The Sun.
London, England, 1850-02-05 00:00:00

EVEN ING,

PETITIONS.

Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition from Ponty-
pool, praying for an extension of the jurisdiction of the
County Courts.'
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from
Rutlandshire against free trade, and for a restoration of
protection, also a petition with a similar prayer from
the guardians of the poor of Ennis.
Lord CLINTON presented a petition with a similar
prayer from Devonshire.
CASE OF MESSRS. GRAHAM AND ELLIOTT.
Lord BROUGHAM said he examined the case of Lit ut.
Graham and Mr. Elliott fully, and although he agreed that
in general the judgments of courts-martial ought not t,-)
be interfered with, yet he thought tLe case of these
young officers was an exception. They had been most
ill-advised to plead guilty to a charge of desertion,
when they had been guilty of no desertion at
all, fur they had given themselves up immedi-
ately after they had escaped from the tyranny of
Commander Pitman, who had been subsequently
convicted not only of tyranny but of falsification of ac-
counts. If these unfortunate young gentlemen had been
tried after Commander Pitman, they would never have
been convicted. lie asked if there was any intention of
mitigating their sentence, so as to enable them to re-enter
the service. He had no personal acquaintance with those
gentlemen.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE wished to refer to
the First Lord of th• Admiralty before giving an
answer.
CLERGY DISCIPLINE BILL.

The Bishop of
.LONDON brought in a Bill to
amend the Clergy Discipline Bill. Ills object was
to take away from the Judicial Committt e
of
the Privy Council the right ofjudging appeals
from the Court of Arches in certain cases. He
did not object to the appelate jurisdiction
of the Judicial Committee on matters of law or ef fact,
but he did object to giving the Committee the appellate
jurisdiction on points of doctrine. He proposed to in-
stitute a new tribunal of appellate jurisdiction in cases
of heresy and false doctrine. He thought that in such
cases there should be an appeal to the Bishop, and from
him to the Archbishop, and that the decision of the
Archbishop should in such cases be final.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY expressed his
concurrence in the sentiments of the Right Rev. Prelate,
and he hoped the Bill would be carried into a law.
The Bishop of LONDON bad purposely brought the
Bill in thus early because he was anxious to do so
before the decision of the Committee in a recent case
should have bean given.
Lord BROUGHAM assured the Right Rev. Prelate
that there would be no jealousy on the part of the
Judicial Committee with regard to the introduction of
this Bill, on the contrary, they would be rejoiced at
being relieved from the responsibility of giving judg-
ment in these cases.
The LORD CHANCELLOR thought it was contrary
to custom to discuss the principle of a Bill on its first
introduction, and he deprecated any deviation from the
usual course on the present occasion.
SCOTCH MARRIAGES BILL.
Lord CAMPBELL asked the Noble Earl opposite
(Aberdeen) when he intended to introduce the Bill for
amending the law regulating Scotch marriages, which
he had promised to introduce last session, when the
Registration Bills were defeated? The Noble and Learned
Lord then read some letters, showing the abuses which
had arisen, in consequence of the facility with which
marriages might be contracted in Scotland.
The Earl of ABERDEEN admitted the existence of
the evil complained of, and would support any measure
to prevent the evasion of the law of England by Eng-
lish persons going to Scotland to be married, but he
considered that the Scotch law of marriage was superior
to the t nglish law, and the Scotch were satisfied with
it. He would be satisfied with the law which his Noble
and Learned Friend had introduced in 1835, and again
in 1846, to remedy the evil, but be must decline intro-
ducing any measure himself.
Lord BROUGHAM was sorry to find that his Noble
Friend declined t) introduce his promised Bill. He
would give up the subject to his Noble Friend, and
would support, as he had no doubt his Noble and Learned
Friend opposite would support, any measure to amend
the existing state of the law.
RAILWAY AUDIT.
Lord MONTEAGLE rose, pursuant to notice, to
move that certain returns relating to railway accounts,