The Sun.
London, England, 1850-02-26 00:00:00

T7:141 l7) A V Pi VP, I N P, BTttT A n ' fin, a

Warne;, stating that it was of the greateset public im-
portsmce that the measure should be rased. Tbo real
parties who opposed that Bill were the Eastern Counties
Company, and the petitioners stated that the New-
market line, which was in the possession of this com-
pany, did not afford the people of New market that col -
venience and facility which Parliament intended it should
give their, and they thought that the present measure
would affoid them the accommodation they wantee%
It was not strictly the fact that the Bill had been three
times before Parliament; and he could assure the House-
that it was for the sake of promoting the public accom-
modation that this Bill was introduced. He theref tVe
pro.eitcd against the attempt to stop the Bill in limine.
Mr. CAMPBELL supported the Bill.
Mr. WADDINGTON said it was all very well for
the inhabitants of Cambridge to say they wanted a
station independent of the Eastern Counties Com-
pany, but he should be glad to know how this
Bill could possibly accomplish that object. The
ha stern Counties Railway Company had a claim
upon the House. He called upon the House to pause
before it sanctioned the second reading of this Bill.
-Ct Mr. M. GIBSON said the Committee were e f opinion
that for the purposes of the public business the line be-
tween Shepreth and Cambridge should be constructed,
end that the Eastern Count'es Company should make
he link between Shepreth and Cambridge within a
t fain time, which had not txpire:,?.
After a few words from Lord GEORGE MAN.
NERS, the House divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading ... 98
Against it ... .. 135
Majority --37
The Bill was conk quently thrown out.
SECOND READINGS.

The following Bills were then read—itsecond time and
ordered to be committed:—

Copper Miners' Company (England).
Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway.
Malchester Bonding.

Victoria (London) Dock.
Waterford and Kilkenny Railway.
MIL FEARGUS O'CONNOR.

A. special report from the Coannitt of Public Peti-
tions was brought up by Mr. TIIORNELY, which was
read by the Clerk at the table.

It stated that a petition was presented on the 14th
of February by the Honourable Member for Ox-
fordshire, which was ordered to lie upon the
table. That petition was not seen or heard of for some
day a afterwards, which had led to inquiries being insti-
tuted by the Committee, and the result was that the
Committee bad discovered that the petition was taken
from the table, and kept for many days by Mr. Feargus
O'Connor the Member for Nottingham.
Mr. THORNLEY thought it right to state that this
report was agreed to yesterday morning, but its presenta-
tion had been delayed till this evening, because the Hon.
and Learned Member fur Nottingham was not in his
place list night.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR said it was entirely through
ignorance of the practice of the House that he had
taken the petition away. The reason for his taking the
petition from the table was to have it published
in his newspaper, but a few days afterwards the
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Wolverhampton re-
minded him of his having taken it away, and he at once
directed his secretary to bring it down to the House. If,
however, he had violated any rules or orders of the
House he now bagged leave to apologise to the Speaker
for having done so. When ho took the petition
ail ay he was not aware that he was violating
any of the orders or rules of the House.
He hoped he had given a sufficient explanation to the
House, and be begged leave to express his regret that he
had viohted any of its rules.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HENLEY rose to explain. He said the petition
came from a number of people in his (Mr. Henley's) own
county, and he conceived it was directed against the
,chcme, and not against the Hon. Member (Mr. O'Con-
nor) l ersonally. If he (Mr. Hen!ey) bad thought other-
wise, he should have adopted the usual course of giving
the Hon. Member notice.--(Hear, hear.)
The petition was then ordered t i lie upon the table.

AT I'ORNEYS' AND tit )1 ORS' CERTIFIGAiE
DUTY.
Sir D. Nortep, Mr. Heilry Herbert, Col. Chatterton,
Mr. V. Smith, and Mr. Henley presented petitions pray-
ing f,r toe repeal of the Attorneys' and Solicitors' An-
nual Certificate Duty.
Sir JAMES DUKE presented a petition from certain
respcctatle attornies practising in the city of London
pra) log tor a remission of the duty on attornies annual
certificates.
Mr. AU LIONBY presented a simPar petition from
the Law Suci ty of Staples Inn.
Mr. CARDWELL presented a similar petition from
Liverpool.
• Loid ROBERT GROSVENOR presented similar
fetitious from the lucorporattd Law Society of Great
Britain, and from the counties of Bedford, Hereford,
Cambridge, Chester, Cumberland, Durham, Hants,
Huntingdon, and others, there being 178 petitions in
the whole.

.1 tie NOBLE LORD again rose, and said that it had been
his duty, before the termination of last session, to bring
under the consideration of the House the case of the
journeymen bakers of the reetropolis, with a view to re-
lieve them from the hardships by which they were sur-
-1-mlw:ed.—(lf( ar, hear.) The journeymen bakers Formed
but a small portion of the community, yet the House
had given a fair consideration of their claims.—(Hear,
bran) It was now his duty to bring before the Bowe
the claims of another portioa—a still smaller, and, in
point of numbers, a more insignifitcant portion—of the
community, but a portion whose power was acknow-
ledgedly great, and of whom it had been justly said that the
citifessions made in all the confessionals in the world were
not, put together, half so important in their consequences
as those made to the atturnies of this country. How
great, then, might be the injury, were they to publish
the communications which had been made to them; and
yet how few had been the instances of any breach of
trust which the members of this body bad committed.
The tax was so contrived as to press with all its
rigour upon the poor man, while it left the
wealthy man entirely free. But, notwithstanding
this, should the Noble Lord below him as he
hoped he would not oppose his motion, he should trust
to the good feelings of the House to carry it out.
The origin of this tax was when Mr. Pitt
was at his wit's end tor an impost, and had tried several
others in vain. Upon the discussion of this Bill, several
very facetious and sensible remarks had been wade.
It would be much fairer to tax the practitioner
according to the amount of business which he
did and to his gain, and on the same
principle as that on which the income-tax was imposed.
His certificate duty at present realised an annual sum r f
120,0001., but the injustice did not end here, for anti attor-
ney had to pay 1204 for stamps to his articles before he
could be allowed to practise, and the annual
receipts to the Government from this source
amounted, according to the last return, to 68,0001
The injustice of the tax would be apparent when he
mentioned that while the rich practitioner paid
a tax of only a half per cent., his less fortunate brother
in the profession actually paid 12 per cent. on his income.
It might be urged against this motion that attorneys
levied large contributions upon the public, and that
other trades and professions 'were taxed according to the
same principle. lie, however, disputed to the truth of the
latter objection, since that 'was a profession similarly
taxed and circumstanced as that of an attorney, while if
they wished to decrease the gains of the attorney or the
costs of the solicitor, nothing was more calculated
to accomplish that object than this very motion.
The time was when attorneys made great profit.,, but
those times were gone. The House had, witlin the last
year, taken assay from the Attorneys a sum of 45,000/.
in hard cash by refusing to allow them any
discount upon stamps of upwards of 101. This duty
operated in a most injArious manner towards
managing clerks in atcornies offices, affecting
their morality and their inch pendence.—(Hear, hear.)
What the attorneys complained of was, that the odious
tax was still continued upon them, while
every day they were injured by the Legislature
rendering them unable to pay it. He had
already shown the House that the tax was not
general, that it was partial and unjust; and having done
so, he would leave the matter to the decision of the
House. The Noble Lord concluded by moving for leave
to tiring in the Bill.

Sir fiE LACY EVANS seconded the motion.
Mr. HAYTER must oppose the motion, as its effect
would be to reduce the revenue to the extent of upwards
c f 120,0001. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving
that the further consideration of the motion should be
postponed to the 22d March.

Sir F. TIIESSEGER supported the motion.
Mr. COCKBURN hoped the Government would
consider the proposition of the Noble Lord.
After a few observations from Colonel CHATTERTON
and Sir DE LACY Everts, the motion was postponed
to the 22d March.
SECULAR EDUCATION.
Mr. W. J. FOX then rose to move for leave to bring
in u 13111 to promote the secular education of the people
in England and Wales, and was
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

COURSE OF EXCH.?
A natemarn 12 2
Ditto, at sigtv.t ...... 12 1
Rotterdam 12 3
Antwerp.. .... .......... 25 75
Hamburg'. ......M.B. 13 13%
rarls, 3 danys'sight 25 50
Ditto, 3 months .... 25 70
larsellles ............ 25 70
80urdeavix......... . 25 70
Frankfort on Mains.... 122
Petesl,u/ gh, Sil. Rble 373/8
Vienna, •! rec. tlo ...... 11 40
Theste, dl tt0.... • • .... 11 40
4tadrid - •......... 49%
qadiz 4974
Bilbao.. .• •..

N GE.---( THIS DAY.)
G1bra1tar.............. .
Leghorn ........•• • ..•• 30 60
Genoa ..•• •• .... .. ••.. 26 0

Venice .. •• • . ..
Naples ...... •..... • • 41%
I•alermo, per0z........ 121
Messina .............. 12 /
Li5b0n.......,„„„„ 53%
Oporto .• .• • • .... ••• . • • 53%
ktio Janeiro ••• • „ • „• • .
Buenos Ayres • •

Yew York, 21 days'alght

Philadelphia

niers OF BULLION, PER OR.
Foreign Gold in bars.. £3 17 9
l'ortugal Gold Coin () 0 0
Spanish Doubloons .. 0 0 0

Barcelont,

New Dollars ...... 0 4 10%
Silverha bars ......•• 0 4 113

SAVINGS' BANKS.--It is another great fact," that
those officers of savings' bank::, who have proved de-
faulters, were persons in excellent stations in life. Trus-
tees and managers of some of those institutions appear
to have had a special likiug iu the appointment cf such
persons (a sort of favoritism to worldly-minded men) to
the exclusion of competent and upright individuals,
to whom the situations would have been a benefit. ana a
credit to those appointing them. But the appointments,
being not of a personal nature to such trustees and
managers but a public concern, why they could serve
pet men more easily and more conveniently to themselves.
Having done so, the favoured men were left to the almost
uncontrolled management of the banks (for it would net
do to watch, much more suspect, there) and tl.e result
has been what all the world now knows. So much for
lavoritism and injustice I
STRENGTH OF GUTTA PERCHA. TUBING.-A trial
of the strength of gutta percha tubing took place a
few days ago at Stirling in presence of a Committee
of the Town Council, with a view to its applicability
for extinguishing fires, flushing drains, &e. The
tubing, which was one•and-a-half inch bore, was at-
tached to the water-pipes; and, although the pressure of
the water is perhaps the greatest in the kingdom (being
about 450 feet), not the slightest effect could be 1 er-
ceived upon either the tubing or the joints, whilst the
same amount cf pressure upon strong leather hose scat-
ter el the rivets in all directions.—Edinburgh Advertiser.
MARGATE, FEB. 25.—The Alfred, Calais to London,
got on the Ness Rock yesterday, but was assisted off
this morning after partly discharging.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Feb. 25.

(Sittings at Guildhall, before Lord Chief Justice WILE'
and a Special Jury.)

THE ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH COMPANY V. BRETT AND

LITTLE.

This case, which commenced on Thursday last, is one
of three actions which have been brought by the plain-
tiffs against the defendants fur an alleged infringement
of the several patents of the plaintiffs.
The Attorney-General, Mr. Martin, Q C., Mr. Mon-
tague Smith, and Mr. Grove were counsel for the plain-
tiffs; and Mr. Cockburn, Q.C., Mr. Webster, and Mr.
Chance for the defendants.

The patent alleged to be infringed in this action is a
patent granted to Messrs. Cook and Wheatstone in
1837, for "certain improvements in giving signals and
sounding alarums in distant places by electric currents
transmitted through metallic circuits." This patent,
with others, was afterwards assigned to the present
plaintiffs. It would be almost impossible to give a
Lair description of the respective telegraphs except
by means of diagrams; the chief clifferepce be-
tween the plaintiffs' and the defendants being
that the plaintiffs' telegraph consisted of five wires,
with a dial plate or index containing the letters of the
indicating
the with five needles for the purpose of
the pat ticular letter intended, and worked by means of
keys and buttons; while the defendants' consisted of
only one wire, with a dial plate and two needles, which
by the number of their deflections., i▪
ndicated the parti-
cular signal intended, according to a telegraphic code
and worked by means of a handle. A great many sci-
entific witnesses were examined on both sides, whose
~
evidence was very conflicting, which would be impos-
sible to give, except in detail. The plaintiffs alleged
that the defendants had infringed thei▪ r patent in five es-
sential particulars, viz.:-1. With respect to the needles,
and the application of stops to prevent their deflection
except in certain angles; 2. With respect to the cross
bar for the purpose of disconnecting and connecting the
several wires at pleasure; 3. In the reciprocating
principle, whereby the same wires were used
iu transmitting backwards and forwards; 4. That
the needles worked in planes opposite the ope-
rators at each end whereby the operator taw that
his message
was correctly telegraphed; and 5. The
using receiving machines at intermediate stations, show-
ing the same signals at those stations as at the termini.
On the part of the plaintiffs it was contended that tte.
invention of the defendants was a mere colourable eva-
sion of the plaintiffs' patent, and that they produced the
same effect by a process which, although apparently dif.
ferent, wets a
.mechanical equivah et. The defendants
contended that theirs was an entirely new invention
from the same stock of knowledge as the plaintiffs', and,
although the effect lc as the same, the means adopted
were essentia'ly different from those point, d out in the
pliinliffs' specification. 'rho decendaids had only one
wire to the distant place, and the electric circuit Ras
completed by using the earth as a conductor. It was not
discovered until after the plaintiffs' patent that the earth
could be used as a conductor; and the plaintiffs' specifi!:.a..
tion throughout relates to a metallic circuit, meaning
that the circuit is to be completed by means of a wire
throughout the entire circuit.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL replied, when
The Learned JUDGE SUM Ir.ed up, and shortly pointed
out to the jury the alleged infringements.
The jury found—That the making signals to distant
stations was a new invention of the plai▪
ntiffs, as also the
making signals to intermediate stations; that the angu-

lar motion of the needle, en vertical planes and horizon-
tal axes; conjointly with steps, was new; the use of the
dial was not new; that the handle of the defendants for
the purpose of clanging the circuits was not an imita-
tion of the cross-bar of the plaintiffs; that the magnetic
ring and indicator of the defendants was different from
the needle mentioned in the plaintiffs' specification; that
the indication of signals at the same time at distant sta-
tions was not the plaiut ffs' invention; that the defendants'
instrument with one wire and two noodles was not the
same as the plaintiffs', and that the system of the tele-
graph was a different system from that of the plaintiffs.
The Learned JUDGE directed the verdict to be entered
for the plaintiff-, with 51. damages, leave being reserved
to the defendants to move on the following points:-1.
That the defendants' using the t arth as a portion of the
circuit was not an infringement of the plaintiffs' patent,
inasmuch as the plait fffs' invention was based upon the
principle of transmitting the electric current through a
metallic circuit. 2. That the defendants' system, con-
sisting of one wire, was essentially different from the
system of five wires and five needlss of the plaintiff,'.
By arrangement between the partir s it was arran=t d
that a verdict should to tdcen for the plaintiffs upon all
the issues except " Nut Guilty."

WATERFO:ID, WEXFORD, WICK-

LOW, AND DUBLIN RAILWAY.
(Couticued from our Third E-Ith n of last night.)
The discussion krminated in an amendment, to the
Effect that a committee of inquiry should be appointed to
investigdto the affairs of the company, and to report
upon the most de,irable Fla❑ Ahich could he adopted to
rescue the shate'iolders from their present difficulty.
It was suggested that this amendment should be with-
drawn, and that there should be substituted f.r it am.-
ther, to the eff ct that a committee c f five shareho!ders
should be appointed to confer with the directors as to
the expediency of short ming the line and reducing the
capital of the company.
Upon the amendment being put, 22 were for it, and 1
against it.

—The Hon. Mr. PONSONBY demanded a poll.
The dissentient shareholders declined to vote, and the
amendment was lost by 67 votes of persons present, and
880 proxy VOte.9.
Another amendment for a committee was made to in-
quire into the accounts. This was negatived upon a
the dissentient shareholders again declining to vote.
The ori;inal motion was then carried, and the meet-
ing broke up.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, Feb. 25.
ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION BILL.

(Continued from our Third Edition of last night.)
Lord STANLEY supported the amendment. It the
clause passed it would preclude the possibility of in-
creasing the number f bishops. Besides this, the pa-
rochial clergy would have cause to complain, inasmuch
as if the txo funds were combined, every 4,0001. a year
appropriated out of it to new bishoprics would be eon-
sidered as depri►ing them of 40 additional curates. The
episcopal fund was adequate to all the demands upon it,
but the common fund was not, and, moreover, there was
no chance of any future excess in that fund. He wac,
under these circumstances, all the more disposed to keep
these funds separate and untouched, except for their own
particular purposes. _ _ _

The LORD.CIIANCELL OR said it could not be an-
ticipated by any one when the nezessities of the Church
might require the application of one fund or of the other,
and, thr re fore, iu his opinion, to make them efficient
they should be united, so as fle.t they could be made
available for any emergency that might arise, leaving
the discretion of their use in hands competent to exec
cise it. He thought this would be to act more wisely,
as well as advantage rusly, for the Church and the
Country.
The Earl of lIARROWBY said if the Noble and
Learned Lord had read the amendment he would have
seen that this discretion was provided for. The fusion
of the two funds would, however, in his opinion take
away that discretion, and also decide the question of any
further increase of bishops in the negative.
Earl GREY did not see on whA principle the fusion
of tte two funds could decide the principle of the crea-
tion of new bishoprics; and he denied, moreover, the t
the clause would have any such effect. There was no
indisposition on the part of the Government to create
new bishoprics. He thought this question, as well as
the management of the united fund, might be safely left
in the hands of the Commissioners, who he believed
had adopted as a principle that in distributing the in-
come of the Church regard should be had to the local
interests of the sees in which that income was raised.
lle believed that if the Bill passed a large income would
accrue for the appointment of bishops and the endow-
ment of the inferior clergy. An increase of the epis-
copal body was highly desirable, seeing the increase of
the population, but an increase of the inferior clergy
w as much more desirable for the Church and the country.
The Committee then divided on the amendment :
For the amendment ... 31
Against it ... 26
Majority in favour of theamendment —5
On clause 15, which enacts that the Deanery of York,
from and after the next vacancy, shall be endowed with
an average yearly income not exceeding 2,0001., and as-
signs to each of the present Deans of Salisbury and
Wells, so long as they hold such deaneries, an averrige
yearly income not exceeding 1,5001., and provides that
no future Deane of Chichester, Exeter, Ilereg,rd, Lich-
field, Salisbury or Wells, shall have yearly incomes ex-
ceeding 1,0001.

Thairshop of SALISBURY then rose to move an
amendment. He said the Act of 3 and 4 Viet., c. 113,
regulated the fund for the capitular establishm,tts of
this country; and, as it was not intended by the Legis-
lature that this fund should be applied in a parti .1 or
unfair manner, but in the general service of the Church,
he felt bound to call attention to the question. The
general effect of that Act was to 'elm.° the income of
two deaneries then exceeding 2,000/. a year
each down to that sum, while it r&s:d the
income of those deaneries which were undo'.
1,0001. to that amount. This left 1,0001. dif-
fer once between the highest and the lowest deaneries.
The amendment which he should propose would have
the effect of remedying the in, qualities in the prent
system. Their object should be, by endowing the
dean( ries with suitable) revenues, to obtain the most
assiduous disch ,rge of the duties pertaining to those
offices. At present it was competent to hold along with
deaneries parochial ben( fives situated at a considerable
distance from the deanery. He would gladly see both
deans and canons placed in that respect under the same
restrictieus as the inferior clergy, attached to the same
establishment., and residing more constantly in cathedral
cities, at the same time that he would have them ade-
quately remunerated.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that the object
of the amendment scarcely came within the scope of the
Bill, the object of which was solely to provide for the
more efficient working of the Ecclesiastical Commission,
the present clause being introduced merely to do justice
to those clergymen who had accepted two deaneries
particularly circumstanced, without affeoting the genera!
regulations under which all the other deaneries existed.
He therefore objected to the amendment.

The Bishop ot. SALISBURY said he would divide on
the amendment.

Their Lordships; dividetl, when there apps ared—
For the amendment
... 21
For the clause... ... 19
Majority ...
•• •••
... •
... —2
The amendment Has accordingly agreed to.
The Bishop of OXFORD moved the insertion of three
clauses; the first empowering the Ecclesiastical Com-
inissiornls to commute any prebend annexed to a dignity
or office; the second providing that commuted land.
&c., should be subject to similar tries as the lands
vested under former Acts; and the third providing that
certain benefices annexed to the sees of Bristol, Oxturd,
and Peterborough, held not in cornmendam, but under
Act of Parliament, and therefore not liable to the opera-
tion of the Act which severed such benefices, should be
:operated from these diocefes.

These clauses were agreed to, and the Bill was ordered
to be repot ted to the House.
Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 25.
PARLIAMENTARY VOTERS (IRELAND) BILL.
(Continued from our Third Edition of last night.)
On our admission to the gallery we found the House
in Committee on the Bill, Mr. BERNAL in the chair.
On clause 1,
Mr. DISRAELI said—The Noble Lord appears t
complain very much of the course I have taken, a id ac-
cuses me of obstructing the public business. The Noble
Lord referred to a passage in which the word obstruc-
tion was used, but did not finish tl ese itence. The per-
son who used the word said that he was ready, and
thought it right, to obstruct all measures that were in-
jurious to the Constitution of the country."—(Hear.)
In my opinion that was a very legitimate description of
the duty of a Member of Parliament. But what is the
obstruction which on the present occasion we presume
to offer? The Noble Lord says that this Bill was
brought in, and the: afore we ought to bo well acquainted
with it, and that one of the reasons why a Whig Go-
vernment introduces measures without any intention of
carrying them, is to give Hon. Members an opportunity
of being masters of the subject in the following year.—
(Hear, and laughter) That shows a confidence in the
duration of cabinets which only a Mai; Minister could
entertain.—(Laughter.) The Noble Lord was also
pleased to sirs that I have received my instructions else-
where.—(Hear.) That is not, let me remark, a very
constitutional or a very courteous mode of expression.—
(Hear.) The Noble Lord, indeed, has in the course of
his political career, received instructions how to conduct
himself in Pailiament from many places.—(Hear, hear.)
But the Noble Lord calm, t soy of me or my friends that
we have ever received inspirations how to conduct our-
selves in this Ileu,e by consulting seditious clubs.
—(Opposition et e.:rs.) The Noble Lord on this
.-hctcd in a manner quite unworthy
ors.) Nt t only ha; he chat ged us
oocfcalLonie:f.— has
(C
with obstructing the business of this llouie, but most
unwarrantably insinuates that we are wilily, of factious
proceedings.—(Cheers and coucter cheers.) The Noble
Lord is the last person from whom such a charge should
have come.—(l.lear,hear.) Did not the Noble Lord
bring forward a proposition in this Ikuso, on which he
made the fate of an Administration depend—upon the
appropriation elas:e?—( Hear, hi a-.) Arid )et the
Noble Lord, when he took ollice in consequence, had
eeither the consistency nor the courage to carry out his
own policy.—(Cheers.) For my part, although I should
have been ready to li ttii with respect to the opinion of
the Noble Lord on this occasion, I shall not be deterred
from the course which it is my duty to take by any
speech such as that which the Noble Lord has just
made.—(Cheers.) This is a measure of immense im-
portariee.—Klear" irom, the Mikisterial If it bo
a measure of itcmee;:e importance, it ought not to be
shuffled through the House. The Gevrnicent have no
right to appeal, as the onl, source from which we can
derive information of the Bill, to the measure which they
brought forward last year, 'without any intention of