The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-26 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Feb. 25.
The L•RD CLlANcgt.tou took his seat on the Woolsack
shortly after Five o'clock.
Mr. O'Mera, the Clerk of the Crown in Ireland, presented
papers.

BAIL IN ERROR BILL.
Lord BROUGHAM gave notice that, on Friday next, he
skould move the second reading of the Bail in Error Bill.

DIVORCE.
The Nonax and LILARNED LORD also gave notice of his
intention, on Thursday week, to introduce a Bill upon the im-
portant subject of the transfer of the jurisdiction in divorces to
another tribunal.
Earl FITZ WILLIAM presented several petitions from va-
rious parts of Wales, Westmoreland, and York, in favour of
temperance.
Lord BEAUMONT gave notice of his intention, on Thurs-
day next, to put a question to her Majesty's Government
relative to the proceedings which had taken place with respect
to Corfu and Calabria.
BANKRUPTCY.
Lord CAMPBELL wished to know when his Noble and
Learned Friend en his left (Lord Brougham) intended to pre-
sent the petition with respect to the London Commissioners
of Bankruptcy ?
Lord BROUGHAM said that he could have presented the
petition a week ago, but that he had put it off, in order that
the subject might be fully considered. If the returns satisfied
him that since he had given the notice the Commissioners
had attended more to the business, he would nut present the
petition. He, however, could net think it right that five of
the Commissioners should be out of town during the summer,
leaving only one Commissioner to transact the whole business.
Their Lordships then adjourned till Thursday morning, at
Ten o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 25.
The House resumed at Five o'clock, when there was a con-
siderable attendance of the Members, and, from the conversation,
there appeared considerable excitement.
Several petitions were presented by Lord Pollington, Sir
Douglas, Mr. Ewart, and other Members, for rail-
way and other private Bills, bat from the loud conversation of
the Members the names could net be correctly ascertained in
the gallery..
Sir JOHN YARDE BULLER brought up the reports of
several railway Bills, and stated that the standing orders of
those before the Committee had been complied with.
CALEDONIAN RAILWAY BILL.

This Bill was read a second time.
Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from 1,800 inha-
bitants of the borough of Lambeth against the extension of the
South-Western Railway. A petition was also presented from
480 inhabitants of the borough of Lambeth for a free passage
over Waterloo-bridge.
Mr. BROTHER'ION presented a petition from Manchester
against the sale of spirits on the Sunday.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD presented a petition from the rate-
payers of Rochdale, complaining of the introduction of the New
Poor-law Act by the Poor-law Commissioners into that district.
The petitioners prayed that they might he heard by counsel
at the bar in support of the allegations contained in the petition.
The Hon. Gentleman gave notice of his intention to move to-
morrow that the petition be printed with the Votes.
Lord M ANON presented petitions against the Medical
Reform Bill.
Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition against the Medical
Reform Bill.

NOTICES OF MOTION.
Mr. COLLET T gave notice that he would ask the Right
Hon. Baronet, the Frst Lord of the Treasury, whether he
.ntended to appoint another Bishop of Bath and Wells
during the life of the present incumbent? and in the event
of his receiving an answer in the negative, whether, at the
death of the present bishop, he intended to propose another
Bishop of Bath and Wells, or to unite that diocese with the
diocese of Salisbury.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD gave notice that on Tuesday, March
11, he would call the attention of the House to the petition
which he had just presented from the ratepayers of Rochdale,
against the New Poor-law system.
Mr. WALLACE postponed, from the 6th to the 11th, his
motion with regard to railways.
Colonel WOOD gave notice that, in the Committee on the
Poor-law Settlement Bill, he should move that any poor person
who had been resident in a parish for a year without receiving
parochial relief, should not be liable to be removed.
CHESTER AND HOLYHEAD RAILWAY.
Mr. W. 0. STANLEY asked whether the line of com-
municatien between this country and Ireland had been agreed
upon, and whether it was intended that the line of communi-
cation should be by Holyhead and over the Menai?
Sir ROBERT PEEL said the subject was under the consi-
deration of the Board of Trade; and in the event of the
plan being approved of, the Government would be inclined to
make a grant for the purpose of carrying out that object.
Mr. W. 0. STANLEY asked whether it was the intention
of the Government to bring in a Bill founded upon the report
of the Commissioners of Lunacy ?
Sir JAM ES GRAHAM was understood to sty that he
had not yet had time to peruse these reports. The Government
would give the fullest consideration to the subject.
Mr. BANKES moved for a return of all daty paid by per-
sons acting as auctioneers during the last three years, distin-
guishing the numbers who have respectively paid the different
amounts of duty.
Lord PALMERSTON asked when certain papers con-
necied with slavery would be laid on the table of the House?
Sir ROBERT PEEL said they had been laid on the table
last night. —( A laugh.)
Mr. M. PHILIPS put a question, which was not heard, re-
lative to the sugar duties.
Sir R. PEEL said he thought it better to reserve the opinion
of the Government for the present on that subject.
COURTS OF SESSION (SCOTLAND).

Mr. WALLACEsaid that for the convenience of members
of the Government he had brought forward that motion first
which he intended to bring on second. The motion
of which he had given notice had reference to the
Courts in Scotland, and he hoped before he sat down
that he should be able to prove from facts that the
time had arrived when a regulation of those Courts was not
only necessary but practicable. Hon. Members should
know that there were in Scotland two Courts of Review.
Now in his opinion there was no necessity for two Courts of
Review. The Supreme Court of Scotland might be so con-
ducted that the whole of the business might be confided to one
Court, without any detriment to the interests of the country.
It was evident that since he had agitated this question
greater attention had been paid by the judges to the businesa
of the Court. In the first division of the Court of Session,
in the year 1841-42, the number of cases which had been
brought before the first division of session was 204. In the
year 1843-44 it was 174, and in the year 1844.45 it was 270.
In the second division of the Court of Session, in the year
1842-43, the number of causes was 216 ; in the year 1813-44,
the number of causes was 145 ; and in 1844-45, it has
diminished down to 82 ; therefore he had na hesitation
in saying that that return proved that the people of Scot-
land, represented by their attorneys, had not such confidence
in the legal knowledge and acquirements of the judges of the
second division of the Court of Session, as they had in those of
the first, inasmuch, as during the last year, while the number
of causes in the first division Court amounted to 270, those of
the second division Court had diminished to eighty-two.
The next document to which he should refer, was a return
of the number of causes in the Inner Court and Outer House.
A number of causes were brought from the Outer House to
the Inner House. The number of causes brought before the
Outer House had considerably diminished. In the first division
there had been 298 causes brought forward, in the second only 46.
That was an incontestable proof that in the opinion of the in-
habitants of Scotland, as represented by the solicitors, the
second division of the Court of Session was not an efficient
court. The second division had fallen off, in which the Lord
Justice Clerk presided. The difference between the Courts
was, as he had stated, in the proportion of 270 to 82.
Another return showed that only one-fifth of the business
found its way from the Outer Court to the Inner. In three-fourths
of the present session there had been but nine causes in the Inner
Court of Review, and at the end of the session there will
scarcely have been more than twelve causes. The sub-
ject was one rhich concerned all th; people of