The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-10 00:00:00

CANAL TOLLS BILL.

Lord HATHERTON moved that the Canal Company's
Tolls Bill be read a second time, which was agreed to ; as was
also the second reading of the Carriers' Bill.
BASTARDY CLAUSES AMENDMENT BILL.

The Earl of RADNOR proposed the second reading of the
Bastardy Clauses Amendment Bill, and contended that the state
of the law at present, as it affected the parents of bastard chil-
dren, was very defective, and required considerable amendment.
He thought the law as it now stood ought to be altered. The
principles of the English law allowed no case in which a person
could be called upon to give evidence in their own case. By
the present bastardy law, however, a woman might be called to
give evidence in her own case. Formerly, in a bastardy case,
the woman was the witness of the parish. Under the present
law a woman might go before a police magistrate, and swear
that she was pregnant with a bastard child. The magistrate
was compelled to issue a summons, which was made re-
turnable at a period subsequent to the woman's recovery
from her lying-in. Now what powers of extortion did this
give to a woman. On these grounds he thought the present
law ought to be altered. The Noble Earl concluded by moving
the second reading of the Bill.

Lord WH ARNCLIFFE opposed the Bill. He thought it
was too soon to judge of the operation of the present law see-
ing thatithe Act only passed last year: The system which was in
existence before the passing of the Poor Law Amendment Act
was fraught with evils. When a woman found herself with child
the parish officers were set at her and at the man who was the
supposed father, and the most improper proceedings took place in
order to induce a marriage between the parties. At that time a
woman had nothing to do but to go before two justices of the
peace in petty sessions, and swear A. B. was the father of her
bastard child, and the order was made at once as a matter of course.
The remedy subsequently adopted, in 1843, was the seizure of
goods and the stoppage of the man's wages ; but in the former
case there were frequently no goods to seize, and in the latter
few, if any, masters could be found who would render them-
selves obnoxious by stopping the wages of the operative for a
crime wholly unconnected with themselves or their contract.
Finally, the new law was introduced, by which the putative
father, on sufficient evidence before a magistrate, was
compelled to provide for the subsistence of the child ; and
as that was but an experiment of a year's existence, be
believed any repeal of it would not only be premature, but
unwise and unsafe.
The Earl of CARNARVON concurred with his Noble
Friend (Lord Wharncliffe) in stating that such sudden and
rapid changes in the law were calculated to bring the Legis-
lature into disrepute. The state of the law, previous to the
introduction of the existing statute, was certainly unsatisfac-
tory ; while the burden of punishment was imposed to its full
on the weaker vessel, the crime of the stronger, and, too often
guiltier, party was virtually connived at. Last year, however,
these anomalies had been removed ; and, trusting that the
remedy proposed would prove successful, he should oppose any
measure which would interfere with its fair working.
The Earl of RADNOR still considered that the existing
law held out a premium to perjury, and that he had shown
amply sufficient grounds to warrant a change in its provisions.
The amendment was then lout and agreed to, and tke House
adjourned at Ten o'clock.

A deputation from Liverpool', consisting of Lord Sandon,
Mr. Henry Cleaver Chapman, an d Mr. Bold, had art interview
with Sir George Clerk yesterday at the office of the Board of
Trade, on the subject of idle MerchVit. Seamen's Fund Bill.