The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-29 00:00:00

SUGAR DUTIES BILL.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said the second read-
ing of this Bill would be moved on Monday, and he
would then move that the Committee be negatived, and
take the third reading on Tuesday, after the Law of
Libel Bill.

Sir G. CLERK and others brought up the Dissenters'
Chapels Bill from the Commons.
CHARITABLE BEQUESTS (IRELAND) BILL.
The House then went into Committee on this Bill.
The clauses were agreed to, and the House resumed, and
the report ordered to be received on Monday.
PARISHES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE moved the second reading of
this Bill.

Lord CAMPBELL thought there was no necessity
for multiplying parishes in Scotland. He objected to
this Bill on the ground of its being unjust to the tithe-
holder in Scotland. Under the 10th section of this Bill
any trustee or tutor to a union could give away for tho
site of a church a manse or glebe, provided these lands
did not exceed four acres. Could there be a more un-
just interference with the rights of property than this ?
The Earl of MINTO thought that when a division of
a parish took place the two incoming ministers should be
placed on the same footing with respect to each other.
The Earl of DUNMORE supported the Bill.
The Earl of HADDINGTON said that the principle
of which the Noble Lord (Campbell) complained was
not a new principle, but had frequently been introduced
into former Bills. It was very essential to Scotland that
this Bill should pass this session, for he believed it would
go far to heal differences which had long existed.
The Duke of RICHMOND thought the present Bill
was an infringement of the rights of property, but still
he thought a Bill of the kind was necessary.
After a few words from the Earl of DALHOUSIE, the
Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be oommit-
ted on Friday next.
The County Rates Bill was read a second time.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 2s.
The SPJAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
Sir J. Y. BULLER presented a petition from Brix-
ham against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
2,fjor MACNAMARA presented a petition in favour
of the Bill; • • .

Mr. BROTHERTON also presented a petition fft.
your of the Bill from a place in Langaskire.
Mr. EVANS presented a petition from Beale, is
Derbyshire, against the Dill.

JUNE 29, 1644.

Col. VERNON presented four petitions against the
Bill.

Captain PECHELL presented a petition from the
Brighton Railway Company against the Bill relating to
railways, which has lately been introduced.
Lord SANDON presented a petition from the wood
sawyers of Liverpool, praying for protection.
Lord ADARE presented a petition from Somerset,
against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
Mr. ROEBUCK presented a petition from the parish
of Forest, in Guernsey, complaining of the proceedings
in the Royal Court of Guernsey, and praying for inquiry.
The Hon. Member gave notice that he should, on Tues-
day, move that this petition be printed, with a view to
his founding a motion thereon.
Mr. FERRAND presented a petition from the opera-
tive wood sawyers of Manchester and Salford, praying
for protection.
Mr. BUCK presented seventeen petitions, praying for
agricultural protection.
JOINT-STOCK BANKS.
Mr. GLADSTONE moved that the Joint-stock Bank
Regulation and Registration Bill be recommitted, for the
purpose of introducing two alterations tending to relax
the stringency of the provisions of the Act. He pro-
posed that the Registrar of Joint-stock Banks should
not be obliged to satisfy himself of the legality of every
a3t to which he attached his name ; another alteration
went to prevent the auditors of these banks from taking
part in their management.
The House went into Committee, and the amendments
were received.
After a few words from Sir THOS. WILDE,
Mr. GLADSTONE said they had arrived at a period
of the session at which it was necessary that a great
economy of the public time should be gradually effected;
he should propose, that on Wednesday next the House
do sit at 12 o'clock; he should try the experiment of
the early sitting on the present Bill, which, he pro-
posed, should be recommitted on Wednesday next.—
Agreed to.
JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES' REMEDY AT LAW
AND EQUITY BILL.
Mr. GLADSTONE moved that this Bill be recom-
mitted pro forma, for the purpose of stating an altera-
tion he intended to introduce, making the provisions of
the Bill applicable to existing Companies generally.
The House went into Committee, and the amendment
was received.

CANAL COMPANIES BILL.
On the motion of Mr. GLADSTONE the order of the
day for going into Committee on this Bill was read, for
the purpose of postponing it till this day week.
On the motion of the same lIoN. GENTLEMAN the
Customs Duties (Isle of Man) Bill was posponed till
Wednesday next.
Mr. YOUNG presented petitions from the north of
Ireland against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
OPENING LETTERS.

Mr. T. DIINCOMBE presented a petition from the
inhabitants of Camberwell and Walworth, complaining
of the system of opening letters, which the petitioners
considered interfered with the liberty of the subject and
the freedom of thought and expression. They stated
that it struck at the root of domestic intercourse,
and they prayed the House to take immediate
steps to repeal the clause in the Act of Parliament
conferring this power, or such other steps as would pre-
vent the social intercourse of her Majesty's subjects
from being placed at the mercy of any of her Majesty's
Secretaries of State ; also petitions to the same effect
from Carlisle. Somers-town, Lambeth, Dumfries, Not-
tingham, and Bethnal-green.
DUTY ON IRON.
Dr. BOWRING begged leave to put the question, of
which he had given notice to the Right Honourable
Gentleman at the head of her Majesty's Government,
respecting the renewed intention of the Zollverein
to place a higher duty upon British iron; and particu-
larly on pig iron. He had seen that communications
had taken place between the different deputies and the
States they represented, and that the concurrence of those
States had been obtained to discuss this question. He
did not understand that any peremptory instructions
had been given to the delegates to insist on the rise of
duty, but they were to assemble in September next, when
this topic would be again introduced. rho question he
wished to ask was, whether her Majesty's Government
had taken any measures on the subject, or made any
representations to prevent such a disastrous result from
taking place ?
Sir R. PEEL said that her Majesty's Government
had not received any direct official information with
regard to the steps to which the Hon. Gentleman re-
ferred, but private communications had been received
which led them to believe that there was a strong desire
to raise the duty on iron. Representations had been
made by her Majesty's Government, giving their own
sense of such policy, and it was stated to her Majesty's
Government that there might be increase of duty for a
certain limited time. It would be difficult to answer
what might be the result of the assembly which would
take place, for they had every reason to think that there
would be a strong opposition to the measure.
COL. STODDART AND CAPTAIN CONOLLY.
Mr. B. COCHRANE wished to know from the Right
Hon. Gentleman whether he had received any direct
account from Dr. Wolff respecting the f-te of Colonel
Stoddart and Captain Conolly, and hr Nisbed to
know whether her Majesty's Governme given any
support to Dr. Wolff on his mission to Lokhara, and
whether he went to that country with the sanction of
her Majesty's Government ?
Sir R. PEEL said that Dr. Wolff did not undertake
his journey to Bokhara with the direct sanction of her
Majesty's Government, because those means of working
on the Governor of that country were very ineffectual ;
but they told Dr. Wolff that, if he undertook the jour-
ney on his own responsibility, he would receive
every assistance that her Majesty's Government
could afford •, and they had an acknowledgment from
Dr. Wolff, thanking her Majesty's Government for the
assistance which he had received in his journey from
British agents. Communications had been received
from Dr. Wolff, and Col Shiel, her Majesty's represen-
tative at Teheran. The letter of Colonel Shiel was dated
so recently as the 6th of May, and the letter of
Dr. Wolff was dated the 12th of April, at
which time he was within three days of Bokhara.
The two officers were in prison at the time that this
person made his communication to Colonel Sheil. The
officers had been two years in prison, and he had not
heard of any public execution. Colonel Sheil had stated
to the Government in his communications that it was
difficult to collect from the conflicting testimony whether
the execution had taken place or not : it certainly had
not taken place in public.
Mr. B. COCHRANE wished to ask how these officers
had been employed by her Majesty's Government ?
Sir R. PEEL said that Colonel Stoddart WA! pat-
ployed upon a mission to Khiva, and when that mission
was extended to Bokhara he was allowed to avail him-
self of the services of Captain Conolly.
THE IRISH REGISTRATION BILL.
Lord HOWICK begged to ask the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, the First Lord of the Treasury, what were the in-
tentions of the Government as to the Bill for amending
the law with respect to the registration of votes in
Ireland ?
Sir ROBERT PEEL said that he did not think the
Bill could be carried further than the second reading in
the present session.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. B. COCHRANE said, before the House proceeded
with the Dissenters' Chapels Bill, he wished to make a
few observations with respect to the course adopted on
Government nights with reference to the business of
the House. The House had generally understood that
the question of the poor-laws was to be brought
forward that night. He did not want to annoy the
Government, but there must be some reason for
postponing the poor-law, and that reason, he had no
hesitation in saying, was that the Bank Charter had not
been sufficiently proceeded with last night. Now the
postponement was a great inconvenience to Hon. Mem-
bers who had stayed in town for the purpose of attend-
ing the discussion. The question of the poor-law came
on first in that House on the Bth of February. Week
after week had been named for further pro-
ceeding with the measure, but nothing had
been done in it yet, and they were exactly in the
same situation now as they were before. He thought
the Bank Charter Bill should be postponed, and the
Poor-law Bill taken that night, after the Dissenters'
Chapels Bill. It would be far more convenient if the
Government would keep to the particular measures ap-
pointed for each evening.
Sir R. PEEL had the greatest sympathy for the un-
fortunate Members who were kept away from the coun-
try.—(A laugh.) He was as anxious to get there as any
one—(Hear, hear)—but Hon. Members should recollect
that the members of her Majesty's Government had at-
tended that House, for some time past, each day from
five o'clock till half-past one, upon the average. Their
only desire had been to take that business that was most
conducive to the public interest. With respect
to some measures the Government had no dis-
cretion ; that was the case relative to the Sugar
Duties Bill, which expired on the sth of next month, and
lie would put it to Hon. Members whether the Bank
Charter Bill was not a measure of great importance ; it
was necessary that measure should be carried in order to
put down commercial speculation. He thought it a
measure quite as , important as the Poor-law Bill. He
admitted there was great advantage in pro-
ceeding with the measures appointed for the day,
but that could not always be done. It was
much better to proceed with measures at once
than to postpone them, for after an interval of four or
five weeks they returned to the subject like giants re-
freshed, and the subject was debated over again. He
and his colleagues sat there nine hours every night for
the purpose of forwarding public business, and he
thought it was most important to dispose of the Dis-
senters' Chapels Bill, the Sugar Duties Bill, and
the Bank Charter Bill, before proceeding to other
measures.—(Hear, hear.) He had given a rash pledge
with regard to the Irish Registration Bill, in order to
meet the convenience of Irish Members. He had found
that pledge so inconvenient to redeem, that it would
make him exceedingly cautious how he gave another.—
(A laugh.) He admitted the claims of the Poor-law
Amendment Bill to immediate attention. The Irish Re-
gistration Bill stood for Monday. The Bank Charter
Bill had to go through Committee. The Dissenters' Cha-
pels Bill he hoped would be disposed of in two or three
hours, and then they would be at liberty to fix a day
for the Poor-law Bill.
Lord HOWICK agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet
in opinion that the Bank Charter Bill, the Sugar Duties
Bill, and the Dissenters' Chapels Bill ought to have pre-
cedence of other measures, but he would suggest to him
whether in order to expedite that happy release to which
they all looked forward—the end of the session—as he
haainfornied them that the discussion of the Irish Regis-
tration could lead to no useful result, he would suggest the
propriety of discharging the order for the iecona read
ng of the Bill. If it Pacr been Intehded to persevere
witlt the' Rip; he Should have attended to give his reasons
for his vote, but asthe discussion could lead to no useful
result he should not like the trouble to take a part in it.
By persevering in We court', Which he had laid down the

Right Hon. Baronet could only give rise to a long,
angry, and useless debate, which would most probably be
adjourned. By discharging the order he would be enabled
at once to proceed with public business, and he doubted
not but that the Irish Members would be perfectly satisfied
with the Right Honourable Baronet giving up the
Bill, and would release him from his pledge and
thus spare the House a vain and fruitless discussion.
This would enable the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir R.
Peel) sooner to meet the wishes of the Hon. Gentle-
man (Mr. Cochrane), and it would also enable him
sooner to fulfil the expectations of the country with
respect to many measures then pending.
Mr. M. O'CONNELL said it had never occurred to him
that the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) would have
put him in the situation of returning thanks to him; but
he certainly felt called upon to do so after what had
fallen from him with respect to the Irish Registration of
Voters Bill ; and most happy should he be to renew
and add to his thanks, if the Right Hon. Baronet would
give the same assurance of delay with the Irish Munici-
pal Registration Bill.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir ROBERT PEEL said they had brought forward
the Irish Registration Bill with the full intention of
passing it into a law. It should be recollected that it
was at the urgent request of Hon. Gentlemen on the
Opposition side of the House that he had postponed
the second reading of it.—(Ministerial cheers.) He
still adhered fully, and entirely to the principle
of that Bill—(Hear, hear)—but in the present
state of public business, and seeing that, even if the Bill
were carried into a law, it would not affect the present
year's registration, he saw no use in unnecessarily
pressing it beyond a second reading. At the same time,
he thought a discussion of its principle—and he saw no
reason whatever why it should be an angry one—would
be very desirable. Such discussion could not be other-
sise than advantageous to the Government, and might
the better enable the country to form an opinion upon it.
As to the discussion being of an angry and acrimonious
character, that, of course, rested with the Noble Lord
himself (Lord Howick).
Mr. ROEBUCK said the Right Hon. Gentleman
(Sir R. Peel) had forgotten one thing in his category—
a Bill called the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill.—(Laughter.)
He should wish to know whether the Government in-
tended to abandon that measure also?
Sir R. PEEL said he could not answer then as to all
these Bills separately ' • the Noble Lord opposite had
suggested that he (Sir R. Peel) should state what mea-
sures the Government had a prospect of carrying, and
w hat measures they did not expect to pass into laws. He did
not at the time comply with the Noble Lord's request,
but on an early day in the next week he should be pre.
pared to state what Bills would be proceeded with, and
what abandoned.
Mr. ESCOTT said it was very desirable, if it suited
the convenience of the Government, that the Ecclesias-
tical Courts Bill should be one of the measures to be post-
poned for another session. It was certainly not one that
could be brought to any satisfactory settlement.
Lord J. RUSSELL said there was another measure—
(Laughter)-- the County Courts Bill, which he under-
stood from the Right Hon. Baronet had been deferred,
in consequence of a measure being under consideration
in the House of Lords, for the abolition of imprisonment
for debt, which it was supposed would materially alter
the provisions of the County Courts Bill. At that time
it appeared the Government highly approved of the
measure brought in by Lord Cottenham, but since then
other circumstances had occurred. He (Lord J. Rus-
sell) understood that this Bill and another were referred
to a Select Committee of the House of Lords, where it
would probably remain for the remainder of the session.
He should be glad to know what the views of the Go-
vernment were with respect to this measure, and whether
it had changed its views since the former answer was
given ?
Mr. P. BORTHWICK complained of the postpone-
ment of the Poor-law Bill on several occasions for two

years past. He hoped that if brought forward, reason.
able time would be afforded Hon. Members for discuss
ing it.

Sir J. GRAHAM said that on an early day next week
he would fix those measures, which it was the intention
of her Majesty's Government to press, and the order in
which they were to come on. He could assure the Hon.
Gentleman and the House that it was the intention of
her Majesty's Government to press forward the
Poor-law Amendment Bill, and to take the
earliest opportunity for that purpose. Had the Dissen-
ters' Chapels Bill been read a third time last night, he
would have brought on the Poor-law Amendment
Bill that night, but more inconvenience would result
from not proceeding with the Dissenters' Chapels Bill
than from postponing the Poor-law Bill.
DISSENTERS' CHAPELS BILL.
On the motion for the reading of the order of the day
for the third reading of the Dissenters' Chapels Bill,
Mr. COLQUHOUN said that, notwithstanding all the
talent which had been ranged in favour of the Bill in
that House, the feeling against it out of doors was still
as strong as ever. The Dissenters entertained no hos-
tile feeling against the Unitarians. This Bill was in
part wholly unnecessary, and, where necessary, it would
lead to great practical injustice. It was said that a
great many lawsuits would be the consequence if the
Bill did not pass. He did not believe that would be the
case, for the common sense of the parties would prevent
that. He denied that the grievances of the class of
Dissenters who would be relieved by this Bill were so
great as to justify so great an alteration of the law.
The Bill broke in upon the wholesome principle by
which the Legislature had hitherto protected trust pro-
perty. His Right Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State
interfere
with the Home Department proposed a Bill to
with charitable trusts. That Bill was objected to, and
did not pass. In his opinion the question ought to be
left to the Courts of Law, and ought not to be inter-
fered with by the Legislature. The Bill, in his opinion,
introduced a dangerous principle with respect to trust
property, and he should therefore move that it be read a
third time that day six months.
Sir R. INGLIS seconded the motion. He retained the
same opinions now as he did when the Bill was read a
second time. The Bill had been altered in Commis tee,
and en recommittal, and on the bringing up of the
report, but he believed its substantial character remained
unaltered. The second clause of the Bill, which was the
vital one, remained unaltered. It still guaranteed per-
petual possession, requiring nothing more from the par-
ties than that they should have been in possession with
or without the consent of the founders. He could assure
the House that the measure was regarded with deep ap-
prehension and pain, he might Almost have said of horror,
by the great mass of people out of doors. He had never
treated the question as a religious one, he looked on it
simply as a matter of property. But the whole question
had been so completely exhauesed by the discussion, and
the pamphlets that had 'eeu sc—tten upon it, that he
should not detain the :louse f but simply con-
clude by seconding coe amendme,
Lord ELIOT co,iid assure hir. Friend, that if he
had any bias on 7':-"e "question at a
,t was rather unfa-
vourable to the -Oasure than °there ;9e. He thought it
would be impc,4sible to distinguish between those cases
where trusts had been founded originally by Unitarians,
and those wheile, from the lapse of tine, the Unitarian
doctrine camel-6'lse taught. Looking to all the circum-
stances, he thought it was but an act of justice that the
Bill should pass.
Sir THOS. WILDE said that at first he held an opi•
nion adverse to the Bill, and having been waited on by
several persons interested in the Bill, he gave it consi-
derable attention, and the conclusion he came to was, that
it was a Bill to prevent the confiscation of property.—
(Hear, hear.) Considerable misrepresentation prevailed
with regard to it. The Honourable Gentleman opposite
him had certainly mistaken the law as applicable to trusts.
The principal object of the Bill was to extend to the
trustees of chapels the same protection which was al-
lowed by the law to all other trustees. In the case of
Lady Hewley's trust there had been expended upwards
of 30,000 L, and yet a new suit was about to be instituted.
The Bill was to be opposed, not by the persons interested,
but by those who would absorb the whole fund in costs
of law.—(Hear, hear.) The Bill would have no other
effect than preventing the future misapplication of the
funds of any charity. He (Sir I'. Wilde) had entered
into the investigation with a strong impression against
the Bill, but since he had considered it fully, he had felt
it to be his duty to support the measure.—(Loud
cheers.) The Hon. and Learned Member had charged
him with having undertaken to lead the Opposition to this
measure in that House. He had done no such thing.—
(Hear, hear.) What he really did do was this. A de-
putation waited upon him, he discussed the Bill with
them, and his impression was adverse to the measure.
The Hon. Gentleman said that he (Sir T, Wilde) had
had their papers. He had had no such thing ; but he
had asked the Right Hon. Baronet for more time to
consider the Bill, and he, with his usual courtesy, had
granted it. The statement of the Hon. and Learned
Member regarding his (Sir T. Wilde's) having been en-
gaged by any party out of the House to oppose the Bill
was wholly without foundation. He had not been even
asked to do so, nor to take any other part than as an
individual Member of Parliament. He had been, it was
true, originally opposed to the Bill, but had subsequently
changed his mind on the subject, and intimated to several
of his Hon. Friends such change of opinion, and, fur-
ther, that he meant to state his reasons for the change in
Parliament. He must now say that he thought the Bill
was a good one, and that the Government had acted
wisely in introducing it to the House. His constituents
were, it was true, opposed to it, and were anxious that
their representatives should oppose it; but, convinced as
he was of its utility, he felt it his painful duty to act
contrary to their wishes.
Mr. SHAW explained, and repeated the expressions
he really had used regarding the lion. and Learned
Member for Worcester. He had especially guarded his
expressions against any personal censure upon that Hon.
and Learned Member; he had even said on the occasion
that he imputed no blame whatever to him. He had
upon that discussion inaccurately stated that an emi-
nent member of the Synod of Ulster, Dr. Montgomery,
had subscribed to the Trinitarian form of faith. lie
had been since informed by that eminent individual that
such was not the case. Regarding the Bill itself he en-
tertained the same opinions as formerly, and would
oppose the third reading.
Strangers were then ordered to withdrawn, and the
House divided, when there appeared--
For the third reading
Against it
Majority for the third reading —l2o
The announcement of the numbers was received with
loud cheering.

NEW WRIT.
A new writ was moved and ordered for Limerick, in
the room of Sir D. Roche, Bart., who has accepted the
Chiltern Hundreds.
BANN, CHARTER BILL.
The Hose then went into Committee on the Bank
Charier Bill.

Clauses 7,8, 9, 10, and 11 were agreed to.
On clause 12 being put,
Colonel SIBTIIOItP asked the question of which he
had given notice, as to the difference of the actual
amount of circulation by extending the issue of notes by
too priyat:a and Joint-stock banking oompaniaa to the

average of the last four years, instead of limiting It
the last three months.
Sir R. PEEL said it was impossible to take the so)
rage so as to suit every case. The period taken 015
that which involved the least risk of disturbing any 1:d
terest. The longer the period over which they extend
the average, the more numerous would be the cases hrs,
would require special clauses. The country banks our
to set the diminution of competition, he was proearil
for them, against the restriction he was imposing
respect to the average.
Mr. P. M. STEWART read the clause which is
lgr
prevent banks of six partners from issuing notes after
the number of partners shall exceed six, and move"
anamendment to the end of the clause, " provided alio,'
that it shall be lawful forany banking company to ttsfo
fer its business to any other banking comjian4wb
shall thereupon be entitled to add the circulation of
bank to the previous amount of its own circulation-
Sir R. PEEL said it was the intention of the Gover.a,
.
ment to respect existing interests, and to protect estsu
lishments in the privileges they enjoyed ; but it was cent
tainly not their intention to permit them to hawk auuti/lia
those privileges in the market. He knew that he
not prevent the addition of partners in private 138,:;d
up to the number of six, and he had therefore not tried
to to do so; but he wished private banks and
banks to adhere to their respective characters. The 11°.0
Gentleman proposed—it was as well to use PlllB
language—to allow the joint-stock banks to buy 1113.tt to
privilege of issue from the private banks, and to ad 1,-.A
their own circulation. But several joint-stock banks "'",
an immense number of branches, with expensive but
chinery, which were carried on not with advantage s,
from a desire to monopolise the business of several "1
tricts. He had no objection to see new joint-stock 100,9
established under better regulations, which should o°4
on their circulation in Bank of England notes. 13uher,
must refuse to adopt the suggestion of the Hon. Melnk-ita
and he hoped the country bankers would stand "
in resisting this attempt to swallow up their business,' e
Mr. DARBY said the country banks took the
view of the subject as the Right Hon. Baronet. gos.
Mr. HAVES said that the object of the Right
Gentleman was to bring Bank of England notes int° Ile
culation, and ultimately to have one bank of, issue• lig
did not think that was a desirable thing. He till,e
they were doing great injustice in under-estimating
stability and utility of country banks.
0-00
Mr. DARBY thought that the Bill would give
tbe
security to country banks, and he believed that was "at
opinion of the country bankers themselves. He did f
see why the Bill should put au end to the circulatioU;
country banks unless they found it rather for their
vantage to circulate Bank of England paper. ore
Mr. WILLIAMS thought the great value of the mesi tea
was, that a greater amount of gold would be citeu,lbe
than at present, and that the paper circulation would
diminished, the unsteadiness thereby created would by
lessened. The Right Hon. Gentleman was supPortedae
the country and the House in regard to this teas
and the fewer concessions he made the better.
Mr. M. PHILIPS thought the tendency of this O 101;
sure was decidedly good. He considered the coneillos
to which the Hon. Member fbr Lambeth jumped' tos
there was to be ultimately one bank of issue, vas
hasty.
add
Mr. P. M. STEWART said that he hoped they would
never approach nearer to one bank of issue than 4
would under the present Bill, which he wished we;
of
though he thought it was dangerous. Ile would
press his amendment to a division.
The amendment was then withdrawn, and the -
was agreed to.

Clause 12 was agreed to.
Clause 13 was agreed to.
On clause 14 being proposed, and
Mr. P. HOWARD (on behalf of Mr. P. Taper' nge
in his absence) moved, in line 1 of clause 14, to exPe;tl
the words " Provided always," and to insert at Lthe -011
of line 16 of clause 14:--" Provided always, tta. tOr
special circumstances arising out of such cent'.i.
of
agreement be explained to such Commissienerss to
Stamps and Taxes by one of the contracting er.„tie,nis.
suoh contract or agreement ; and that the said LAM" Ito
sioners of Stamps and Taxes shall have power t?„-ficl'
such special circumstances into their consideration i'eos.
jesting the average under such contract or agree:loss
And be it enacted, that with a view to pre"-no" s'
to the working classes, that from and after the f
ing of this Act, the Governor and CompaNY
Bank of England, at their bank, or branch bank 0f sole'
shall take, as of the value of twenty shillings, alle;o-ve'
reigns, and as of the value of ten shillings, all
reigns tendered to them, which equally balance 'n
scales, notwithstanding the same may not turn tbe
or of
lance ; and that any loss arising to the said Goverri,ldot
and Company of the Bank of England from the r "etc'
of such sovereigns or half sovereigns, shall be tetfresse
from the profit arising to the public from any "—swig,
of the issues of the Governor and Company of the bO,
of England, before such profit be paid over to the Pla de'
Sir R. PEEL opposed the motion. He 311°11' the
cidedly object to any such power being given tfmed
Commissioners of Stamps and Taxes, as that pror"
in the amendment. a W.
After a few words from Colonel SIBTBORP an drill
W. WILLIAms, the amendment was withdrawn, ap
clause agreed to.
Clause 15 was agreed to without discussion. )f.
On clause 16, in reply to a question from gr.`,
STEWART,
Sir R. PEEL said no clause in the Bill, exeePt,Rils•
10th, would apply to Scotland ; but he reserved to e to
self the right of bringing in a Bill at a future till s'o4
extend the operation of the Bill both to Scotian"
Ireland.

The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses to 19 inclusive were then agreed to.
On clause 20 being proposed, Ptrsi I
Mr. S. WORTLEY suggested that some res
should be imposed upon the joint-stock banks.
,surgf
Sir R. PEEL said that the object was to eV'
fair competition in respect to banking.
The clause was then agreed to.
°
The remaining clauses of the Bill were then agreed
as were also the schedules. clot°

Mr. BARNARD proposed that the followieg,„,iber
should be added to the Bill :—" And be it .`"t; the
enacted, that it shall be lawful, with the consent 0 f the
Queen in Council, for the Governor and Directors of
Bank of England, in their banking department, fr,g,illossci
to time, to withdraw and exchange Bank of '.-ITeder
notes of 5/. and upwards for Bank of England not 0,411;
5/., to an amount not exceeding two millions, to 60'
drawn and re-exchanged within one year fromfr 00. ,
exchange, any law to the contrary notwithstanalin.
Sir R. PEEL objected to the clause, which /"-
mately withdrawn. ;II a/Orr
The preamble was then agreed to, and the Bill
ported to the House amid much cheering. 19 or
Mr. COLLETT wished to know whether ebitl'"
plied to banks in London ? i
Sir R. PEEL—Certainly. He did not se° heirtllle:
public should not know who were the responsible
in banks in London as well as the country.
The Education Bill went through Committee__,„. c
The Charitable Loans Societies (Ireland) 3317ted
through Committee, and was ordered
Itvoebsnten:rerirelesli:
Monday next.
The Protection of Purchasers (Ireland) Bin W°
a second time.
ST. MARGARET'S CHURCH' tat Ca
On the motion of Sir C. BURRELL s °e''`-plie°
mitte was appointed to consider of aid to be sPten the
the repairs of St. Margaret's Church,
Committee to consist of Sir Charles
Howard, Lord Seymour, Mr. D'Eyncourt, 141,,del
Stuart, Mr. Jervis, Mr. Hindloy, Earl of -Are-Cob:Op
Surrey, Mr. Blackburne, Viscount Ushfe'gr. stjt
Rushbrooke, Mr. William Fielden, Mr. rac'e' i&fo
rete r
ford O'Brien, and Colonel Fox. m of
Sir ROBERT FERGUSON moved fore
Il ober er
the years 1841, 1842, and 1843, of thoNtisrn'a.
persons sentenced to transportation by Courts in Irelloa
Sessions or General Sessions of the Peace oeed, • tit
date of the Session, name of the person sent! rtst.l°,4,
the offence charged, and the term
the number of persons left in custody after 01%, weal to
of traelemsis
during the above period, who were after pors..nd
Sessions ; the number of persons who have ettoled
take their trial at the Assizes, who have bees
been afterwards tried at the Sessions.
COUNTY COURTS BILL'-s, whetiftf
In answer to a question from Mr. Itiov'.o Co°'
it was the intention of Government to bring
by
Courts Bill, and when ? „ state
Sir Sir J. GRAHAM said it had already be,e-nsrlf week
his Right Hon. Friend (Sir R. Peel) in t"° next we to
r the ded
of the evening, that, in the beginning 0. - • Gen
de
would state the course the Governmenthleiiiiteoese gis
pursue, as well on the Bills already before t rod
with those they contemplated introducing.kt ova
introducing,
k,
xt
then, at a Quarter to Ten o'ol
until

part of the Kingdom. at the
-------•'"•••••••••••=mwma.lallisilliintil,
and upwardst_s! _ ion recslP'
SIX POUNDS of TEA, at carriag.,oolo—
PM.,
tance, or Post-office order. 4,1 4e. Sd'' P.
Black, 2 &1., 35. Zs 4d 3s Sd. 4s. 40. --Al 6, • Is. qi ~
Green, 35. 4d 35,. Bd. 4, 4. 4S se; as. r ,-..10d., -,ii,CP."
G.
TCoffee, 9d„ 15:'15. 2d.,"1ae..4d.5,.15.,"6d..,'15.firp00LH, -;ia, I, `'ec-tahl°
T. MANSELL and holesale Toe my to real)
LERSBURY, CIIEIPSIDE. CO.,"Agencies will b• Ifiv—
partie3.
k ....L........___-----.' the
, n
RTHS.
On the 24th of Juneß
ilnstant, at ChAteaubrizboo.--
a
Rhone, France, the lady of Monsieur L. Gil." '
of Faure pere and fils, of Saint Wray, of a s°ll P,
On the 21st inst., at Thorp,
On the 20th inst., Mrs. John Belcher, of a son; ,be go.
North
Walea'
Hale, of a son. Nor--
On the 24th inst., at D I Machrolleth,
o guog so, oi
Mrs. Edward G. Bartlett, of a daughter. gob
On the 25th inst., at Norwich, Bill. ems,
a son, Essex, the lady of &

.0n the 25th MARRIED. Willol
inst., at Up Cl t the Bev* eldeet
per ap on,
Tiverton Preedy, of Sheldon Warwickshire, to FillT:.wo...
daughteron of the late Samuel ,Leney, Esq., of Love!, pry
,i, the 27th inst., at All Souls, Langhata-PlecPtio late
Bo Lee, Esq., to Anne Emilia, only daughter of
Richard Debary, Es t n sr°l9ll'
v.. On the 27th ist., qa.t St. Mary's, Islington, 310_1,,,rgiane'
-6611., of her Majesty's Ordnance-office, Tower, ° `-'_,,,,M1
youngest daughter of G. Blackburne, Esq., of Isliw° '
DIED. Of
On the 17th of May, at Nassau, New Providence..B_tiblinit:
Lieutenant T. V. E. Reynolds, 3d Virest India RegingAr
of On the 22d inst., Mary, the wife of John Aikenbee-'
Manchester. . Pllfl
On the 22d inst., Mary Ann Bradby. wife of the Ite
Morley, Derbyshire.
Vicar of East Charlton, Somersetshire• -401' (//'
yt,heDe2rttyhshiinrset., the Rev. William Sitwell, R.,-
On the 25th inst.:at Little Hampton, Franco. oling
daughter of the late Henry Esq 0f On
God, eee°lll
enry oods,
Bogue, Surrey.i EA'
On the 25th trist., at Grosvenor-p
lace, John

London: Printed and Published by BWRDO No. of
No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The bun 0 ~.ffice'costf
Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, la '4lw
WMloam, Situ •r duly 1144.