The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-10 00:00:00

WALTHAM F3REST.

Lord DUNCAN moved for certain rcturns connected
with the enchroachments up,:n Waltham Forest, which
were agreed tn.
TRAFFIC OF TURNPIKE ROADS.
Lord J. MANNERS moved for a return of the aggre-
gate number of miles on turnpike and parish roads, &c.,
travelled over by mails, stage coaches, &r., which was
agreed to.

SOAP.
The HON. MEMBER also moved for a return of the
quantities of soap, or of the substitute for soap, made
and used on the premises in the manufacturing
districts, free of excise duty; and of the quantities of
soap used by manufacturers on which the excise duty
has been returned, during each of the last three years.
Agreed to.
DRAINAGE ADVANCES FOR IRELAND.
Major BLACKALL asked the Chancellor of the
Exchequer whether it was the intention of the Govern-
ment to proceed with the Drainage Advances for Ire-
land Bill? Also, whether, in the meantime, orders had
been issued to the Board of Works to proceed with the
drainage works already commenced? Also, whether it
was the intention of the Government to propose any ex-
tension of the purposes to which money borrowed for
the improvement of landed proprty in Ireland may be
applied ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied,
as to the float question, that the Bill was perfectly ready,
and would have been introduced before now, if
there had been any prospect of going on with
it ; but It was his intentio❑ to proceed with the
Bill at the earliest possi'olo peried. With reference to
the other question, he stated he would not authorise any
further loans of money until the Bill was passed, but
th:lt the works would be proceeded with as far as the
present balance in hand would allow. The subject to
which the last question referred he thought was one
rather for consideration of the House than the Govern-
ment.

THE EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY.
Mr. HUME wished to put a question to the Right
Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the home De-
partment relative to a recent case which had been tried
in the Court of Exchequer. After detailing the
circumstances of the ease, which have already been
published in The Sun, the Honourable Gentleman
proceeded to ask the Right Hon. Baronet whether the
attention of the Government had been drawn to the
charge of Baron Alderson to the jury in the case; and
whether it:was the intention of the Government to intro-
duce any measure for the protection of the public against
..ho misconduct of those acting in the employ of railway
companies ?
Sir GEORGE GREY said his attention had been
called to the case, and it appeared that Mr. Gray brought
an action against one of the servants of the Eastern
Counties Companv.
Mr. HUME—No, against the company.
Sir GEORGE GREY 'thanked his Hon. Friend for
the correction. The action arose out of an alleged illegal
imprisonment by a servant of the company. Now, he
believed he was right in saying, and he spoke under the
correction of his legal f:iends, that it was a settled rule
of law that where a servant commits a wilful
act the employer was not liable unless some
evidence was adduced that the act was done with his
sanction. Now, in that case he was informed that not
only was such evidence wanting, but there was direct
evidence to show that the act complained of was com-
mitted contrary to the express orders of the company, so
that the matter r,-solved itself into this, that the
plaintiff had brought his action against the wrong party.
With regard to the other part of the question, as to
whether it was the intention of Government to alter
the long settled rate of law relative to liability of
wasters in such cases as this, he begged to tell his Hon.
Friend that Government entertained no such intention.

MR. COM.BE. THE MAGISTRATE. -
Mr. RIO LIA.RD FOX wished to ask a question of the
Right Hun. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home
Delatrtment on a subject which had excited a good deal
of interest within the last few days. It related to an
oceurrence which took place at the Clerkenwell Police-
court on Tuesday last. It appeared that a person
named Reardon was placed in the witness-box of
that court, and the New Testament was handed
to him fa- the purpose of his being sworn. Before
swearing him, however, the officer whose duty it was to
administer the oath requested him to make the sign
Of the cross, having ascertained that he was a
Roman Catholic, . which the witness refused to do,
stating that he .considered it an insult to be told that his
oath taken on, the Evatigeliats v,-as not as binding
without. the cross as with it. Then, it would
seem that the magistrate, Mr. Combe, took it up, who
stated that he had never known a Roman Catholic
riiii3e to make the sign of the cross before, whereupon
the. witness still protestA that this mode of proceeding
could be intended as nothing else than an insult to him-
self.. This called feat% another explanation from the
magistrate in the shape of an intimation to the
witness that if a Roman Catholic priest were
pr,;sent, he would toll him that an oath taken by a
Roman Catholic would not be binding, unless it wore
accompanied by the sign of the cross. The witness, how-
ever, persisted that he knew nothing cf any such rule,
and ultimately he wes allowed to be sworn in the usual
Way, when he gave some evidence contradicting that of
al;:!,.;)rnar3r witness, but the magistrate said he did not
TLev e bin, and decided the case- the other way.
:.LII° witness Reardon then asked the magistrate
it. he, the magistrate, intended publicly to
chase him with
gisitrate rePlied thateeninlitting perjury, to which the ma-
ne
wished, he certainly did.—(Herr, hear.)
State, whether it P 7, therefore,h to ask the Chief Secretary of
of Mr. Cotahe, preiiil* is intention to notice the conduct
Sessions enuet, towaint!ti.t magistrate of the Clerkenwell
the name of RearcloGn,RiyTauealraay,l;ith May?
of
witness of
,Sir GEORGE said his attention had been
called to the ease by reoetvi
question yes-
terday from hutTsnsllica of
a
terday on the subject
Arundel and Surrey, and in his Nobly, Friend the Earl of
lion he had looked over the sequence of that marl
of thn case •
new,papers.. Upon reading in the
that report he
communication to be made to c directed a
. Mr. ombe, the
magis-
trate, requeaing that gentleman to furnish him with any
(Amery:sums in explanation on the matter. The answer he
hid received to ' that communication found n)
fault with the newspaper report of the easat but(
it stated` that the witness being requested to
make the sign of the cress was in accordance
with the usual practice of the Clerkenwell Police.
court. The answer added that the magistrate did not
discredit the evidance of the witness because ho refused
to make the .sign of the cross, but because the evidence
on the -Othel side seemed to ho the strongest,
and the most to be relied on.—(bear, . hear.)
New he (Sir G. Grey) must confess that this practice
wits 'one which he had never heart! of before,while he had
matte inquiries of parties who were well informed on the
E.,„,.llhLct, and they seemed to think that the act of
--r•-'ng the sign of the cross was quite voluntary on the
part t)t the witacsi, and no magistrate had a right to in-
Vat on a witness performing the ceremony before permit-
Int him t(be eworn. It did not appear that the
practice prevailed in 6 court, nor did it
any other police-co . .
..,,
prevail in any of the tither in king.
land or Ireland. common law courts c.
directed a communication
hear.) He had, therefore,
directing that the to be made to Mr. COMbe,
&zed in the Clerkepurwaeetic'e should be forthwith abaci-
-11
AY
MONDAYS ,Court.—(Cheers.)
`Mr. HUME asked the BUSINESS.
Home Department wh t•Secretary of State fir the
a,
Monday ? was to be the business for

Sir GEORGE GREY said the Australian Govern-
ment Bill stood first for Monday.
POLICE IMPROVEMENT (SCOTLAND) FILL.
On the motion that the House shoul t go iuto Com-
mittee on this Bill,
Mr. MIME said, having been informed that all the
material objections to this Bill coming from Scotland
had been removed, he did not intend to oppose any oh-
steel° whatever to the Bill.

In answo t. , . , :tipllfrom Mr. COWAN,
02M6 :0 '• J ATE said it was not his inten-
• •
~.... • • Y 71,4 the •üblie Ile.ilth Bill to-jgat.
' • t'liPiise, thai\x*t, into Committee.
, 2 5 4, ei were agreed to wlilout dis-
4. ' 41 ill'OM •
(Iro 61 4: re then agreed to with some
1'
A? amendments.
i fivm 0 to "6 lad 4s;y3 were ague] to witt,-
ou . ,x4eTearirer°