MR. LAURIE asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether it was decided that 1,000 troops with officers and women, were about to leave Kingston for the Mauritius on board the ship Lord Raglan; and whether a vessel of such tonnage is capable of containing so large a number with any comfort or safety?

SIR CHARLES WOOD said, it had not been decided that the Lord Raglan should embark 1,000 men; she would only carry 727 men; the whole number on board - including men, officers, women, and seventy children-would be only 904. As she had before carried 984 with com

fort and safety, he had no apprehension but that she was quite capable of carrying

the number she was now about to take.

This had the House?

not yet been set at liberty.
been brought under his notice by a report
in the Hobart Town Daily Courier, dated
February 14, 1857, of the proceedings in
the Legislative Assembly there. A mem-
ber asked Mr. Nairn, the representative of
the Government,-

"The cause why an absolute pardon similar to those granted recently to all other political offenders (excepting those who absconded from this island), had not been issued to W. Cuffey, who

was transported to this colony as a Chartist some years ago, and whose conduct here is understood

to have been such as to deserve consideration ?" To this Mr. Nairn answered,

In July, 1855, an application was sent home for a conditional pardon, which was recommended by the Governor. No answer had been received to that despatch, nor had any despatch been received respecting an absolute pardon. Cuffey's conduct had been good."

He was sure that there must have been some omission or negligence on the part of the authorities at home, or Cuffey would have received his pardon with the other prisoners.

He should also be glad to

know when the Government intended to invite the opinion of the House on the very important matters contained in that convention?

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON said, that no such document had been received by the Government from Mr. Buchanan. With regard to the other part of the question, due notice would be given as to the day when the subject of the convention would be brought before the House.

EDUCATION-QUESTION.

MR. SLANEY asked the right hon. Baronet the Member for Droitwich, whether it was his intention to bring in any Bill this Session on the important subject of education?

SIR J. PAKINGTON said, that he did not intend to move for leave to introduce any Education Bill this Session, as he thought it would be quite useless for any private Member to attempt independent legislation this Session.

QUESTION.

SIR GEORGE GREY said, there had been no difference made between Cuffey and any other of the political prisoners. A pardon was passed under the Great Seal THE "URGENT" AND THE "MEGÆRA." to all political prisoners, and a list of them was transmitted to the colonial authorities, on which list was the name of William Cuffey. It was quite possible that there might have been some delay in restoring him to freedom, in consequence of a necessary reference to the law officers as to the form in which the pardons ought to be made out, and it might be possible that the despatch containing their decision had not arrived at the colony at the date referred to by the hon. Gentleman. The delay, however, would apply equally to all the prisoners, for no difference had been made, and as Cuffey's name was on the list he would receive his pardon at the same time as the others. He had no doubt, however, but that the man had been set at liberty before this.

ADMIRAL WALCOTT said, he wished to put a question to the First Lord of the Admiralty in reference to a statement made by him on a previous evening, when stating the circumstances under which the Urgent troop-ship had put into Corunna. It was of the highest importance that statements made by a Minister of the Crown, on matters of this description, should be unimpeachable, and he was sure, therebe obliged to him for calling his attention fore, that the right hon. Gentleman would to a letter in The Times newspaper, in which his statement that the Urgent had put into Corunna in consequence of having inet with severe gales and heavy seas was directly contradicted, and it was asserted

obtaining one from the right hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Admiralty.

that she went in in smooth water and calm weather. [ Order!"] If he was out of THE SOUND DUES-QUESTION. order, he would put himself in order by MR. LIDDELL asked the First Lord moving the Adjournment of the House, of the Treasury whether there had been but he desired to have a satisfactory extransmitted, along with the other docu-planation, and looked with confidence to ments on the subject, by Her Majesty's Minister at Copenhagen, Mr. Buchanan, a copy of the Report of the Committee of the Danish Imperial Council on the law relating to transit dues, dated Copenhagen, April the 17th; and if so, whether a copy of the same might be laid on the table of

SIR CHARLES WOOD said, he was very much obliged to the gallant Admiral for having given him an opportunity of setting himself right with the House after the attack which had been made on his

veracity. He had been accused of having placed in communication with those gendeceived the House by a false statement; tlemen and the railway authorities, and but the only foundation for that charge preparations were being made, both for was obtained by putting that into his carrying the railway down to the pier and mouth which he had never said, and of also for the construction of a new pier for course it was easy enough to contradict a landing the passengers and mails, which statement which had been misrepresented. would obviate the necessity of going round He was accused of having said that the the old one, as at present. Every arUrgent had been driven into Corunna by rangement, in fact, was being made for bad weather; but he had never said any the accommodation of that service. such thing. On the contrary, he had read to the House a letter from her commander, in which it was stated that she steamed

into Corunna in smooth water and fine weather. It was of the Megara that he had said that she had been driven to enter Corunna by bad weather, and he had stated that a large merchantman which had been out in the same gale had been driven back, and had entered Plymouth under a jurymast. That statement applied to the Megara and not to the Urgent. Before sitting down, the House would be glad to hear that he had received a letter from the commander of the Transit, written off the Cape de Verd island, in which he stated that the performance of the vessel under steam was of the most satisfactory description, the working of the machinery was good, and the speed averaged nine knots an hour, and that the health of the crew and of the men was most satisfactory.

STEAM-PACKET COMMUNICATION BE-
TWEEN DUBLIN AND HOLYHEAD.

QUESTION.

MR. GROGAN said, he should be glad if the Secretary for the Treasury would state what instructions had been given with regard to the providing of new berths for steam-vessels at Holyhead, and the construction of a tramway from the landing pier to the railway station.

MR. WILSON said, that it had been represented to the Treasury by the company which proposed to undertake the mail service between the metropolis and Dublin that very great facilities would be given if the railway were continued from the Holyhead station down to the place where the vessels were brought up, and also that considerable delay would be avoided by bringing up outside instead of inside the pier, so that the vessels might come flush with the railway, and allow the passengers and mails to be landed at once upon the line. In consequence of those representations, Mr. Rendell had been

NAVY ESTIMATES.

SIR CHARLES WOOD wished to state

that the Navy Estimates for the year, which he had laid on the table, would be delivered to Members on the following day. In these Estimates there was nothing which were submitted before the dissolunew, they were precisely similar to those tion of the late Parliament; and he hoped, therefore, there would be no objection to their being proceeded with on Monday next. He had just laid on the table a voted on account, and the sums remaining paper, stating the sums which had been to be voted, with of course the difference between what had been voted and the whole amount required for the service of the year.

MARRIED WOMEN BILL.

LEAVE. FIRST READING.

SIR ERSKINE PERRY, in asking for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law of property as it affects married women, said, he regretted that some measure on the subject had not been proposed by Government. The assurance given during the last Session by his hon. and learned Friend the present Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, had led him to believe that such would have been the case. On that occasion he had brought forward some Resolutions for the purpose of contrasting the different principles which are applied by Courts of Equity and Courts of Common Law to the property of married women, when the late Attorney General admitted fully that the rules of the common law were injurious and unjust, and intimated an intention to introduce in the next Session a satisfactory measure. IIe (Sir E. Perry) fully admitted, however, that the difficulty inherent in the subject, and the little discussion it had undergone in this House, were sufficient reasons why the Government should not be precipitate in their legislation, and all that could be expected on the part of those who object

to the present law was a patient inquiry | tainly was one which was the most dangerinto the ground of their objections, and of ous and the most difficult for a legislator the principles on which they contend a wiser to meddle with. But the House had relaw might be framed. In order to guard ceived grievous complaints as to the abuses himself from the charge of presumption of the law of property which occur in the in venturing to propose an Amendment in married state. When misconduct occurs an institute of social law, wherein he ad- on the part either of the husband or the mitted legislation to be so difficult, he wife, the main object and design of the would crave leave to say that the subject innocent party is to be relieved from all had been most carefully canvassed for pecuniary liability arising out of the illmany months by the Law Amendment starred union, and his firm belief was, Society, of which several distinguished that if a wise and comprehensive law, reGentlemen on both sides of this House gulating the enjoyment of property beare Members, and the measure he pro- tween husband and wife were passed, all posed was founded on the principles almost demand or necessity for tampering with unanimously adopted by them, after delibe- the indissolubility of marriage would disrate and lengthened consideration; and, for appear. The objections to the common himself, he would say he had too much pro- law of England, as it affected the property found respect for the House to have neglect- of married women was, that it was unjust ed any resource which industry or diligence in principle, unlike the law of all other might supply, in order to furnish materials civilized nations, a departure from the fit for being brought before the notice of principles of the old common law itself, and the Legislation, in considering the present above all, grievous in its operation on the state of the law. Before entering on the community at large. He would touch on question, he would state that he was advo- these points lightly, as he understood the cating no speculative or theoretic reform, introduction of the Bill would not be opbut a measure framed to meet an acknow-posed. By the law of England, the act ledged evil. During the last Session of of marriage hands over the whole of a Parliament nearly 25,000 petitioners, men woman's personal property to her husband, and women, comprising many of the most and reduces her to a mere nonentity. She distinguished names in literature, science, cannot acquire property; she cannot sue and art, and belonging to the most influ- or be sued, and, indeed, has no civil rights ential classes of society, complained to which she can assert in a court of justice. this House of the injustice of the present Nay more, it would be found that, in all law, and of its harsh bearing on the in- questions of property between husband and terests of the great majority who depend wife, either by decisions of courts of juson their industry and labour. Having tice or by the express enactments of the pointed out the grievance, they now pa- legislature, the husband had been preferred, tiently and confidently relied on the wisdom and the interests of the wife sacrificed. of the Legislature to afford redress. Thus, with respect to a woman's dower or There was another reason which ap-life interest in her husband's lands after peared to make speedy legislation on this subject extremely desirable. In another place, attempts had been made to alter the law of England as respects divorce, and to establish as a right the power of dissolving the marriage tie in certain cases. But, although this right had been claimed in certain vehement and very eloquent pamphlets, as founded on indubitable justice, no popular demand had arisen on the subject. Divorce practically did not exist, and never had existed in this country, and we certainly had no reason to believe that the people of England desired that the facilities of divorce which existed in some Protestant countries so much to the corruption of morals therein should be introduced into England. The House had not received a single petition on the subject, and it cer

his death, the Courts denied it to the widow out of the equitable lands of the husband; but when a similar question arose as to the equitable lands of the wife, they gave the husband his life interest therein, or what is called his curtesy. And now the Legislature has enabled husbands to deprive their wives of dower altogether. So with respect to the widow's right to a third of the personal estate of her husband, the Courts allowed husbands to leave away the whole of their personalty by will; and thus a wife, giving all to her husband on mar riage, was entitled by the present law to absolutely nothing in return. Yet, with amusing self-complacency, Sir William Blackstone laid down that the female sex are great favourites of the law of England.”

to justify this anomaly. For the credit of the legal profession, there are scarcely any who defend the English law as it is; difficulties are suggested as to the alteration, but the injustice of the present law is pretty generally admitted. There are, however, some sages in the law, and if I mistook not the argument last year of my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Wallingford (Mr. Malins) he must be one of them who defend the law in all its vigour. He (Sir E. Perry) had heard the justification placed in as clear and forcible terms as it was capable of being couched in:

nance of wife and children and the education of the latter; he is the proper judge how these duties shall be performed, and therefore he ought to have all the wife's personalty to enable him to perform these duties." But this was not a logical conclusion. Even if it be correctly stated that the father is bound by law to maintain and educate his children, and that he ought to dispose of his wife's personalty for these matters, what if there were no children, if the wife died a week after the marriage, if the husband had a mistress, was it just, was it reasonable that he should be allowed in all these cases to have the absolute property in his wife's personalty? to squander it away, or to give it to his own natural children? But the present law allowed it, and grievous misapplication of the property constantly happened.

Now, the Roman law, which was universally allowed to have dealt with rights of property with more practical good sense and comprehensive views than the codes of other nations, gave the married women full rights over all such portions of her own property, as she had not handed over by ante-nuptial agreement to her husband to bear the charges of the marriage. The German law deals with the property of husband and wife on the principle of community of goods, or communio bonorum; but though it allows the administration to remain in the hands of the husband, it recognizes the clear right of the wife to her" the law throws on husbands the mainteshare in this common property, which she may assert either in the case of improper conduct on the part of the husband, or on the dissolution of the marriage. Nay, the early English law pursued the same liberal principle of recognizing equal rights on the part of the wife, and dealt with the only property which was then of sufficient value to be regarded seriously by the law, namely, real estate, on terms as beneficial to the wife as to the husband. The common law did not and does not transfer the wife's property in land to her husband, but recognizes a distinct title in each, and whilst it gave to the husband a life-interest in the wife's lands after her death if there happened to be a child born, it gave to the wife a third part in her husband's lands whether there was a child born or not by way of recompense. With respect to personal property which, in the days when the rules of the common law sprung up, was too insignificant to have much attention paid to it, although the law, founded no doubt on usage, gave it to the husband absolutely; the old English law, like the law of all the German nations, recognized the absolute right on the part of the wife to take one-third of all the common stock of personalty on her husband's death. This right, Sir William Blackstone tells us, married women lost by "imperceptible degrees;" that is to say, husbands assuming the right to bequeath all their property, the courts of justice recognized such wills, and gradually judge-made law grew up which effectually deprived wives of their clear and indisputable right.

The law of England on this head then being thus one-sided, being, unlike most laws, all in favour of the stronger, not of the weaker party, and being founded on a different principle from that which has governed the legislation of other countries, English jurists are undoubtedly called upon

The argument, however, was unsound in another particular; the conclusion was not supported by the premises; but the premises themselves were not correctly stated. The rights of the husband are based on his supposed liability to the charges arising out of the marriage, but this liability is stated much too broadly. It was true a husband is bound to maintain his wife according to his station; he is not bound to maintain his children according to theirs, or to educate them at all. The law of England has been content, and on the whole wisely, to leave these duties to be governed by the laws of nature, by the strong parental feeling which induces the great majority of mankind to make all the sacrifices that may be required for the welfare of their offspring. But this parental feeling was not less strong, it was probably much stronger, in the female bosom; and if the law could safely leave man unfettered to perform such duties towards his children, there could be no necessity to take away a