The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1851-08-05 00:00:00

EPISCOPAL INCOMES.

Sir B. HALL gave notice of his intention, early in the
next session, to move for a committee to inquire into epis-
copal incomes.

PATENT LAW AMENDMENT BILL.

On going into committee on this bill, Mr. CAREW and
Sir F. THESTGER objected to its further progress; but
after a short discussion—in the course of which the Sou-
CITOR-GENERAL stated that many persons who had arti-
cles in the Exhibition were waiting with great anxiety for
the passing of the bill, to take out patents under it—the
bill went through committee, pro forma', for the purpose
of receiving certain amendments. The house then went
into committee successively on the Church Building Acts'
Amendment Bill, the Petty Sessions (Ireland) Bill, and
the New Zealand Settlements Bill, which occupied the
remainder of the sitting.
THURSDAN.—TITE CRYSTAL PALACE.

At the morning sitting, in reply to Mr. OSBORNE, who
intimated that there had been acme misunderstanding
upon this point, the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.
repeated his statement respecting the Crystal Palace.
Whether the commissioners were at liberty, under the
terms of the memorandum, to apply any portion of the
surplus in their hands to the purposes of a winter-garden
he thought very doubtful ; whether, if they bad the power,
they had the inclination; he could not say. If they were
unable or unwilling, the public could only purchase the
building for a sum which might probably amount to
£70,000. Then to put it in a fit state for permanent
preservation would cost a considerable sum, and there
must be an annual outlay for kee•eing it in repair. So
much for the building. In addition to this expenditure,
there must be a certain outlay for the winter garden itself,
and then there was the cost of maintaining it. These five
charges must fall upon the public.
The Metropolitan Sewers Bill was read a third time and
passed, after a protest from Sir B. Hall and Mr. Walcley.
The Metropolitan Interment Bill went through com-
mittee.

THE PETTY SESSIONS (IRELAND) BILL.
The house went into committee upon the remaining
clauses of this bill, and, after a protracted discussion upon
the 10th clause, the chairman reported progress, to sit
again in the evening, the Chancellor of the Exchequer
consenting to abandon that portion of the clause which
gave new powers to a single magistrate.
THE LAW OF EVIDENCE AMENDMENT BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed. A clause
was inserted, providing that the act should come into
operation on the Ist November.
EPISCOPAL AND CAPITULAR ESTATES MANAGEMENT

(NO. 2) BILL. •
At the evening sitting, on the order for the second read-
ing of this bill, Colonel SIBTRORP objected to the further
progress of the bill this session, and moved that the third
reading be deferred for three months.— Sir B. Ham.
called for some explanation respecting this bill, and
thought that the house should have time to consider the
manner in which the interests of lessees were proposed to
be dealt with.—The CIIANCELLOR of the ExcinQuEn
said, a bill which had been introduced in the other house
by Lord Carlisle had been referred to a select committee
of the House of Lords, who had come to the conclusion
that it was not desirable to proceed with that bill, and
had recommended this measure, which was permissive
only, providing for the possibility of getting rid of the ob-
jectionable system of renewals of finable leases subject to
the check of the Ecclesiastical Estate Commissioners.—
Mr. AGLIONBY said, assuming the measure to be a fair one
for all parties, it should not be pressed with such indecent
haste.—Mr. SPOONER agreed that the rights of lessees
ought to be fairly dealt with; but this was not a compulsory
bill ; it was the first step towards getting rid, with the con-
sent of all
parties, of a system of management which gave to
neither party the full advantage of his interest in the pro-
perty.—Mr. CARDWELL Said, if this bill were intended to

• "
increaseipiscopal orcapitularrebenues, and tiedupthehands
Of parliament from reforming the management of church_
lrroperty;--he -could understand the objections offered to
it ; tout the, bill- expressly provided .that all increase of
church property should be carried to the common fund,
andbe applicable to the benefit of .the working- clergy.
The bill emancipated the parties from the restraints which
imliament had imposed in former times, and enabled the
church to deal with the lessees, and the lessees with the
church, if they pleased.—Mr. ANSTEY opposed the
Mr: NEWDEGATE and Mr. FREWEN urged the postpone-
ment of the bill.—The SOLICITOR-GENERAL observed
that the objections went to the clauses of the bill, not to
its principle, which was this—the lessees had now no
power of enfranchisement from any body except the eccle-
siastical commissioners in respect to property vested is
than. By this bill they might be enfranchised ; but
there was nothing in it to prevent the renewal of leases,
if this were desired ; all the bill did was to enable the
parties, lessor and lessees, if they saw fit, to put the
management of the property upon a new footing.—Mr.
HENLEY and Mr. BARROW wished the bill to be post-
poned until next session, to afford time for considering
its provisions.—Lord PALMERSTON suggested that those
who objected to the details of the bill should allow it to
be read a second time, in order that it might be com-
mitted, and go to the country with any amendments
adopted in the committee.—Upon a division the amend-
ment was negatived by 45 against 34, and the bill was read
a second time.

Certain bills were advanced a stage, and the house then
went again into committee upon the Petty Sessions (Ire-
land) Bill, the Summary Jurisdiction (Ireland) Bill, and
the Constabulary Force (Ireland) Bill, the details of
which were discussed at much length.
The motions upon the paper having been disposed of,
the house adjourned.
FRIDAY.—The New Zealand Settlements Bill was
read a third time and passed, after a protest from Mr. V.
&milt, and n defence of the bill by Mr. HAWES.
The Lunatics (India) Bill and the Crown Estate Paving
Bill were likewise read a third time and passed.
The house then went into committee upon the County
Courts Further Extension Bill, the details of which un-
derwent much discussion and some amendments.

THE CHLTECEI BUILDING ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.

A short debate arose upon a clause proposed by the
Solicitor-General, authorising the bishop, upon or after
the avoidance of a benefice having a population of 40 and
an income of £l5O, where there has been no church for
ten years, to cause a church to be provided out of the
profits of the benefice, v hich was negatived.

TUE EPISCOPAL AND CAPITULAR ESTATES MANAGE-

MENT (NO. 2) BILL.
On going into committee on this bill, Sir B. HALL
complained of the rejection of the bill introduced into the
other house, in conformity with the excellent reports of
the church estates corn missioners, by the select committee
of the lords, upon which five bishops sat. He objected
to the hurried mode of legislating, without allowing the
lessees time to consider the operation of the bill.—Lord
J. RUSSELL said that the ecclesiastical corporations would
not suffer damage, since they must be consenting parties,
and so must the lessees. Some other body might be sub-
stituted for the ecclesiastical commissioners in the Bth
clause, and he was disposed to prefer the church estates
commissioners. The bill was entirely a voluntary and
permissive measure.—Mr. HENLEY observed the parties
interested in the bill had not had time to become
acquainted with its provisions, and to consider whether
their interests were guarded in the right way. He agreed
with Sir B. HALL that it was indecent to attempt to force
this bill through the legislature at such a time.—Mr. J.
A. SMITH thought the wisest course was to go into com-
mittee, suggesting, however, some doubts as to the bene-
ficial working of the measure.—Lord D. STUART doubted
the expediency of going into committee upon a bill the
enactments of which the house had had no fitting oppor-
tunity of examining ; and he moved that the debate be
adjourned, which, upon a division, was negatived by 51
against 30. _ .

-The house having gone into committee, the chairman
was immediately ordered to report progress, and leave
was given to sit again on Monday.
The house then went into committee upon the General
Board of Health (No. 4) Bill, the Canterbury Association,
and the Nuisances Removal and Diseases Prevention Bills.

The Collection of Fines, &c. (Ireland), Bill was read a
third time and passed.

SUGAR REFINING.

Sir J. PAKINGTON moved a resolution that, in the opi-
nion of the house, the British refiners of sugar should be
permitted to refine in bond, and enter their manufactures
for home consumption upon the same duties as are levied
upon refined sugar imported. The existing law threw
impediments in the way of the trade, from which, confor-
mably with the principles of free trade, it ought to be
relieved. The more important branch of the subject,
however, was the obligation in point of consistency and
justice towards the colonies, and to relieve the British
sugar-grower from the serious disadvantages under which
be laboured. The real objection to the change he pro-
posed was apprehended danger to the revenue, and upon
that point he challenged the government to show that this
was a bona fide objection.—Mr. LABOUCHEILE, in the
absence of Sir C. Wood, said that the question was whe-
ther any of those restrictions were superfluous. He
admitted that in regard to the differential duty the British
sugar, owing to its quality, laboured under some discou-
ragement ; but the growing improvement in the processes
of roanufazturing the colonial sugar, the qualities of which
now more nearly approached those of the foreign, had
lessened this disadvantage. There was no reason to believe
that the supply of colonial sugar had decreased.—Mr.
MITCHELL treated the objections offered as extremely
Weak: Mr. Labouchere had admitted that the prohibition
to refine in bond was a restriction which he had justified
on the ground that the London refiners did not desire its
removal, the motive of which was obvious—to keep up a
profitable monopoly.
The house was here counted, and 40 members not
being present, an adjournment tock place.

FOREIGN AND COLONIAL.