The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-11 00:00:00

of speed were obtained by Captain Sir Edward
Belcher, Mr. Scott Russell, and others. But that
which is new, and especially important, in the
present instrument, is a most interesting
compensation, or self.acting correction for every
disturbing force or tendency, which allows the indi-
cator to register nothing but the true speed of the
ship through the water in a horizontal direction ; and
at the same time the exact line in which it moves is
also pointed out. This beautiful compensation sug-
gested itself to the inventor upon his discovery of
other forces (besides the positive or uplifting one),
which, inasmuch as they act so_ as to depress the
column, may be called negative. These were disco-
vered by turning a small tube, projected from the
bottom of the ship, at different angles to the line
of motion. A point was also found at which there
was no force exerted by resistance either positive or
negative. Some very interesting experiments, re-
vealing phenomena as yet unexplained, will shortly
he published by the inventor. These experiments
were made in the South-Western's Company's
steamer Courier by the assistance of her exceedingly.
intelligent commander, Mr. James Goodridge, jun.,
to whose uncommon skill and perseverance the in-
ventor is greatly indebted for their success.
In this instrument two forces are used, and made to
act upon the two surfaces of mercury in a bent glass,
furnished with a ball like a barometer. These two
forces are equal as to every vertical movement or
pressure, and therefore neutralize each other as re-
gards any effect of change of draught, list, trim, or
the action of the sea, &c. ; but they are unequal, or
rather dissimilar as regards the effect of horizontal
resistance.

MARKS OF IGNORANCE.

In one of the archive-rooms belonging to Durham Ca-
thedral there are some venerable documents which con-
tain the signatures of William the Conqueror; of his son,
William Rufus; of Duncan, son of Malcolm. King of
Scotland; of Prince Edgar; of Lanfranc, Archbishop of
Canterbury; of Thomas, Archbishop of York; and Wil-
liam Carileph, Bishop of Durham ; of the Earls of
Northumberland, De Montford, and Chester; and of
other princes, prelates, and barons of the realm; and all
these signatures are simply the sign of the cross, or what
are now vulgarly called marks; and so were many of the
deeds executed or witnessed by Dien of high degree for
centuries afterwards.

arose. He believed it never was the intention of the
Legislature that the Act should apply to estates
so situated—(Hear, hear)—but only to estates seriously
encumbered; and this was shown by a clause being in-
troduced into the original Bill, specially exempting
estates not encumbered to more than one-half of their
gross value. The effect of that clause was, however, ne-
gatived by an amendment being made by the Commons,
saying that the net value should be taken instead of the
gross value, and which was not repealed by this House.
Another amendment was also made, by which all estates
were included where there was a receiver on any portion,
however small. That was all that this Bill proposed to
remedy; and he asked the Government if they could pos-
sibly refuse, not only such an act of justice, but a Bill
like this, which would actually facilitate the operations
of the existing law, by reducing the number of estates
brought into the court, and thus affording a better
chance of a good price for those which were sold.—
(Hear.) At present all the land in Ireland was liable to
be brought into that court if, as he was informed, there
was that facility under the Act of obtaining a good title,
as it would merely be required to get a receiver ap-
pointed. lie asked the Government whether, when they
passed that Act, they wished large estates to be sold
merely because they were slightly encumbered? and if
not they were bound to adopt this Bill.
Lord CAMPBELL said, if his Noble Friend under-
stood that the Encumbered Estates Bill, as it now stood,
subjected and required every encumbered estate in Ire-
land to be sold, he was under a great mistake. It was
only where a receiver bad been appointed, and where
nothing in the way of payment could be obtained out of
the estate, that the Commissioners for the sale of encum-
bered estates had power to step in and direct the male of
such estate.
The Earl of WICKLOW was always in favour of the
Encumbered Estates Act; but he must say that it had
been brought forward at the most unfortunate time that
could have been chosen. The Noble Earl then adverted
to the powers given to the Commissioners, and being
himself of opinion that the Bill of last session required
amendment, he should give his support to the Bill of the
Noble Marquis—conditional support.
The Earl of CARLISLE could not admit that there
could be any objection to the conduct of the Govern-
ment on this Bill. He thought it was matter of doubt
whether the Commons would assent at all to the amend-
ments proposed by their Lordships; but, believing that
there were some inconveniences arising out of the ope-
rations of the receivers in Ireland, he was not disposed
to divide against the Bill of the Noble Marquis, but
rather that it should go to the Commons, there to be
considered.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH replied, and again
took the opportunity of speaking in terms of severity
of the Commissioners, whose political stomachs were
ready for the confiscation of any estate they could get
into their clutches, and to masticate, eat, consume, and
digest it.—(Laughter.)
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE defended the Com-
missioners from the imputations cast upon them by the
Noble Marquis, and contended that those imputations
were quite unfounded. He, however, deemed it expe-
dient that the whole subject should be connected toge-
ther, and be would not therefore offer any opposition to
the Bill going
before the other House of Parliament, and
there being considered.
Lord S VANLEY said, nothing was easier than to
swamp a document by overloading it with a mass of
irrelevant matter. What he asked for was specific
and distinct.. viz., an account of the number of estates
sold, the amount of the encumbrances on each, the an-
nual rental, and the number of years' purchase at that
rental for which each had been purchased.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, when the
Noble Lord made a motion he would answer him on
the subject.
The Bill was then read a second time and ordered to
be committed.

This shows that writing was an accomplishment rare
even among the great of our country in those times, and
so troublesome to those who could write their own names
that it was usual to put the mark only. These things
bear witness to the low state of literature among all
orders, and leave us to judge what must have been the
ignorance of the great majority of the nation.
Pass over the interval of a hundred years from the
conquest, and we find curious mention of English stu-
dents going to the University of Paris, and the quality
and habits of these students are thus delineated—" They
are of noble manners and of generous dispositions : they
give handsomely to the people: they dine oft many
dishes, and they drink plenty of wine." They, then,
must have been of wealthy families, or they would have
had no money to lavish; and no wonder, if they were
notorious for eating and drinking that the nobles them-
selves at this time were so unlearned, that, when the
King of England sent an embassy to the Pope, the Earl
of Arundel stood up, after the bishops had made their
speeches, and said:—" May it please your holiness—we,
who are illiterate laymen, do not understand one word
the bishops have been saying."
Roger Bacon, who was it star of the next century, in-
forms us that it took him twelve years to complete his
studies, and that it cost him 2,000 livres for books and
instruments; and that, after all, his contemporaries did
so little appreciate his wisdora that they persecuted him
for being a conjuror. Let us advance on to another
generation, and a ludicrous story, related of Lewis
Beaumont, consecrated Bishop of Durham in 1317, will
give you an insight into the sort of proficiency which
some Churchmen attained in the elementary art of read-
ing. Bishop Lewis Beaumont, a Frenchman, thrust
into an English bishopric, knew very little either of
Latin or English. When he had to read the bull of his
nomination, he was obliged to spell it over several days
beforehand; but, on coming to the word metropolitice, it
so puzzled him he could make nothing of it. At last he
cried out, in French, " Let it be supposed that I have
read it. By St. Louis! he was not very civil to me who
wrote down that hard word!"—Dr. Gilly.

Without describing the apparatus in detail, it may
suffice to mention that the tube called the way-tube
passes through a stuffing box into the water below the
bottom of the ship, provided with a rod for drawing it
all inboard when desired. The tube is divided into
two chambers, which have no connexion with each
other, and have their ports or apertures turned
at different angles to the line of motion—the
two forces thus obtained act upon air enclosed in.two
air-vessels, and the pressure of the air thus unequally
compressed is conveyed alone in the very small gutty
perch& tubes to any part of the ship, high or low,
where it is desired to hang the indicator, of which
any number may be supplied from ene way-tube.
The lower end of the way-tube is furnished with a
vane of peculiar construction, which not only keeps the
ports in the right direction•, but also, by moving the
rod above and the index finger upon it, indicates the
true course or lee-way, if any. His Royal Highness
Prince Albert was pleased to honour the inventor
with an audience in November last, when he ex-
hibited and explained to his Royal Highness the in-
strument in a state not quite so perfect as it has
become since.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMEN

HOUSE OF LORDS, June 10.
ROYAL COMMISSION.
Their Lordships met at Half-past Four o'clo
the Royal Assent was given by Commission to th
ing public and private Bills:
Exchequer-bills (18,558 7001.).
Process and Practice (Ireland) Act Amendment:
Parish Constables. . ,

Acts of Parliament Abbreviation.
Sunday Fairs Prevention.
Licensed Victuallers and General Fire and
surance Company (No. 2).
Carlisle Gas-light and Coke Company.
Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow.
Colonization Assurance Company,
Elgin Guildry Fund Society Incorporation.
Exeter and Crediton Railway.
Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh.
Nottingham Freemen's Allotments.
The Lords Commissioners were Lord LangC
Earl of Minto, and the Earl of Carlisle.
PETITIONS.
The Earl of RODEN presented petitions from I
ham and other places, praying for the abolition
day labour in the Post-office. '
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petitic
certain tenant-farmers complaining of the preset
cious mode of taking corn averages.
ASSISTANT-SURGEONS.
Earl MINTO entered into an explanation of a state
ment which he made the other evening relative to assis
taut-surgeons in the navy, and which had been misre-
presented iu the public prints. It was reported 'that he
had stated that it was the intention of the Board of Ad-
miralty to provide additional accommodation for
assistant-surgeons of the navy, in the sick ward.
Now, he stated no such thing; what he stated was
simply that additional accommodation would be pro-
vided, but he did not say when or how.
ENCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) ACT
AMENDMENT BILL.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH moved the second
reading of this Bill, which he said was intended to
correct the evils which resulted from the operation of
the Encumbered Estates Act in Ireland, and which if
not checked would end in the general confiscation
of the lands of that country. He had no personal
interest whatever in the measure, but unless
Government consented to amend the existing Act, he
saw no hope for it, but ruin to the majority of Irish
landowners. This was proved by the statements that
wore constantly being published in the newspapers, and
he hoped Government, if they proposed to
continue the Act without alteration, ' would
preserve their consistency by extending its
provisions to England. It was indeed a monstrous
injustice that a man who was indebted considerably be-
low his rental should be forced to sell his estate to pro-
vide for the debt, at an immense sacrifice. Why should
Irishmen be singled out for such oppression? They were
not the only men who had been so unfortunate
as to fall into debt. There were hundreds of land-
holders in this country who were far deeper in debt than
his unfortunate countrymen, and if Government and the
House wished to make an intolerable law bearable,
they would readily consent to amend the evils he
complained of.—(Hear, hear.) The operation of
the Act was bad enough; but the evils which
resulted from that were aggravated by the indiscretion
of the Commissioners who were charged with the task
of seeing the Act carried into effect; a parcel of monkics,
in fact, could have presided over its operation with as
much judgment and discretion, and he there-
fore hoped the House would at once adopt his
amendment.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of CARLISLE declined entering into a
discussion of the operation of the. Encumbered Estates
Act, but this he could state, that while some estates bad
been sold at a sacrifice, others had been sold at an im-
mense advantage to the proprietors. That evils had re-
sulted from the operation was naturally to be expected, but
they certainly were not of that magnitude which the Noble
Marquis would have their Lordships believe. There
was, however, no necessity for making any alterations
in its provisions, which had not already been provided
for by Government, and he must, therefore, call upon
their Lordships to stop the further progress f this Bill.
The Duke of RICHMOND would bo no party to the
forcible sale of an estate at seven and a half-year's pur-
ehase, and he should support the Bill,
The Earl of GLENGALL denounced the. Encum-
bered Estates Act as a downright robbery. It was a
scandal to the Legislature, and no matter whether Go-
vernment intended to amend its provisions or not,
ho would never cease to protest against it till the Act
had been blotted out of the statute-book. The Noble
Marquis had told their Lordships of estates having been
sold at figures aver aging not more then 7 i years' purchase,
but he knew of instances where the price had not been
equal to two years' purchase. He admitted with the
Noble Lord opposite that some properties had
fetched excellent prices, but in those instances
there were substantial residences attached to
the estates.—(Hear, hear.) Great injustice was done
to the Irish landowners in Lord Strafford's times, but
the acts committed then were trifles compared with
the villanies perpetrated under the existing law. The
amendment about reserves was a mere swindle—it
was brought up only three days before the end of' the
session, and agreed to without a single Irish Peer know-
ing anything at all about it.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY entreated his
Noble Friend not to use language which, in the present
condition of Ireland, was of a most fatal description.
He implored Noble Lords not to talk of meetings in
Dublin to resist the laws.- Whatever the Government
might do in Ireland, he trusted the loyal spirit of the
Irish people would ever prevail, and that they would not
be tempted to endeavour to effect a change in the laWs
by measures of violence, which could not but lead to the
most unhappy consequences. .
Lord CAMPBELL said, that from the speech of the
Noble Earl (Glengall) the House might suppose this was
a Bill to repeal the Encumbered Estates Act, and it
would never imagine that the poor paltry Bill really
proposed by the Noble Marquis would. ever satisfy
him. On the contrary, he would rather fancy that
even if this Bill were passed, it would still be
necessary to have meetings in Dublin to oppose an
alteration of the law by violence; and that Irish land-
lords would still . complain of the tyranny of the Im-
perial Legislature. In point of fact, this was a Bill to
make a very slender, and he thought inexpedient, amend-
ment of the Encumbered Estates Act. It did not even
touch the question in which 'the Noble Marquis differed
from the other House, of Parliament as' to whether
the test of encumbrance should be taken on the gross
income or the net income. It went merely to exempt
from the jurisdiction of the Encumbered Estates Com-
missioners .those estates which are now subject to re-
earneddiffLeroerndt
ceivers, or which are in the hands of the encumbrancer.
Earl FITZ WILLIAM (who spoke from the
purposehad Opposition
made
from thatry which
r a e
very
benches)a
lhe
isaidci h speech,
he
aehNobleintended.andL
foravery
He attacked
the Bill of the Noble Marquis, not on the ground which
he (Earl Fitz william) would have done, that it went to
overact the legislation of last year, but that it wont to
make so small a change that it was not worth making.
—(:Tear, hear.) But in making that small change he
must remind the House they were taking away
por-
tion of the law which was fraught with extreme injustice
to the landed property of Ireland. He must, therefore,
support the Bill. that
Lord BEAUMONT thought his Noble and Learned
Friend had either not read or—which was a very un-
usual circumstance with him—not understood the Bill
now before them. The Noble and Learned Lord would
lead the House to believe that, by passing that Bill, they
would prevent the sale of encumbered estates in Ireland
altogether in those cases where there was a receiver.
That was not the case. The only case to which the Bill
would apply was, where there was a large estate per-
fectly clear from all but a very small encumbranoe
affecting a part only of the property, and not the whole,
and there beiug a receiver on such part. - At present
stash an estate could be brought into court and sold;
but, if this Bill were passed, it would be exempt from
the jurisdiction of the court. That was the whole
effect of the Bill, which was made quite clear by
the .Bill ef:_..th.e,...Nobla Marquis. reciting that, por-
-1
tion of the present Act under which this grievance 1

,fe As.

de, the

AUSTRALIAN COLONIES.
Lord BROUGHAM, in rising to present a petition
from certain persons interested in the Australian
colonies against the Australian Colonies Bill, praying
to be heard by themselves, or by counsel, against
the said Bill, and to move that the petitioners be
heard at the bar as desired, complained of having been
misrepresented in the newspapers as to what he bad
stated (a the subject of the County Courts Bill. He
blamed no one for the misrepresentation, for he knew
too well the great difficulty their Lordships had in hear-
ing one another in that House, and the general incapa-
city that prevailed among them o❑ that point, not to
know that this difficulty was greatly aggravated to those
whose duty it was, through the connivance of their Lord-
ships, to communicate what passed in their Lordships'
House. Therefore be had no complaint to make—he
could have no complaint to make, and he made no com-
plaint against the respectable and intelligent individuals
who made those reports. But it was reported that he
had said the reverse of what he actually did say in the
case in question; and the knowledge of that fact had
come to him in the very inconvenient form of cart-loads
of letters, asking him why he had changed his opi-
nions on the subject of the jurisdiction of those courts.
What he had said was, that it was his own measure

firming,
'of Sun.

n from
Lt ftilla-

of 1833 which had been lost in the House of Lords
in that year by one voice. He had added that
he rejoiced t see this Bill introduced elsewhere; but
that he complained it had not been taken up in the fir t
instance as a Government measure. He did not advo-
cate the abrogation of the option allowed by the Bill to
take 501. causes into the superior courts, if the parties
thought it necessary; on the contrary, he approved of it
as it was given in the Bill. The Noble Lord then gave
notice that on Friday next he would call the attention of
the House to th,- jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery
and the Great Seal, and proceeded to cite the heads of
the petition, which were to the effect that the petitioners
objected to the franchi'e fixed by the Australian Colo-
nies Bill as being too high—that they objected to the
composition of the legislative council as vicious in prin-
ciple and alien to the constitution—that the federal in-
s'itutions proposed would be productive of discord, and
that the great grievance of the colony was the Govern-
ment being carried on not on the spot. The Noble Lord
then urged that the course prayed by the petitioners, to
be heard at the bar, was not unusual, and he quoted a
dozen cases to that effect from 1803 to 1838. The Noble
and Learned Lord concluded by moving that the peti-
tioners be heard at the bar by counsel.
Earl GREY said, if it were the practice of their Lord-
ships' House to hear counsel at the bar on a Bill in pro-
gress, he should be very willing to hear them on the
present occasion, as it might be of advantage, notwith-
standing that it might be attended with considerable
wraesetedn th
waste f t their
they would e
Lordships' s objected to the
pt timeif
they ; but he
were to agree to the
motion of the Noble and Learned Lord; and he thought
it a matter of great importance that they should endea-
vour to adhere, as far as possible, to the practice which
had so long been observed by their Lordships' House in
the matter. If there was one rule more established than
another in the practice of their Lordships' House, it was
that they should not hear counsel upon a measure before
their Lordships House, except the individual interest
of the petitioners was concerned. All the instances
which had been cited by the Noble and Learned Lord
were those in which the individual interests of the peti-
tioners were directly concerned. In 1825, when the Ro-
man Catholic Association petitioned to be heard against
a measure for suppressing illegal assemblies, the prayer
of the petition was rejected, on the ground of the prac-
tice of their Lordships' House. With respect to the
Australian Colonies Bill, there was not one clause in it
which affected the individual interests of the petitioners,
and there was not a single alteration in it which had not
been petitioned for by those colonies. With respect to
the present petition, ho happened to know that great
pains had been taken in canvassing signatures for it,
and of those that were attached to it there were not more
than five or six which belonged to persons directly con-
nected with those colonies, and that of itself formed suf-
ficent ground for their Lordships not acceding to its
prayer. From the colony of New South Wales there
had not been one single petition against the Bill, though
it was notorious in the colony that it would be passed
this year; while from Port Philip petitions had come
praying that the Bill might be passed into law as
speedily as possible. In one of the petitions in favour of
the Bill there were the names of almost every great house
trading with these colonies, and of a large number of the
most important proprietors connected with them who
were now in England. There had been, too, sufficient
time for the Legislative Council to instruct Mr. Scott,
the agent for the colony, to petition against the measure,
had that body thought fit to do so. But such had not
been the case. As soon as Mr. Scott's petition had been
presented to the House ho (Earl Grey) had a communi-
cation addressed to him asking him if he had received
any instructions from the Legislative Council to petition
against the Bill, or to suggest any alterations in it, that
The answer
if so he might have them brought under the attention of
the Government,
which he had received
from Mr. Scott last Saturday stated that the petition
which he had presented indioated the grounds on
which he prayed to be heard at their Lordship' bar
against the Bill, and that he hoped the statements con-
tained in it would be sufficient to induce Earl Grey not
to oppose the prayer of the petition. He (Earl Grey)
found then
that the a ent had received no instructions
from the Legislative Council on the subject, and the act
of Mr. Scott in petitioning against the Bill was an uneu-
thorised act, which would not
g
receive the approbation
of his constituents. He trusted, then, their Lordships
would not accede to the motion, or infringe the practice
of the House, which had been adhered to even in the
case of the petition of the West India planters and mer-
chants in 1833, when they asked to bo heard against the
Slavery Abolition Bill. It was quite true that counsel
municipal
againstwa s founded,vario u 3 con-
tained had been heard against the Municipal Reform Bill; but
that was because the report of the commissioners of
in the case of a
alleginagtitray'oofngwrahviechchtahregßesill
that,
cor-
porations of England. But the present was a very dif-
ferent case. He would only add,
measure of public policy coming up from the other
House, it was very unusual that an application of that
sort, which had not been made to the other House of
Parliament, should have been made to their Lordships'
House. Upon those grounds he trusted that their
Lordships would not agree to the motion of the Noble
and Learned Lord.
Lord MONTEAGLE said he would take the Noble
Earl upon his own terms, and would assert that these
petitioners ought to be heard at the bar of that House.
They were actually legislating for persons who were at
a great distance from this country, and therefore, as this
was a Bill which would alter the value of the property
of the landed proprietors of Australia, certainly it was
but an act of justice that these parties should be heard
at the bar of that House upon a measure which would
so much affect them. The petition which the Noble
Earl had referred to in favour of the measure was not
signed by a single landed proprietor in Australia.
Earl GREY—That's a mistake.
Lord MONTEAGLE—weII, let that be as it might,
there was no question that the petition against the Bill
was ifigned by numbers of people who held property in
Australia. When the Bill was introduced, it was
stated. that under it the colonists were to have the
Power of disporiug of their WOK 5440. b4l 11 this

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 11, 1850.

Bill as it now came before their Lordships, that
power was denied them. That. therefore, was a point
on which the colonists differed from the Bill.
The petitioners against the present measure complained
against' the evils which it would inflict upon them,
and he therefore asked whether they would carry through
the present measure without hearing those parties at
the bar of their Lordships' House? On that question
he should take the sense of the House before going into
Committee on the Bill.
Earl GRANVILLE said he thought the best argu-
ment in favour of the Bill was, that it had been bix
months in Australia considered by the Legislative
Council of that colony, and by the people in general,
and that no opposition whatever had been raised against
it. That certainly showed that the people of Australia
were not against it; and now what was the use of hear-
ing counsel upon it? From what he had heard, he did
not believe that the feeling of the colonies was against
the present measure, and therefore he could see no
necessity for the present motion.
Lord REDESDALE believed this to be the first
occasion on which a similar petition had been refused,
if their Lordships should refuse it, and he could see no
reason why the prayer of it should not be granted.
Lord KINNAIRD said that when the present mea-
sure was announced to the colonies. it was stated that
they were to have the management of their waste lands.
On that understanding be believed the Bill was accepted
by the colonists; but that power being now denied, he
thought the parties were entitled to a fair hearing.
Earl GREY denied that the Bill submitted to the
Legislative Council contained such a clause as to waste
lands.

Lord MONTEAGLE said that Mr. Scott had a perfect
right to come now before their Lordships, seeing that it
was not until the present session that her Majesty's Go-
vernment had come to the determination to abandon the
control of the waste lands in Australia.
Earl GREY considered that Mr. Scott had no right to
take any step in this business without the permission of
the Assembly, which he did not appear to have.
The Earl of WICKLOW said that without further in-
formation it appeared to him inexpedient to proceed at
present to legislate on this Bill, and he trusted either
that the prayer of the petitioner would be now attended
to, or that their Lordships would postpone the further
consideration of the Bill to next session.
The Earl of HARROWBY, looking at all the cir-
cumstances, considered it to be his duty to support the
motion.
After a few words from Lord POLWARTH in sup-
port of the motion,
Earl ST. GERMANS said he was of opinion that a
very erroneous impression might be produced on the
minds of the colonists themselves, if the speech of Mr.
Scott should be heard against this Bill, and he was of
opinion that if' their Lordships should not proceed to pass
the Bill which had been introduced on this subject, they
might, by such course, produce an unfavourable opinion
in the minds of the polonists.
Lord BROUGHAM replied, and said with respect to
his former argument, he was disposed to give it up. But
Mr. Scott was the agent of the colony generally, and
his commission was to represent theca to the Govern-
ment. And was he (Lord Brougham) now to be told
that his (Mr. Scott's) instructions were to go for nought,
and that they were to be thrown in the fire? Was it to
be said by their Lordships—" You, Mr. Scott, are Mem-
ber for Berwickshire, and as you are in that character,
we cannot, we will not hear you." Was that right?
Was it right in Lord John Russell to get up in his
place and say to Mr. Scott, " You are not instructed by
your Berwickshire constituents on this question, and
therefore we shall not hear you." But was that
right ? Was that fair towards the " antipodes ?"
He (Lord Brougham) must say that nothing could be so
futile as such an argument. The objection to Mr. Scott
being heard then was most unfair. He (Lord Brougham)
must say that this colony had been very harshly dealt
with; and he could assure their Lordships that had it
not been for the promise of Lord John Russell with re-
spect to the land clause, their Lordships would have had
numerous petitions from the colonists on the subject. He
did not then hesitate to say, that Lord John Russell
stopped their mouths. There were strong reasons why
their Lordships should not persevere hastily with the
Bill now under consideration, and he hoped their Lord-

ships would be of opinion that Mr. Scott ought to be
heard on behalf of the colonies. In his humble judg-
ment, all the arguments ho had heard that evening,
amounted to an additional reason why they should grant
the prayer of the petition.
After a few words from the Earl of ST. GERMANS,
in explanation,
Their Lordships divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it ... ... 33
Majority against hearing counsel at the bar —8
On our return to the gallery we found
The Bishop of OXFORD moving that the Bill should
be referred to a Select Committee, when they might
hear witnes►es that they could not hear at the bar. The
Bill appeared to him to be frankly the most injudicious
handling of a great and permanent interest. Ile denied
that it was the desire, of the people of New South Wales
to have a single chamber, and if the Committee were

granted he would undertake to prove that assertion by
evidence that could not be controverted. He considered
that the uniting the free colonies proposed by the mea-
sure was a most monstrous proposition. In respect of
the interests of the Church of England, as pointed out
in the Bill, he considered that they were altogether over-
looked, tor while pertect freedom was given to the Pres-
byterian, the Wesleyan, and the Baptist, the Church of
their fathers was left unprotected. He did not want to
see the Church of England established in those colonies,
' as he did not think they were fit for such a state of
things, but what he wanted was, that the Church of
England ►hould not be circumscribed and shackled i❑
its operations in those colonies, as it would be by the
present measure. Considering, therefore, all the cir-
cumstances attending the measure, he felt him,elfjusti-
fied in moving that it should be referred to a select
Committee.
Earl GREY said he thought the proper course for the
Right Rev. Prelate to have pursued would have been
that they should go into Committee on the Bill that day
six months. lie could not conceive what was the object

of the motion he had now proposed. The Right Re►.
Prelate had said that information was wanted on the
subject, bat even though that was the case, such could
not be got by referring the Bill to a Select Committee,
so as to have it passed during the present session of
Parliament ; and therefore the object of the Right Rev.
Prelate would be defeated. He considered that they
were in possession of all the information necessary on
the subject, and he could not, therefore, see the necessity
for referring the measure to any such Select Com-
mittee. He was persuaded that the system of Govern-
ment now in operation in Now South Wales was ex-
ceedingly well adapted to the condition of the colony.
Had they asked his opinion some years ago on the sub-
ject, he might have been of a different way of thinking
in relation to the constitution of the colony , but men's
minds had, in a course of years, adapted themselves to
that constitution, and to the institutions under it ; and
the principle of the Bill working well there was suf-
ficient to induce the Government not to alter it with-
out the consent of the colonists themselves. He should
now repeat the argument which ho made use of the other
night, namely, that when Parliament had once given a
representative system and government to a colony, they
bad no right to alter it without the consent of the colo-
,,ists,(Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl then read ex-
tracts from the inhabitants of various districts of the co-

lony against any alteration in the constitution of the
colony. His Lordship also read resolutions agreed to in
the colony, to the same effect, and said he thought he
alterationhsshttwiehu isoi
ncetdn(dhhßEmoiopniuugrrtodtthi
htpeat
hGeonßoesyßrui
madeeket
yiymnl
oia)on:rwiwa, stronginrsibalteuernhtldrhadoeogetuneeeviteowcatnanuhows t
dleuaedo cudwo consentot hdhena yva consent
constitutionenenv
rtgneeh:vtesoaehoorsrfeffec
nNhtt shouldhehaecemenwrgecacchange
Secretary
consentoel
oronunynantointiohstths
ftotabes‘ssiev:
altera-
tion easaaybrni
tnueaeryyts.:
con-
stitution of a colony without the consent of the colonists
themselves.—(Hear, hear.) From South Australia,
Victoria, and Port Philip, petitions emanating from
large and influential meetings had been forwarded, pray-
ing the Government to pass the Bill at once,
and send it out, and, in like manner, they had
petitions from various places in Van Diemen's Land,
praying that the Bill might be passed, and condemning
the Government for continuing the transportation of
convicts to the colony. But the Eight Reverend Prelate
urged that, because the people of New South Wales
were content with their constitution, so also ought the
people of the other colonies. The Right Rev. Prelate had
gone further, and taunted him (Earl Grey) with speeches
which he had made is the other House of Parliament,
with a view of showing him inconsistent on this subject
but ho had never made a speech yet in that House that
he was not prepared to make in their Lordships' House,
Nay, more, he had gone farther on this subject in their
Lordships'House, than he had ever gone in the other House
of Parliament--(Hear.) The. system of governing the
Australian colonies was at present most unsatisfactory.
Even a slaughterhouse could not, for sanitary pur-
poses, be removed from a neighbourhood without send-
for power to the home country. The Noble Earl then
drew a distinction between the laws which the Crown ought
to allow, and those which it ought to disallow. Of 127
Acts which had been passed by the Legislature of New
South Wales, not more than five had been disallowed
by the Crown, and those fire were disallowed on tech-
nical grounds, and sent back ; and five had been sent
back for amendment and alterations. Ile might add
that 99 out of every 100 of the laws made in New
South Wales, related exclusively to local matters. He
found that of 272 measures which had been brought
forward in New South Wales, 184 were carried by the
members of the elected Council Chamber. He earnestly
entreated their Lordships not to throw out this measure
by adopting the Right Rev. Prelate's amendment—not
to dash from the lips of the colonists the cup of expecta-
tion, nor to postpone for another session the enactment
of a measure which the colonies themselves called for.
The clauses which the Right Rev. Prelate considered as
objectionable, if they really were so, could be amended
in Committee, but to refer their consideration to a Select
Committee, would in effect be to consent to a postpone-
ment of the entire all for another session, and this was
a step which he was not prepared to sanction.
Lord STANLEY said if this Bill were to be a final
measure—if it were intended to pass the:Bill with their
present amount of information, and without expunging
some of the more objectionable clauses—then, believing
that the enactment of such a measure would be most
dangerous, he was prepared to join the Right Reverend
Prelate in his application for a Select Committee, even
at the risk of losing the Bill. If the G.ivernment per-
sisted in the passing of the 30th to the 35th clause, he
must vote for the amendment of the Right Reverend
Prelate; hut if he could get an assurance from the Go-
vernment that these clauses would be modified he would
not do so.
Earl GREY said, that as the Noble Earl had ap-
proved of clauses up to, 30, ,the clearer and fair ourse
would be to,go into Committee upon the Bill, and, when
they Ceja9 $9 the (Aimee objected to, ovbjeot them to

discussion. As to the 35th clause, for example, he him-
self was strongly desirous of retaining it, but still he
should ❑ot regard its rejection by the Committee as a
sufficient reason for abandoning the Bill.
Lord STANLEY said it did not follow that he was
favourable to all the clauses up to 30—quite the con-
trary.

Earl GREY said that, under those circumstances,
they had better go to a division.
Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment 21
Against it ... 34
Majority for the Government ... —l3
Their Lordships ajourned at Half-past Twelve.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 10.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
LORDS' AMENDMENTS.
The Lords' amendments to the following Bills were
considered and agreed to:—
Greenwich Hospital Improvement.
Guardian Fire and LiFe Assurance Company.
THIRD READINGS.

The following Bills were read a third time and passed
Cobbe's Divorce.

Edinburgh Slaughter-hou►es Removal.
Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton, Birmingham
and Oxford Junction, and Great Western Railway
Companies.
The following Bills, as amended, were considered and
agreed to, and ordered to be printed:—
Kent Waterworks.

Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway.
Southampton Waterworks.

ryne Navigation.
The Prussian Minister's Residence Bill was read a
second time and ordered to be committed.

PETITIONS.

Mr. DUNCOM.BE presented a petition praying fur
the abolition of all test oaths in the Universities of
Scotland.

General LYGON presented a petition from Worcester
against the Savings Bank Bill.
Mr. TUFNELL presented a petition to the same
effect.

Sir J. Y. BULLER presented a petition from the
clergy a,,d laity of Exeter against the system of secular
education.

Mr. GROGAN presented a petition from Dublin
against the Bill fur abolishing the office of Lord-
Lieutenant.

Colonel RAWDON presented a petition against the
Savings Bank Bill.
Colonel THOMPSON presented a petition from the
Bradford Savings Bank, praying the House to refer the
Savings Banks Bill to a Select Committee; also ten
petitions from various parts of the metropolis in favour
of the Marriage Bill.

Mr. CLIME presented a petition from Shropshire to
the same effect.

Mr. HEY WOOD presented a petition in favour of
the Ten Hours Bill.

Sir GEOItGE STRICKLAND presented a petition
to the same effect from Todmorden.

Lord BROOKE presented a petition from the War-
wick Savings Bank in favour of the Savings Bank Bill.
Mr. MASTERNIAN presented fifteen petitions from
various parts of the metropolis in favour of the Marriage
Bill.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL presented a petition
against any alteration in the County Courts Act.
Mr. B. DENISON presented a petition from a place
in Yorkshire in favour of the Marriage Bill.
Mr. HENLEY presented a petition from Oxfordshire
against the Bill.

Mr. FlTZROYyresented a petition from Lewisham,
praying the House to pass a Bill to prevent the use of
dugs in carts.

Mr. CORRIE presented a petition from the Dun-
cannon Savings Bsnk praying the House to refer the
Savings Banks Bill to a Select Committee.
Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from the
South London Cemetery Company against the Govern-
ment Interment Bill.

Mr. BANKES presented petitions from factory ope-
ratives in Todmorden and ether places in Lancashire in
favour of an effective Ten Hours Bill.

Culonel FREESTUN presented a petition, very nu-
merously signed by some of the most influential inha-
bitants of Weymouth and Me'combo Regis, who have
prefixed their addresses, being a counter petition of one
he had the honour to present from the same place, pray-
ing that the Honourable House would not make any
alteration in the present mode of delivering letters on
Sundays, as the petitioners humbly think it would be at-
tended with the most injurious effects in case of sick-
ness, or urgent public or private affairs; which was re-
ceived with cheers.