The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-30 00:00:00

THE ST7N, LON'DO WEDNES.I3A-Y IVI-ORNING, JULY 80, 184111

COURT OF ALDERMEN

Yesterday a Court was held for the dispatch of public
business,

THE CROWDING A\ D RAPID SPEED OF STEAM VESSELS.
A trn-mber of the Court having requested to be in•
formed whether the resolutions passed by the C. urt for
the regulation of steam-vessels had as yet obtained the
sanction of the judges,
The LORD MAYOR stated that the important resolu-
tions alluded to had been some time since referred to the
judges, whose acquiescence was necessary before they
could -be brought into operation, and his Lordship
sired the Town-clerk to let the Court know what pro,-
gress had been made.
The TOWN-CLERK said that the resolutions had been

given ,to the Chief Baron, who handed theM over for
perusal to Str,B4r9n Platt, and that Mr. BarOn Platt being
under dui!. necessity of going upon circuit, placed them in
the hands of Mr. Justice Wightman, who had nut (as;
we tir;derst,od the Town-Clerk) had time to examine
them, but that it was expects d by. Saturday next that
some information on the subject would be in all pro-
bability received. •:
v. .
The LORD MAYOR—It IS proper 'to state also that in

the case of the late losS of Ile., occasioned by the rape
transit of a steam vessel in the Thames within the jade•
diction of the Coutt,:orderS had been issued to the City
Solicitor to prosecute upon the part of the city of
London. —(llear,: hear.)
The Court" was occupied a considerable time in in-
coiring into the conduct of one of the sworn-brokers,
why "was''. petitioned against by a tallow-cliandler for
having refused to exhibit his books awl explain the
nature and circumstances of certain purcbace:4 made by
him for the petition, r. The books of the broker were
produced, from which it appeared that there had been
very great irregularities in his mode of doing business.
-The broker himself admitted that he had not exercised
the necessary vigilance and caution in his accounts, but
solemnly denied that he had betrayed the interests of
his principal in the transactions referred to.

Aldernian COPELAND strongly urged the necessity of
making the most strict inquiries into the conduct of ii,cli-
viduals who, from the character of their business, had a
very extraordinary power of doing mischief. In his
views the great majority of the Court concurred,
and the broker was told that he must produce his
principal in the sale of the tallow, and show that the
transaction was a bona fide one, at the next sitting of
the Court.

A report was brought up, recommending that a
gratuity of fifty guineas should be given to each of the
inspectors of weights and measures. It particularly re-
commended the zeal, activity, and integrity of the two
excellent officers, Mr. Knott and Mr. Harvard, appointed
by the Court to watch over the interests of the poorer
classes of the City of London.
Alderman COPELAND said it was discreditable in the
City of London to pay officers whose utility was so great,
at such a ratl that it was necessary to vote them
gratuities. He concluded by moving that the salary of
each should be raised 50/. a year at once,
ST PETER LAURIE acknowledged that duties . could
not be more satisiiictorily perii,rmed than were the duties
of the two City Inspectors, but the very vigilance and
activity which they were in the habit of using, would
very soon diminish their Labours. Besides, they had
both expressed their perfect satisfaction at . the report
which had just been presented.
Alderman COPELAND said there was not the least
prospect of the diminution of the labours of the in-

spectors. Even the apprehension of the disgrace of ex-
posure, as well as of the penalties visited upon the vio-
lation of the law, was not sufficient to deter many trades
people from reaping an advantage from the exercise of
an idle and dishonest avarice.—(Hear, hear.)
The report of the Committee was finally agreed to.
After the transaction of some business of no public
importance, the Court adjourned.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE' OF LORDS, July 29.
Their Lordships assettehled at Five o'clock.
Messengers from the Commons brought up several Bill.,
which were severally read a first time, on the motion of the
Earl of DALHOUSIE.
DUBLIN AND GALWAY RAILWAY.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE presented a petition,
signed by the High Sheriff and the Grand Jury .of the
county of Galway, in favour of this Bill, and stating that if the
Undertaking was rot espied out, that great injury woeld be
inflicted on that part of the county.
. The.. Earl of BESBOROUGH moved that the adjourned
),legate on this Bill be resumed. The Noble Earl then pro-
needed to draw the attention of their Lordships to the report of
the Committee appointed to inquire into the allegations brought
against the Directors of the Company. It appeared, from
their report, that the Direr-tors had not been in the habit
of inquiring into the condition of those who applied to
them for shares ; that nut of 971 applications, 863 were
granted without any inquiry, and that. 29 only were
inquired into. As he had said, he had no wish to
impede the progress of the Bill, and in moving for the inquiry
o hich had been instituted, he had no other object in view than
that the allegations contained in the petition of Mr. Pymm
might be inquired into by a Committee of their Lord-
ships' House. The report which they made to the
House stated th o the allegation that fraud had
been used to obtain the necessary number of signatures to
the subscription contract had been proved before them.
None of their Lordships who had read the. report could hold
any other opinion than that gross and systematic frauds had
been committed to a very great extent. In page 9 they would
find that the Company had resorted to the too prevalent prac-
tice of putting the r ames of respectable and well-known indivi-
duals in their prospectus for the purpose of making a show.
If parties allowed their names to be put in the pros-
pectusses of a company, they ought, at least, to
see that its affairs were carried out in a proper manner.
The Noble Lord then proceeded to quote extracts from the
evidence taken before the Select Committee on the peti-
tions, respecting the allegations contained in the peti-
tion of Mr. Pymm, relative to the allotment of shares,
and concluded by declaring his intention to persist in his mo-
tion that the further consideration of the Bill be postponed for
three months.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE admitted that the Noble
Earl had made a very skilful speech, but really if their Lord-
ships looked carefully int it, t hey would find that it bore very little
upon the allegations of the petitioners, that the Directors had
sancetioned the forgery of names to their contract deed. He
could see no reason why their Lordships should attempt to fix
upon this particular Bill the stamp of a character which was
equally applicable to .several other Bills that had passed, and
several that were now before the House, because they had
framed regulations which afforded facilities for persons
committing frauds against the directors, against the company,
and if they could, against the public. Neither the tVoble Lord
nor the evidence said a word which could possibly show that
any man had been induced against his will to sign the contract
deed, or that went to show that any measure, whether directly
or indirectly, had been taken by the directors for that purpose.
Mr. Fym, a gentleman influentially connected with the Dublin
and Kingstown Railway, and interested in the success of the
atmospheric principle as well as the Canal Company, thinking
that this project would interfere with his other schemes, found
out a few errors in the Bill. He (the Marquis of. Clanricarde)
was most delighted, on public grounds, that their Lordships
had sheen an inclination to suppress shameful jobbing and
gambling. They ought to check a system, but not a particu-
lar Company, and is hile be hoped 'he result of the present ex-
posure would be a change in railway government, he was sorry
to see them pouncing on an unfortunate Bill because they could
not understand the model contract as propounded by the House.
Pym Lei no right to present that petition, nor that House to
receive it ; he went before Standing Orders' Committee, and
was told he had no locus standi. It was not to be denied that
frauds had been perpetrated, but if he were to tell all the
frauds be was aware of, it would be tedious alike to the House
and himself. It was well known in the market that brokers
kept a black list, containing the names of all those who had
committed- frauds. If, therefore, they passed laws which others
could not comprehend, and when the Irish framed a Bill threw
it out for non-compliance with tho 4 unintelligible require=
ments, while they admitted others equally culpable, it was a
strong argument for the repeal of the Union, which would not
be neglected elsewhere. He would now state that
a party who had fraudulently bought shares in the
Deblin and Galway Company, to the • amount of
1,250/., applied for 2,000/. worth in the Direct Northern
and 2,00 I. in the Shrewsbury and Oswestry Company. A
man called Thomas Constable, who had applied for 1,000/.
worth of shares in the Dublin and Galway, solicited 2,5004
worth in the South Western (Ireland.) Another man
had sought shares in various companies to the amount
of 27.5001., and William Shackel, who had appeared before
both Committees, and had applied for 3,500/. worth- of shores
in the Dublin and Galway, solicited shares to the amount of.
48,000/. in the Aberdeen, C hornet Valley, Cornwall and other
Bees. Let all those schemes be stopped, let their progress be
at once arrested; but they let all these great English Bills go
by unobstructed, and when an Irish company, which could. not
be supposed capable of finding out every particular, made a slip,
it was pounced upon for condemnation, On referring to the
advertisements of the periods-if they looked to the Timis
newspaper of the 24th of March in last year—it would be sten
that but tsar out of forty-nine advertisements for railway shires
required references. In the Times of last week he, found
fifty advertisements, and amongst them but two asked for refer-
ences. This model of a witness, Mr. Mowatt, adMitted that
his own Company had allotted shares to stablemen .and
ostlers, and persona of that class, and that he had been deceived
byOnly 20 applicants. Mr. Mowatt admitted that his. Company
only began the system of references when they found that persons
of a suspicious class were applying fo: shares. Now, it would
have been the case with the Dublin and Galway Railway, if
their L odships had allowed the Bill to proceed, and beard
counsel ;n support of the. Bill. Would they then punish this
Bill, and make an example of it, for the purpose of rooting out
the system, whilst others equally as guilty escaped without cen-
sure ? Such a course would be contrary to justice. With re-
spect to the allegations of giving money to a Mr. Barry to pre-
vent him from laying charges against the Company, he wished
to say a few words. This person, who petitioned in the name of
Gerrard Barry, could not be found, after he had presented the
petition, as he was in the habit of going by the name of Barry
Gerrard. This etas, no doubt, for the purpose of extortion.--
( Hear, hear.) Such practices were as common as could be.
Parties agreed to take shares in a company. by Signing the
names of each other, and so deceiving the company, that they
might bring charges against them when before Parliament, or
withdraw them on being paid for doing so. This person bad
no doubt found that there were names in the contract deed,
which ought not to be there. Persons of the highest respectas
bib!), were in the habit of compromising matters,
in which they knew they were right, rather than incur great ex-
pense and trouble. If, then, the Committee found that there
was sufficient money in the contract deed to carry out the
works, they had no right to stop them. This might be effected
by a supplementary contract, which he believed was frequently
adopted. Besides, the Dublin and Cashel had volunteered to
subsc:ibe 100 000/. to complete the undertaking, if they would
allow them to carry it out, leaving a considerable sum more
than would b. required.. Because the parties had shown them
a bail list which had grown out of their own imperfection, would
they prevent so great a work from being carried out? General
Burgoyne had stated that such a railway would be•ofthe greatest
advantage to that part of the country. . Would they do4ny
substantial good by st°PPittgohis Bill? They would ds right
to no one who had been wronged. They would remedy tor'
flaw in the law, but they would stop one of the most im-
tortant works ever undertaken for the benefit of Ireland.
What had they derie for public works in Ireland ?
They had made
io an attempt, and a successful one. to improve
the social, religus, and political condition of the people by
passing measures with respect o education. But the Govern-
ment had not projected any great works for the benefit of that
people. You have done nothing for emigration—you' have
done nothing whatever for the benefit of public works in Ire-
land, and now that the capitalists of England and. Ireland come
forward and say they will complete a great work which will
employ the population, and will add to the wealth. of the
country and improve it, and come to you and ask simply for
powers to do so, you refuse on the ground I have stated, but
which I hold cannot be maintained.
Earl BATHURST had but a few words to say en the
subject, after what had fallen from the Noble Earl who moved
the trotion. Their Lordships would remember that the
Committee had made no report upon the merits of the
scheme. They had only reported that fraud hid .. been
committed and that the directors had been guilty :of
great negligence. It was therefore for their Lord-
ships to decide whether the Committee should proceed
further with the inquiry or not. If their Lordships thought
these frauds had been so clearly proved that they ought to be
marked with the strongest disapprobation, their Lordships of
'elitirse Would not allow the inquiry to be carried on further.
'The Earl'of .WICKLOW had come down with -a sincere
hoe that'
'Mhe should be convinced, by the' arguments of
the Noble arquis opposite, that their Lordships Ought. to
alloW the Bill to proceed, but he regretted; having heard the
argument 'of the Noble Marquis, that he felt himself con•
strained °to' support the motion and resist the amendment.
There was no doubt frauds had heen committed in other rail-
ways, but there was none to equal thoiCie-the present instance,
and he mold not conscientiously do otherwise. than support the
original motion.
The Earl of ST. GERMANS said, having been a member of
the Committee appointed to inquire into the allegations of the
petitioners. he could not be ignorant of the frauds which had
been committed by this company, and he admitted that the mode
adopted by the directors in allotting share, had been exceedingly
lax and careless. They had, however, filed a supplementary
fist in accordance with their Lerdsh ps standing orders, and he
thought it injudicious for their Lordships to stop the Bill at this
stage. The Committee had not inquired into its merits, nor
could they say whether the parties were or were not competent
to carry oat the undertaking, and until' the Committee had made
a report upon that point, their Lordships ought to pause
before they postponed the further progress of the Bill.
Lord BEAUMONT baying also served upon the Committee
alluded to by the Noble Lord, wished to say a few words on the
subject before the debate closed. He should feel not the
least hesitation in voting, for the motion of the Noble Earl, if
by doingso he thought he was punishing the parties who com.
Knitted the f.aud; but they were not doing so. They were not
slightest degree.--s touching them in the Hear, hear.) He
could not see why the country should suffer by the rejection of
this Bill; "nor why innocent shareholders should be punished
for the fau'ts of managers whe committed themselves
to a ealpable line of conduct with their eyes open.
The truth was, the House of Lords could not allow
this matter to pass away
.in silence. Some steps must be
taken to prevsnt similar misconduct, for he believed, as had
b. en well observed by the Noble Marquis, that if English rail-
way projects were as closely investigated, many cases of the
same, if not of an equally flagrant kind, would be discovered,
He would earnestly recommend the House to acquiesce in the
suggestion of his Noble Friend opposite (Earl Bathurst), 'and
refer the ease again to a Committee. If the Commi.tee found
the contract to be sufficiently valid and bona fide to admit of
the wot k being carried out, then he would recommend their
Lordships to allow this Bill.
The Duke of CLEVELAND said it. would be most im-
portant that the House should ascertain that no frauds existed,
and if they did, projects in which they should be discovered
irsould be thrown out. He did hope that before the session
closed the House would come to some resolution to prevent
such practices. It would be of the utmost consequence that
the House should do so.
Lord REDESDALE said he agreed with the Noble Earl
opposite ; and it was his opinion that where acts of fraud were
detected the parties should be punished ; for if they were not,
they might as well object to punish pickpockets, if they ac-
cepted the excuse that other pickpockets had committed the
same off ace for which they stood charged the same day.
Lord MON TEAGLE felt assured that, if the. Bill should be
passed, after the discovery of these frauds, the result would be
that other Bills would be attempted to be passed which might
be got up in the same way; but, at the same time, he would
say that the parties to the Bill were not guilty of any participa-
tioo in the fraud, because they might have been taken in ; but
then, to a certain extent, the parties had a right to be punished,
because they should have taken the proper precautions to have
prevented such an occurrence.
The Earl of DEVON felt bound to oppose the motion ; and,
in doing so, he begged to say he also was as anxious to do jus-
tice as his Noble Friend near him ; but, at theoame time, he
would be glad to know to whom it was that he was called upon
to do justice? He would contend for it that if it was to be
considered injustice to any party, it was injustice to the
House itself. He would contend for it that if this .Bill were re-
jected, an injury to a great extent would be inflicted on those

who really did not deserve it; while by the passing of the
Pill, those who had been guilty of the fraud, or rather those
who ought to be punished, would be let escape by reason of the
House of doing Sr!.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said it was v try strange
that the Directors, who had the limier to come before the
Committee, should not have come before them, for the purpose
of clearing themselves. By not. adopting this course they
threw great suspicion on their proceedings.
Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared—
For the rejection of the Bill
Against it
Majority
Some conversation then ensued with respect to the witness
Smith, against whom there is a'charge of felony, which, how-
ever, led to no satisfactory result. . .
STANDING ORDERS.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE gave notice that he should
bring the following standing order, under the attention of the
House on Friday next :—That proof shall be required before
the Standing Orders' Committee that the names subscribed to
a Bill or petition are bona fide.
SCOTCH POOR-LAW BILL.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH moved the third reading of
this 1.
he llllarquis of BREADALBANE presented a number of
petitions from variou. parts of Scotland against it.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH could not consent to the pro-
pos:tion of the Noble Lord (Cuttenham). The Act of Parlia-
ment j rovided that that portion of the feofinent which it was
contended belonged to the parish of Sotoh Leith, not to that
of St. Giles, Edinburgh, and its inhabitants, were subject, to
pay'double rates, both parochial, tithe, anl cess. The object
of the clause was not to overthrow a decision of that House,
but to remedy a palpable hardship, which had been exposed by
a discussion in the House, and he therefore cordially supported
the clause.
Lord CAMPBELL was astonished, after the able speech of
his Noble Friend near him (Lord Cuttenham), to find that. the
Government persisted in pressing this obnoxious clause—a
clause which, if passed, would be a reproach. not only to the
Administration, but the House. He had always bet n an op-
ponent of the Government, but, n-qterthelcss, had believed that
among its members were men t f honour who wished to act
upon principle towards every part of the kingdom, and of jus-
tice towards man and man. If, however, they now refused to
accede to the proposition for excluding the 17th clause, be
should: change that opinion, and believe that they were acttiated
by neither ability or principle. At any rate, he implored his
Noble Friend on the Woolsack, whose talents, integrity, and
honour were unimpeachable, to say whether the clause was not
most iniquitous? This was a question already decided by the
House. He himself, as advocate, had argued it at the bar of
their Lordships' 'House, and hi. Noble Friend (Lord Cotten-
ham), who then sat. on the Woolsack, satisfactorily put the
matter beyond dispute by an adjudication which it was sought
to overthrow.
Earl DALHOUSIE said that it was because her Majesty's
Government wished. to act with justice towards man and man,
that they would not agree to the expunging of this clause. It
was a novel principle to be laid down that because an advocate
had pleaded, and a judge had decided, a certain question, the
House was prevented.from amending the law which rendered
that adjudication, however hard in its requirements; necessary.
The LORD. CHANCELLOR said, that having been called
nn by his Noble Friend (Lord Campbell) to explain the law
upon the question, and give his opinion, he would without he-
sitation respond to the appeal. He hal lookett into the Act of
Parliament and the original contracts most carefully, and he
was therefore ina position to s;,eak with confidence. No con-
tract between these parties could affect the parish of Leith, and
therefore the parties residing in the district would be liable to
pay both thepoor-rates of the city of Edinburgh and the paro-
chial burdens of the parish of Leith. The inhabitants were
liable, he -repeated, to contribute to the public burdens of the
parish of Leith. That was the effect of the contract. The
Act 'of Parliament had been passed 10 years after the
contract had been made, and it ratified and recited that
contract. The Act recited that the spot in question
should be . included in the Royalties of Edinburgh,
and at the same time be subject to the burdens above enume-
rated, in the parish of Leith. Therefore, the Act of Parka-
ment in no way varied the case. The matter had been first
decided by the Lords in Ordinary, then by the Courts of Ses-
sion, and finally by that House, which confirmed the decision of
the courts below, on the footing of contract. The present
occupants 'were as much bound by the contract as the original
contractors. The effect of the law might certainly be hard en
those persons, but they took the property subject to the cons
tingent burdens. It was, he admitted, hard, that the inhabi-
tants should be taxed, not for the value of the land, but accord-
ing to their means and substance. There could be no doubt
as to the law of the case; and if the inhabitants were to be
relieved, it must be done by Act of Parliament.
Lord CAMPBELL said the clause could not be supported,
and trusted that without further discussion it would be with-
drawn.
The Earl of HADDINGTON supported the clause, and
thought the hardship a serious one, and required a remedy.
Lord COTTENHAM urged the withdrawal of the clause,
and:entirely agreed with his Noble and Learned Friend on the
Woolsack, that it would be highly inexpedient to pass the clause.
The coatract was a regular bonci fide one, and to abolish it
would be to take the property of one and give it to another.
He thought that those who framed the clause must have done
so in utter ignorance of the law of the case.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said it was most unfortunate
that any party views bad been brought into this discussion. It
appeared to him when the question was first introduced that the
legal objection had been raised with the view of postponing the
Bill to a future session.
Lard CAMPBELL intimated his dissent.
Tae Duke of WELLINGTON said, however that might be,
it was quite certain that by this law great alterations wereabout
being made in the condition of the poor of Scotland. As re-
garded the clause under discussion, after the ext,ression of the
Noble and Learned Lords opposite, and the Noble and Learned
Lord on the Woolsack, he would recommend the withdrawal of
the clause.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH acquiesced in the suggestion of
the Noble Duke, and would withdraw the clause.
The clause was then withdrawn, and the Bill was read a
third time and passed.
PAUPER LUNATICS ALYLUM BILL.
The House then went into Committee upon this Bill.
Lord BEAUMONT objected to the wording of the clause
which permitted the public asylums to admit other lunatics.
The LORD CHANCELLOR supported the cause, which,
after some verbal amendments, was agreed to.
Clauses up to clause 41 were, with a fewverbai amendments,
agreed to.
Clauses 42 and up to 91 were agreed to. •
The House then resumed, and the Bill was ordered to be re-
ported on Thursday, next. -
DRAINAGE (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
LUNATICS BILL.

On the motion being put for the committal of this Bill,
The LORD CHANCELLOR rose and said, he had been
requested by his Noble Friend Lord Ashley to state the
nature and object of this Bill. Previous to the year 1774 there
was, comparatively speaking, no protection given to persons
who happened to be in this unhappy situation, and everybody
who was acquainted with the history of that period knew well
that cases of cruelty and injustice were of frequent occurrence.
The 14th of George 111. to a certain degree provided a
remedy for the evil,• but it was found the provisions of that
Act were totally inadequate fer the purposes for which they
were brought forward, and in 1830 his friend, Mr. Robert
G rdon, brought the subject under the consideration of the other
House of Parlirment, and introduced' a Bill fir improving the
then existing law of. lunacy. By that Bill Commisiloners
were appointed who had the power of licensing and visiting
private establishments, and the Bill contained other provisions
for the purpose of meeting the evils which had been pre-
viously complained of. That Bill was merely a temporary
measure, and was only intended to continue in force for three
years. It was found, however, that it operated so well that it
was again and again renewed, and it was now about to expire.
The present Bill was brought forward for the purpose of making
That Act permanent. The Bill, however, introduced some
alterations into the existing law, and it would he necessary for
him to put their Lordships in possession of the changes which
it proposed to effect. The first alteration was, that in conse-
quence of the Bill being made permanent, it had beedme ne-
cessary to make the office of Commissioners also permanent.
Hitherto the number •of Commissioners bad been twenty,
eleven of whim where paid, and consisted of barristers and
medical practitioners, and the remaining nine Commissioners,
from motives of benevolence, performed the office gratuitously.
The present Bill proposed to reduce the number of paid Com-
missioners from eleven to • six, and the number of .the other
class of Commissioners from nine to five, making in all eleven.
By the existing law a paid:Commissioner was not restricted from
devoting his attention to private practice ; but, under the pre-
sent Bill, he was compelled to give the whole of his atten-
tion to the duties of his office. Another change was pro-
posed to be introduced into the law rela'ive to the mode of re••
munerating the Commissioners. . Under the existing law they
were paid by fees ; but, instead of paying them by this modes
they would be paid by salaries of 1,500/. each, making an annual
total of 9,0001. It had been suggested to him that
this mode of remuneration would considerably increase the
expense of the commission, • but he had looked into
the subject himself, and he could assure their Lordships that it
would diminish instead of increase the expenses. The Com-
missioners under the existing Act had the power of visiting
private asylums, but they had not the power of visiting private
hospitals. But the Bill of his Noble Friend proposed to remedy
this defect. Another point of improvement was, that the visitors
were to be allowed to examine and inspect workhouses or
places where paupers were confined ; they were not, however,
to interfere with the duties of the Poor-law Commissioners,
but simply to report to the Commissioner the result of their in-
quiries. There; was another important alteration to which he
wished to call their Lordships' attention. It related to what
were termed single houses, or in other words, houses where
only one patient was confined. Their Lordships, in the exist-
ing Bill, restricted the Commissioners from visiting these esta-
blishments, but, as the proposed Bill stood, the Lord Chancellor
would have the power of selecting three of the Commissioners
who should act as a sort of private committee for visiting single
houses. These were the chief provisions of the Bill. He thought
that the alterations were all salutary. The persons who kept
lunatic asylums were in the habit of taking in persons who were
accused of being of nervous temperament, but not insane or
idiotic. Those persons did not come under the jurisdiction
of the visitors. There were cells and places of concealment
in the asylums which would not be allowed to exist if the visitors
had the power of examining the whole of the house. He pro-
p
osed that their Lordships should go into Committee upon the

The Earl of ELDON approved of the Bill generally, but he
objected to some of the details, and he had a petition to present
from persons in the county of Oxford against interference with
the institution at Warnford.
Lord NIONTEAGLE thought that there ought to be aorne
better provision made for the supervision of asylums in England
and Ireland.

The House then went into Committee, and the report was
brought up with some amendments.
The Hil4 of Exchange Bill passed through Committee, and
was ordered to be read a third tine on Friday.
The Railway Selling and Leasing Bill passed through Corn.
mittee, as also did the Bonded Corn Bill, and were ordered
to be read a third time on Thursday.
The Drainage (Ireland) Bill was read a third time and
passed.

The Report on the Fiiheries (Ireland) Bill was received.
The Fees Compensation Bill went through Committee, as
did also the Criminal Jurisdiction of Assistant Barristers
(Ireland) Bill, which was ordered to be read a third time on
Thursday.
The Militia Pay Bill, and Joint-Stock Company's Bill, were
committed, and ordered to be read a third time on Thursday.
The House then adjourned, at Eleven o'clock, till Thursday
neat.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 29.
The SrEAXER took the Chair at Twelve o'clock precisely,
when the orders of the day were proceeded with.
The following Bills were read a third time and passed :
The Court of Chancery Bill, the Stock in Trade Bill, the
Removal of Paupers Rill.
The Apprehension of Offenders Bill went through Com-
mittee, and was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow at
twelve.

The report of the. Municipal Districts (Ireland) Bill was
received. and went through Committee, and the Bill was or-
dered to be read a third time to-morrow at twelve.
GAMES AND WAGERS BILL.
The report of this Bill was brought up.
After Mr. q. DICK had proposed the insertion of two