The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-19 00:00:00

JEW BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of the Oath of
Abjuration (Jews) Bill, -
Mr. LAW protested against proceeding with so im-
portant a Bill at this period of the session, and gave the
Noble Lord at the head of the Government notice that
if persevered in, he should feel compelled to avail him-
self of every constitutional-opposititn which the. forms
of the House afforded.

Lord J. RUSSELL would fix the second reading for
Monday.
Lord J. MANNERS asked if the Noble Lord intended
to proceed with it on that day ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said he would on that day state
the intention of the Government. _

The second reading was tint' postponed till Monday
next.

--;The Court of Chancery (County Palatine of Laneas-
- Bill passed,;,,Jc o Rl, E through.
yF
ACERTIFICATES BILL.

Lord R. GROSVENOR moved that the House re-
solve itself into a Committee on this Bill.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
should take the same course as on previous stages of the
Bill, and begged to move that the House resolve itself
into Committee upon it that day three months.
Mr. HAMILTON asked whether any intention ex-
isted of moving any instruction-to the Committee to in-
clude Ireland and Scotland in its operation?

Lord R. GROSVENOR said no instruction was ne-
cessary. The object would be attained by merely alter-
ing the title of the Bill.
Mr. A. STAFFORD raid he should be prepared, on
behalf of his Hon. Friend the Member for Kerry. who
was absent at the assizes, to move certain amendments
in Committee as soon a. the Government had been de-
feated a third time.

The Home then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment ... ... ... 103

Against it... ... _ 105
Majority against the amendment --2
The House went into Committee.
Colonel SIBTHORP expressed a hope that the at-
torneys would send in their Bills to all those lion. Mem-
bers who had voted against the Bill.—(Laughter.)
An amendment was proposed by Mr. A. STAFFORD
and agreed to, including in the provisions of the Bill
Great Britain and Ireland.

On the pruvision altering the foe for registration paid
to the Incorporated Law Society from is. 6d. to 10s.,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
that the fee shunld remain as at present.
Lord R. GROS VENOR. urged the expense cast on the
society in maintaining an cattensive library, and in
taking steps to exclude improper persons from the pro-
f.ssion, as a justification for increasing the present most
inadequate fee.
Mr. MULLINGS said the society had expended as
much as 90,000/. in taking proceedings fur the purpose
of punishituz the malpractices on the part of attorneys.
Sir R. FERGUSON observed that the Incorporated
Law Society had left Ireland and Scotland out of the
Bill.

Lord R. GROSVENOR said application had been made
to the profession in Ireland and Scotland before intro-
ducing the Bill, and it was only because it was thought
that s.parate Bills would be required for that purpose
that they had not been included.
Mr. CLEMENTS asked if the Irish and Scotch at-
torneysMULLINGS said they would not, not requiring
registered at the Law Society.
S
would have to pay the registration fee?
F. TUESIGER bore testimony from his own re-
centperience to the system exercised by the Law So-
tc:rr.
ivMbtyeiin excluding improper practitioners from the roll,
and expressed a hope that the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer would not divide the Committee on the question
unless he had very good grounds.
The Committee divided, when there appeared—
For the 10,. fee • •
• ••• 70
•••
Against it 130
Majority —6O
Mr. S. WORTLEY moved that the fee should be 55.,
as it would be unreasonable to retain the present inade-
quate sum of IP. 6d.

The ATTORNEY-
sufficient, bearing
_
in England and GENERAL thought
le s amounted to 10,000. •
in mind that the number of theattorneys old
fee
w
Mr. G. TURNER contended that the present sum was
with
sVoEf N
Lnod ithß. theO
most inadequate, considering the important duties dis-
charged by the society.
b
were quite willing Rprsoafeidsshioen winasevieurycorarmt uonfitchae-
tio
kingdom, and could assure the Committee that they
to pay the 10s. It was certainly
somewhat h
ad esxeitrzaed theordinaHryonto. observe the
artnheednew-bornseal
Attorney-Ge-
neral to save the pockets of the attorneys, after having
opposed the Bill in every way.—(Hear.)
Sir F. THESIGER said the error consisted in treat-
ing the Law Society as though it were a body apart
from the profession, whereas the greater part of the
London attorneys were among its members. The ques-
tion was whether they were now to deprive the society
of the means of discharging .those duties which they
had hitherto performed so satisfactorily.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
he did not wish to deprive them of anything, but 1„
wished to prevent them from taking the money out of
his pocket to put into their own.
The Committee divided, when there appeared—
For the fee of 53. ... ••• ... 68
Against it ... ••• ••• •• • 124
Majority ... ••• ••• ••• --56
Mr. HUTT moved that the Chairman leave the chair.
Mr. A. STAFFORD commented in terms of strong
animadversion on the email() pursued by the Govern-
ment, who on some occasions were so eager to yield to
the first intention of the wishes of the House, as in the
recent case of the Post-ottice—(Hear, hear)—and now,
when the opinion of the House had been taken on the
contested points, and many of the supporters of the Bill
had left the House, the Hon. Member for Gateshead
moved that the Chairman leave the chair, for the pur-
pose of getting rid of the Bill altogether; and the Go-
vernment, in rendering their support to the Hon. Member
in this individual attempt to defeat a measure, which
they had been unable to do in a, fAir stand up fight, was
acting a most unworthy part.
ebtirmueasr
Lord J. RUSSELL said there was a great difference
between the case alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman and
the present. When an address was to be made to the
Crown, one motion was sufficient; but it was perfectly
at the right to contest a Bill on every one of its stages.
Lord R. GROSVENOR contended that the Govern-
ment had not treated him with fairness.—(Loud cheers.)
y, and had
It was not his fault that the Bill had not been discussed
longthree times
in-
stance of the Goeernment.—(flear, hear.) He could not
help thinking that the measure might have been grace-
fullyfoitrs bfeulghdeirn
discussiontroduced it
postponed ago;
conceded ; but if that was not to be the course, the

result would be the same as in man; r ether cases, and for
his own part, he should feel bound in honour to exert
his beat efforts, independently and conscientiously, to
secure its success.—(Hear.)
Mr. BASS said that it was notoriou s that many Hon.
Members deeply regretted baying coup nitted themselves
to the support of the Bill in its early st tge, not knowing
what they were about, and would not b e sorry to see it
rej:cted.—(Cries of " Name, name.")
Mr. BASS would give the names of th use Honourable
Members when authorised by them to do• so.—(Oh, oh.)
Mr. WALPOLE was in favour of the Bill, but had
hitherto refrained from voting, acting upon a principle
which always prevented him from acquiescirig in depriving
the Chancellor of the Exchequer of revs nue after the
announcement of the budget. It was quite by accident
that be happened to be present when the
House went into Committee, but being the-:e, and seeing
that the Government had been already beaten twice
upon it, he intended to give his support to the Noble
Lord who had had the conduct of it. He thought it
unfair on the part of the Government, after the Bill had
almost passed through Committee, to attempt to get rid
of it by an indirect mode, and advised them to contest
the point on the third reading, which would be more
legitimate.
Mr. V. SMITH hoped the lion. Member for Gates-
head would persevere with his motion, which was per-
fectly fuir and legitimate, especially after so narrow a
division.

Mr. HUTT contended that ho was adopting the most
direct mode of defeating an objectionable Bill.
Mr. PLUMPTRE had had great experieuco in that
House, sad did not recollect any motion of the kind,
and could not help thinking that the course pursued was
most unumal and dishonourable.

The Committee divided, when there appeared—
For the motion ... 92
Against it ... ... 99
Majority against the Government —7
Ihe announcement was received with -cheers by the
supporters of the Bill.
The clause was then agreed to, as were also the re-
maining clauses; and the report was ordered to be re-
ceived on Monday next.
The Cruelty to Animals Bill passed through Com-
mittee pro forma, and the Bill, as amended, was ordered
to be printed.
The Bills of Exchange Bill was read a third time and
passed.
The Militia Pay Bill passed through Committee.
Mr. SADLEIR brought in a Bill to facilitate arrange-
ments between debtor and creditors in Ireland.

Mr. AGLIONBY brought in a Bill for abolishing
fees paid to county and certain other coroners, and for
providing for the payment of such coroners by fixed
salaries.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for IRELAND
brought in a Bill for the better regulation of the officeof
Registrar of Judgments in Ireland.
The House adjourned at Two o'clock.