, Stain-
cross, and Agbrigg."
Mr. BAINES said he felt considerable objection to the
course which the Government were now pursuing. It was
not a course which had been recommended by the determi-
nate judgment of the house themselves. The house wished

to give two out of the four seats to boroughs and two to
counties; although he (Mr. Baines) thought that the four
seats might have been very fairly all given to boroughs and
none to counties. He admitted that the two boroughs of St.
Albans and Sudbury were small, but there were others in
the country still smaller, and these boroughs frequently re-
turned men who represented large mercantile interests, and
not solely the landed interest. As a member for one of the
largest boroughs in the West Riding he had one serious ob-
jection to bring to the proposed division of that great con-
stituency. Although he did not object to four members
being given to the West Riding, he must confess that in his
opinion the metropolitan county had a better claim ; for in
Middlesex there were eighteen members with a population
of 2,800,000; whereas in the West Riding there were
the same number of members with a population
of only 1,500,000. One result of this mode of division
would be that the large clothing district of Leeds and Hud-
dersfield would be severed into two parts. He should not,
however, think it necessary to divide the house on the
clause.

The clause was then agreed to.
The following clause was then, on the motion of Sir G.
C. LEWIS, agreed to :—" In all future Parliaments there
shall be two knights of the shire to serve of each of the said

northern and southern divisions, and such knights shall be
chosen in the same manner, and by the same classes or de-
scriptions of voters, and in respect of the rights of voting, as
if each ouch division were a separate county, and all enact-
ments now in force applicable to divisions of counties return-
ing knights of the shire to serve in Parliament, shall apply
to the divisions hereby constituted."

Sir G. C. LEWIS then moved a third clause, the effect
of which was that the polling place for the northern divi-
sion of the 'West Riding should be at Leeds, and the poll-
ing-place for the southern division at Pontefract.

Mr. G. HARDY said that he had certain technical objec-
tions to take to this clause, which made him think it better
that it should be postponed. Provision was made for the
erection of 'new polling-places in case of a dissolution, but
he was prepared to show that the election must take place
before these polling-places could be arranged. You would
have to use the present polling-places in parts of the West
Riding, where the districts extended into the northern and
southern divisions ; and as persons must poll in the districts
for which they had their votes, great inconvenience must
ensue. Another point was that the high-sheriff would have
only twelv days fer giving the necessary notices ; and the
present u er-sheriff bad intbrmed him that it would be
it
quite imp Bible to do it in the time. He should prefer,
therefore, t at the sheriff should have the power of appoint-
ing as many returning officers as might be necessary. If
the right hen. gentleman would permit him he would put
his facts arid suggestions into his hands, and if the clause
were postponed they
might be incorporated in the form of
amendments.
Sir G. C: LEWIS thought it better that the clause should
be at once proceeded with. Re confessed the difficulty
there existed in not allowing the justices to make provi-
sional arrangements on sudden emergencies, and he had
been unassisted by any precedent in previding for the case.
With regard to the other point, he had always thought the
sheriff had power to appoint any necessary number of sub-
sheriffs—but he would consider that point. On the whole,
he was disposed to think that the better way Would be to
leave the law as it stood at present.

Mr. COLLINS said that when the question was started
before, it was proposed that the existing register should be
retained.
Mr. HAbFIELD proposed as an amendment that
Sheffield't should be inserted instead of Wakefield.
Sir G. LEWIS could not look upon this as a question
of much imiportance, although it was naturally one to the
hon. member for Sheffield. The whole question was, the
most convenient place for nomination. Wakefield was
situated near the border, and Pontefract was most conve-
nient for the central districts.

Mr. COLLINS advocated Wakefield in preference to
Pontefract,) alleging that bribery had been as rife in the
latter placeas in the former. . _

Mr. M. MILNES defended Pontefract, and complained
of the hon. member for Knaresborough introducing irre-
levant topics. All the gentlemen of the southern division
wanted was to select such places as suited themselves. (A
laugh.) I e question was not between Pontefract and
Wakefield, but between the latter place and Sheffield.
It
The reside t gentry of the southern division of Yorkshire
had declared that after full consideration they believed
Pontefract 'was the most convenient place where the elec-
tions should be held.
Colonel MYTH believed that Wakefield was more ac-
cessible byroad and railway than Pontefract, and for all
public puses was almost central,
Sir C. WOOD begged to say that he was perfectly indif-
ferent as to which town should be selected ; but he thought
on the who e, looking to the means of communication and
the popitio of the ton, that Pozjiefract was the wept con-
rl