The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-11 00:00:00

enactment, so jealous was Parliament of committing itself
to retrospective enactments.
Lord WENSLEYDALE was understood to defend the
retrospective clauses.

On the question being put that the amendment be in-
serted in the bill, their lordships divided—.

Contents 9B
Non-contents 6l
Majority ..

The exemption clause was then inserted.
Lord CRANWORTH then moved to leave out a clause
introduced into the bill by the select committee, on the mo-
tion of the Earl of Derby, to the effect that if a father and
son have each a life interest in the same estate, and that it
is to revert to the son upon the death of the father, the cre-
ditors of the son, in the event of his becoming bankrupt,
shall not be allowed to sell that interest without the special
leave of the Court. The introduction of the clause left
their lordships open to the imputation of favouring the
aristocracy. In the case of a trader, his reversionary right
to any property would be sold for what it might bring, and
the non-trader ought not to be put in a better position.
The Earl of DERBY defended the clause. He had got an
actuary to calculate the value of a property held by a father
and son under the circumstances mentioned, the father
being 56:years of age and the son 25, and he found it would
fetch only two years' purchase. In the case of such a pro-
perty being sold, the present holder would have no interest
in keeping up the value for those who were to possess it in
succession to himself, and they, on taking possession of it,
would have no other care than how to screw the most they
could out of it, so that it would come to the present posses-
sor's grandchild greatly deteriorated. Under those circum-
stances, it was, he thought, a very mild favour to ask that
the estate should not be sold without the section of the
Court. _ _

After a few words from Earl GRANVILLE in respect to
post obits,
Lord CRANWORTH withdrew his amendment.

The other clauses were then agreed to ; and the bill
having gone through committee, was reported to the house.
WILLS OF PERSONALTY BY BRITISH SUB-
JECTS ABROAD BILL.
This bill was passed through committee.
CUSTOMS (INLAND) REVENUE BILL.

This bill was likewise passed through committee.
The Earl of LEITRIM gave notice that, on Thursday
night, ho would make a formal motion in respect to the
matter which he broached in the early part of the e% ening,
an that Chinf Justice Monaghan might have an opportunity
of replying to the charge he had made against
The LORD CHANCELLOR said Thursday was far too
early a day, as there would not be sufficient time for him to
communicate with the learned judge in question.
After a few words from the Earl of DONOUGHMORE,
the tima was enlarged, and their lordships adjourned at a
quarter to eight o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—YESTERDAY.
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Lords' amendments to the Great Northern and
Western (of Ireland) Railway Bills were considered and
agreed to. The following bills were considered and ordered
to be read a third time :—Bonelli's Electric Telegraph Com-
pany ; Charing-cross Railway (City Terminus) ; Dews-
bury and Batley Gas; Great Western Railway; Hereford,
Ray, and Breeon Railway ; Londonderry and Lough
Swilly Railway ; Mersey Docks and Harbour Board ; and
Victoria Station and Pimlico Railway.

The following bills were read a second time :—Devon
Valley Railway, Edinburgh, Perth, and Dundee Railway,
Forth and Clyde Junction Railway, Kinross-shire Rail-
way, and Shireoaks District Church.