The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-09 00:00:00

PETITIONS.

Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Mrs.
Georgiana Hall, praying for a divorce. She had married
a person named Hall clandestinely, but the marriage
had never been consummated. Her husband had sub-
sequently married another person in France. She had
obtained a divorce a mena et thorn, and she now prayed
for a divorce.
Lord MONTE AGLE presented a petition against the
Metropolitan Interm*nta Bill.
The Earl of LONSDALE presented a petition from
Dover in favour of the Public Health Bill.
The Duke of WELLINGTON believed that the ma-
jority of the inhabitants of Dover were in favour of the
Bill.

Earl GREY presented a petition from the Town
Council of Newcastle, in favour of the immediate
rescinding of the order prohibiting Post-office Sunday
deliveries.

The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from
Todmorden in favour of a real Ten Hours Act.

Lord BROUG HAM bad felt it his duty to oppose the
original Bill as a mischievous interference between the
employer and the employed, but he would not take any
unfair advantage, and he thought it would be most un-
just not to correct the inadvertent slip which had been
made.

HEALTH OF TOWNS BILL.
On the order of the day for the committal of this
Bill,
The Earl of LONSDALE moved, as an amendment,
that the Bill should be referred to a Select Committee,
to inquire and report whether the preliminary forms
directed by the Public Health Act, 11 and 12 Viet.,
c. 63, to be observed on confirming " provisional or-
ders" by Parliament, have in the case of the Bill been
duly observed.
The Earl of WARWICK supported the amendment.
The Earl of CARLISLE said he felt under the ne-
cessity of opposing the proposal of the Noble Earl. He
believed that the adoption of that proposal would lead to
unnecessary delay, and would in that way defeat the
purposes of the measure. He had further to observe,
that no distinct case of abuse had been stated, which
could justify the appointment of the proposed Commit-
tee. The measure was viewed with approbation by all
the places to which it was to be applied, and they bad
made application that no further delay should take place
in its passing.
After a few words from Lord REDEsDILE„and the
Marquis of SALISBURY,
The House divided, and the numbers were—
For going into Committee ... ... 47
Against it............18_

Majority...

... -29

The Bill then passed through Committee.
THE COURT OF CHANCERY (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion of Lord BROUGHAM, this Bill was
read a second time.
THE FACTORIES BILL.

Earl GR ANVILLE moved the second readine of this
Bill. He thought it better that they should take in the
Committee on Monday next the _discussion on the only
point connected with the measure on which there could
be any difference of opinion among them.
After a few words from the Duke of RICHMOND and
Lord WHARNCLIFFE,
Lord FEVERSHAM said he believed that a very
strong feeliog prevailed throughout the manufacturing
districts that if that Bill were ps.sed in its present shape
a breach of faith would be committed against the work-
ing classes in those districts. He had himself presented
several petitions from operatives expressing that view of
the subject. In their opinion Parliament would not
keep faith with them if, in passing a mere declaratory
Act to amend an accidental error in a preceding measure,
it were to alter that measure and to extend the hours of
labour from 58 to 60 hours in each week.
Lord KINNAIRD said he believed that the decision
to which the operatives had come upon the subject was,
that they would prefer a ten hours' Bill, but that they
would sooner see the present measure carried than 'that
no legislation should take place upon the question in the
course of this session. Hs should have petitions to that
effect to present to their Lordships.
The Bill was then read a second time, with the under-
standing that the discussion on it should be taken in
Committee on Monday next.
THE COUNTY COURTS EXTENSION BILL.
Lord BEAUMONT, in moving the second reading of
this Bill, said that Parliament had already adopted the
principle that it ought to make justice cheap and ac-
cssible t) the people. The Bill establishing County
Courts had, since its passing in the month of April,
1847, been eminently successful. It had been success-
ful in two ways; first, with respect to the number of
debts recovered in consequence of the intervention of
those courts; and secondly, it had produced the most
beneficial results by inducing many persons to pay debts
who would never have paid them if they had not
been aware that justice could easily be ob-
tained in those courts. He found that during
the year 1847 there had been issued under
the Act 429,215 summonses, and that 267,445
cases had been tried. In the year 1848, the
number of summonses had been 427,611, and the num-
ber of cases tried had amountedlo 259,115. He believed
'hat the sum recovered in those courts during the two
years might be fairly estimated at 2,700,0001. But under
the present Act no sum above 201. could be recovered in
those courts; and one consequence of that provision had
been that many persons to whom sums of 301., or 40L, or
451. had been due, had actually abandoned a portion of
their claims, so that they might be able to bring them
before tribunals so cheap and so accessible. Now it was
manifest that such a system offered an inducement to
fraudulent debtors to cheat their creditors. Another
great advantage of those courts was that the parties
themselves were allowed to give evidence before them;
and it had been ascertained that the arrangement had
led to an immediate settlement of a great number of
cases. Some complaints had been made as to the amount
of the fees in those courts, but he could not think that
thatthe respecta
clauses,
lnagu.lieamountprinciplesbut washe
believed
prepared
it
to
would
linto e a
better
discussiontter t
o d
delay
tsoest,he objections made to the details of some of
those discussions until they t
went into Committee. When
they did he would be ready
o meet them. lie concluded
by asking their Lordships to agree to the second reading
of the
ord 11.
BROUGHAM consideredcompijalenttehde
hpirsese
L
Noblen
present Bill was
of importance,lul and
manner in which he had Friendperiothr me
on d
greatthe clear
and
his task of moving the second reading of it. With
re-
spect to the number of verdicts which had been returned
for small sures, so far as he could ascertain from an ac-
count he had received with respect to one spring assizes,
they had amounted to 188, and were for sums not ex-
ceeding 151. or 161. On that question, as on all others,
he should be open to conviction; for he believed that the
Act had worked well. In 1833 he had brought in a
measure of a somewhat similar character to that now
proposed; but though be had the benefit of the valuable
suggestions of his Noble and Learned Friend Lord
Lyndhurst, after a reference to a Special Committee
to amend its details, the Bill had been lost in their
Lordships' House. He would reserve himself for the
COainaittlior to more cataia szpegdzeuts is deta, which