The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-09 00:00:00

UST.

PETITIONS.

Petitions were presented in favour of the Budget by Mr.
Bazley from Manchester, and against the Master and
Operatives Bill by Mr. Gaskell.
FRIENDLY ASSURANCE BILL.

Mr. S. ESTCOURT brought up the Friendly Societies
Assurance Bill, which was read a first time and ordered to
be printed.

AGGRAVATED ASSAULTS ACT AMENDMENT
BiLL.
_ _

Lord RAYN asked permission of the house to post-
pone the second reading of this bill for three weeks, in order
that he might see what course was taken with the measure
referring to the assaults on women and children, which had
beenintroduced by her Majesty's Government.
The second reading of the bill was consequently post-
poned to this day three weeks.
CRUELTY TO ANIMALS PREVENTION BILL.
Lord RAYNHAM, in moving the second reading of the
bill, said its objects were to amend the existing law by ren-
dering all persons present at dog-fights and cock-fights
liable to conviction as eiders and abettors. The bill also
sought to increase the punishment of persons convicted
of skinning live animals from. three to six
months imprisonment with bard labour. He also proposed
to increase the area in which it was now compulsory for
cattle drovers to wear b edges, so as to secure their convic-
tion for brutality committed beyond the metropolitan dis-
tricts ; and he further sought to facilitate the prosecution
and conviction of persons charged with working horses in
an unfit or diseased state. The noble lord concluded by
moving the second reading of the bill.
Sir G. LEWIS was of opinion that the Act of 1849 had
been found sufficiently operative and effectual for the ob-
jects which the noble lord had in -view ; at all events ha
could state that no complaints had reached him (Sir G. C.
Lewis) in his official capacity that the existing law was at
all inefficient in bringing offenders to justice. He there-
fore suggested to the noble lord the propriety of set fur-
ther pressing this measure.
Mr. HALIBURTON thought the bill was very crudely
prepared, and it would be best for the noble lord to with-
draw it,

Mr. HENLEY said if not withdrawn, ho should now
move that the bill be read a second Vine that dly six months.
Lord RAYNHAM expressed his readiness to withdraw
the bill.

Mr. HENLEY withdrew his amendment, and eventually
the bill was withdrawn.
VALUATION (SCOTLAND) ACTS AMENDMENT

BILL.

Mr. BLACKBURN, in moving the second reading of
this bill, stated that its scope was to require the assessors to
return the net value of the property assessed to county
rates instead of their gross value, as required by the existing
law. In fact the bill was designed to extend to Scotland
the same principle as the Government by the Parochial
Assessment Act of this session established in England.
The LORD-ADVOCATE objected to the bill on the
ground that it would raise the franchise in burghs, and
would completely overturn and put into complete confusion
the system of rating which at present prevailed in Scotland.
The bill would have the effect of reducing the property tax
in Scotland by 20 or 25 per ceht. He must therefore move
that the bill be read a second time that day six months.
Mr. S. ESTCOURT gave his support to the Second read-
ing of the bill on the ground that it went to assimilate the
practice of assessment in Scotland to that which was suc-
cessfully adopted in this country.
Mr. F. PEEL urged that the bill was objectionable on
the ground of its interference with the amount of income
and iuhabited house taxes which at present was levied in
Scotland.

Mr. G. W. ROPE suppm ted the second reading of the
bill, which went tl remove a great injustice which at pre-
sent existed in Scotla•:-id.

Sir G. C. LEWIS denied that the Parochial Assess-
ment Bill ho had introduced would interfere with the basis
on which the franchise existed, or that on which any of
the Queen's taxes were levied. This bill, however, pro..
posed to do both, and therefore was wholly dissimilar from
the measure he had brought forward.

Mr. MITRE supported-the bill, and contended that the
objections to it would be found on examination to be wholly
untenable.

Mr. BLACK reminded the house that a similar bill had
been rejected last session, and that this year the people of
Scotland had petitioned almost unanimously against its
reintroduction daring the present session, because they felt
that its operation would greatly interfere with a system
working well and satisfactory at the present moment. He
should therefore vote for the amendment.

Sir E. COLEBROOKE also opposed the bill, consider-
ing that the system of assessment in Scotland was based on
a better principle than the system which existed either in
this country or Ireland.
Lord J. MANNERS said that he should, with much
pleasure and satisfaction, give his vote for the second read-
ing of this bill.
Mr. FINLAY also supported the second reading of the
bill, for he could not acquiesce in any of the arguments
which had been advanced against its principle.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
as responsible Finance Minister he felt bound to give his
most strenuous opposition to the bill, which went to sub-
vert the whole principle on which the income tax was based
in this country.
Sir J. FERGUSSON gave his support to the prearable
of the bill, and should therefore vote for the second reading.
Mr. POLLARD-TTHWTHART supported the bill, re-
oi.tKrug- tnat the system of valuation in Scotland was
fraught with hardship and injustice.
Mr. BUCHANAN objected to the bill, which was so
crudely drawn that it could not be easily remodelled. The
house ought to deal with the measure as they found it n•w,
and to reject it without making any attempt in committee
to frame a new measure.

Mr. BLACKBURN replied, and said he by no means
sought to interfere with the income tax, which couli be
levied on the gross valuations as at present. Ho only
sought to establish the net valuation for the purposes of
local taxation.

The house then divided, when the numbers appeared—
For the second reading 7B
Against it
Majority —6B
The bill was accordingly lost.

COUNTY VOTERS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
On the motion of Sir E. COLEBROOKE this bill was
read a second time and ordered to be committed 011 the 4th
June.

TRAMWAYS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The house then resolved itself into committee on the
Tramways (Scotland) Bill, Mr. MASSEY in the chair.
After several verbal amendments the clauses were agreed
to.

On the motion of Sir E. COLEBROOKE, a clause provid-
ing that tramways should not be laid down in burghs
without the consent of the magistrates and council was
brought up and agreed to, and the house having resumed,
the bill was reported with amendments.

MASTERS AND OPERATIVES BILL.
Mr. MACKINNON said that he brought forward the
bill under the belief that without some legislative enact•
merit it would be impossible to put an end to the system of
strikes which unfortunately had prevailed, and were still
existing. This bill was identical in its provisions with that
he had introduced last year, and which had not only passed
this house without any opposition, but had received a se-
cond
ginthceoLortteeezowf
who had
wnhoetreeloisted the evi-
dence been
referred
au select e
the session terminated. The bill had received
reading
before
to do
ri
the support of the public in all parts of the coun-
try, and the only opposition which had arisen was
that of certain coal owners, who desired
to be exempted from the operation of the
measure, and with a view that they should be fully heard
he would consent to refer the bill, after its second reading,
to a committee up stairs. He should therefore now content
himself with moving that the bill be now read a second time.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that while he ad-
mitted that it might be desirable and expedient to es tablish
means by which the disputes between masters and work-
men might be speedily terminated by arbitration, still he
objected to the scheme or plan by which the hon, member,
the author of the bill, sought to accomplish the design he
had in view. At present there was existing a law-5 Gee.
IV., cap. 96—by which, by a reference to a justice, the
award could be enforced ; and he much feared that
if this bill were passed it would lead to a
confusion as to the authority by which these strikes
and controversies were to be ended and settled. The bill
proposed tol establish a concurrent jurisdiction with that
which already existed ; it was cumbrous and expensive in
oa
and
thedmc the
he
its machinery, and yet no provision was made or suggested
as to the means by which the expenses which its operation
would involve could be defrayed; He, therefore, should
certainly object to the bill altogether.
Mr. KINNAIRD regretted the opposition he had just
heard from the hon. and learned Solicitor General to
of the
a measure which was in reality the result
labours of two select committees after a full examination
by both. The bill was permissive, and the exPeaditisediwcatimona
of course be defrayed by those who sought the - -a
of the councils of arbitration, which the
establish. In the absence of any Government measure,
to the second
hoped the house would give its sanction bill soughtht:
reading of this bill.
_ in the view
Sir J. SHELLEY expressed his concurrence
taken of this bill by the hon. and learned Solicitor-General,
ought to be so taken up by
The subject, if taken up at all,
the responsible Government
Mr. W. FORSTER objected, to ebill, because he
thought the controversies
believed that
would best be settled by personal
intercourse
n,
betweenmtion on the second reading of the bill.
the establishment of these councils would only tend to
increase disputes and controversies. He should therefore
vote against 'IL doubted
be good arise, he should give his support to the LIDDE t much whether this bill would
masters
answer the purpos.e con emplated ; but in the hope that there
mo-
tionmighfotr a second reading, then to be referred to a select
committee.
Sir J. PAXTON supported the bill, which he consi-
dered would be of the greatest advantage to skillqd artizans,
as the councils of arbitration which had existed 70 years in
France had effected much good.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that while he gave the autbor of
this measure the fullest credit for the philanthropy which
had actuated him in again presenting it to the
consideration of the Legislature, he could not, for
the reason stated by his hon. and learned friend the Solici-
tor-General, with others, give his assent to the further pro-
gress of this bill, and he should therefore, but with regret,
move that the bill be read a second time this day six months.
Mr. L. GOWER admitted the great difficulty which
the course of the present debate were well
beset this question, and thought that many of the objections
and it was with regret he felt constrained to vote
amendment.
ir
na
founded, i
fs
ae
vd
o
i in s
Mr. CROSSLEY opposed the bill, because he was con-
inobpeetrtaetriveeet,fiaednd
bbrimuuestee
masters
doumgenht
tvlii
ene se eaedddisputesu ihecedoubl house
be
themselves than by any council that could be established,
H
"to leave well alone," and to reject
this bill.
Mr. MELLOR also opposed the bill.
Mr. AYRTON rose and was addressing the house in
support of the bill when a quarter to six arrived, and the'
debate was necessarily adjourned.
The other orders having been dioptasecl of, the house *4l-
- icinocl,