The Sun.
London, England, 1868-07-21 00:00:00

LONDON, TUESDAY, JULY 21, 1868.

The House of Commons did not begin the week
well, and yesterda) 's sitting was distinguished for
one or two incidents of an adverse nature. In the first
place, Mr. FORSTER imparted an acrimonious cha-
racter to the debate by requiring some assurance
from the Government as to the Report on the Cor-
rupt Practices Bill, as a rumour was current to the
effect that they intended to strike out Mr. FAWCETT'S
clause that had been agreed to on Saturday. Mr.
DISRAELI replied that it was very extraordinary to
put such questions at all, and that it was " unusual,
un-Parliamentary, and inconsistent" to make
remarks or anonymous rumours. This an-
swer appeared to satisfy the House, but it did
not please Mr. GLADSTONE, who forthwith started
up in the excitement of his most virtuous indigna-
tion, and asked the same thing in different words,
whether, in the event of such a change being made,
due notice would be given ; and Mr. DISRAELI
replied that no one could accuse him of conducting
public business in anything like an un-Parliamentary
form, and that, of course, proper notice would be
given. It is really very absurd, to say the least of
it, for the time of the House to be wasted and its
temper irritated by introducing these frivolous
charges, but party spirit bas run so high this year
that it has been found quite impossible to prevent
their constant recurrence, and no sooner is one
confusion over than another begins. It is true
that few days have been so remarkable as yes-
terday was, for there was a whole string of con-
trareities. When the dispute had been settled
about the report, the Irish Registration Bill was
taken on for consideration. The chief part of the
provisions was got through very easily ; but at the
third part of the bill great dissatisfaction was
occasioned among the Irish members in consequence
the clauses to erect new polling-places. The course
pursued by these gentlemen was not creditable to
their judgment, and they must indeed be greatly
deceived if they think they showed their patriotism
in controverting a proposition which was meant to
preserve peace and order. So persistent was the
Opposition to the plan that Lord MAYO was obliged
to withdraw all the clauses that related to the new
polling-places, and in doing so the noble lord very
justly said that those who drove him to this course
must take the responsibility of the scenes of violence
and bloodshed which might arise during the ensuing
elections which are sure to be hotly contested. This
triumph of party feeling is much to be regretted,
and the more so as its consequences may be
serious and cannot now be avered. It was
indeed ridiculous to say that Lord Mayo had laid a
crafty scheme and taken advantage of some Irish
members having gone home in order to play off this
purpose, but absurd as the charge was it seemed
to be believed by the excited crow who thronged
to the charge. When it has been clearly shown
that these additional polling places are require], it
is indeed trifling with the serious acts of legislation
to insist on their non-erection.
The discussion of the Metropolitan Cattle Bill
was then taken, and here again much virulent
opposition was manifested, and before proceed-