Oriel, L. (V. Massereene.) Petre, L. Raglan, L. Redesdale, L. render the administration of justice as cheap as possible, and the clause as it Sheffield, L. (E. Shef- stood would tend to prevent a man of mo field.) Stafford, L. derate means from instituting proceedings. Vaux of Harrowden, L. As to the substitute, his noble and learned Wensleydale, L. Friend opposite (Lord Campbell) might hereafter propose to make the offence On the Question, "That the clause, as committed a misdemeanour, punishable by amended, stand part of the Bill?" fine, or by imprisonment, or by both. It was not necessary to settle that question then. THE BISHOP OF OXFORD said, though the clause was greatly improved by the most rev. Prelate's Amendment, he still considered it very objectionable, and should therefore move its omission. to. Amendment withdrawn. Clause agreed Clause 44 (Dissolution of Marriage to precede Action for Criminal Conversation.) LORD CAMPBELL said, thinking that the discussion could not at that hour be continued advantageously, he should move that the House do now resume. THE LORD CHANCELLOR opposed the Motion. LORD LYNDHURST said, before the House went into Committee he had stated his desire to put an end to the action for criminal conversation. For the purpose of effecting that object, he would now propose that so much of the 44th Clause as began with the word "unless," down to the end, be excluded. EARL GREY observed, that the House had been engaged seven hours and a half in discussing the Bill, and he did not think it would be consistent with propriety and with the dignity of the House to proceed any further. EARL GRANVILLE thought, that as the noble and learned Lord (Lord Lyndhurst) had borne the fatigue of sitting there so long to state his views, the House ought to have the patience to hear him. - LORD LYNDHURST said, he had previously explained his object. What he now proposed was, to strike out the word “unless," and the remaining words of the clause down to the end. The clause would then stand in substance thus:"That no action for criminal conversation shall hereafter be brought." The Bill as it stood made the law in reference to that subject worse than it was at present. Providing as it did that no action for criminal conversation should be brought till a divorce had been obtained, it would prevent a Roman Catholic, who could not sue for a divorce, from bringing an action. One object of the Bill was, he understood, to LORD WENSLEYDALE said, that this was a most important question, on which he had much to say. He should support the Motion that the House do now sume. re THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE said, that the House ought not to resume till the noble and learned Lord's (Lord Lyndhurst's) statement had been answered. He had raised a very grave question, and the House ought not to resume without some answer. The great objection to these actions for damages had hitherto been the form in which these actions had been brought. It was a subject which demanded much consideration, as to whether they should abolish a pecuniary remedy for what was very often a pecuniary damage. He wanted to know the views of the Government on this subject. LORD CAMPBELL again urged the adjournment of the House. Even in the House of Commons it was not the custom to sit so many hours in Committee even upon important subjects. He urged the adjournment as a sincere friend to the Bill. After a few words from Earl GRAN that all Committees should have leave to sit, notwithstanding the adjournment of the House. The pressure of public business rendered it very desirable that the sittings of all the Committees should not be suspended for two days. COLONEL FRENCH said, that several Committees had already adjourned. SIR JAMES GRAHAM said, that the Committee over which he presided had, with the full consent of counsel, decided not to meet to-morrow, but, with the permission of the House, to sit on Wednesday. SIR GEORGE GREY said, that the Motion was intended only to give permission for the meeting of such Committees as chose to sit during the adjournment of the House. MR. FITZROY said, he wished to explain that his Motion was in the usual terms, and would leave it to the decision of the several Committees whether or not they should sit. Motion agreed to. Ordered, That all Committees have leave to sit, notwithstanding the adjournment of the House. THE INNS OF COURT-LEGAL EDUCATION-QUESTION. MR. WARREN asked the Attorney General, whether Her Majesty's Government have any intention during the present Session, to introduce a measure founded on the Report of the Commission issued to inquire into the subject of Legal Education. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL said, that two years ago a Royal Commission was issued to inquire into the state of the Inns of Court, especially with reference to the facilities for legal study, the revenues appropriate for the purpose, and the means likely to secure a systematic education for students in the law. The Commissioners made a Report, recommending a course which they thought would tend to effect that object. Her Majesty's Government had expected that the Inns of Court would have voluntarily adopted the measures thus recommended by the Commission for securing the great object of providing for the effectual education of students for the bar. To provide such an education was one of the trusts imposed upon those societies, and they had large revenues at their disposal to discharge that trust. He was sorry, however, to say, that there was a division between the different Inns of VOL. CXLV. [THIRD SERIES.] Court upon the subject. The Inner and Middle Temple were desirous of carrying out the plan proposed by the Commissioners, but Lincoln's Inn and Gray's Inn were opposed to such a course, a resolution to that effect having been passed by a majority of one vote. If that state of things should continue, it would be the duty of Government to introduce a Bill upon the subject; but the subject having been under the consideration of the societies, and the Government believing that they were actuated by good intentions, it was not intended to bring any measure in this Session. SURGEONS IN THE MILITIA. QUESTION. COLONEL GREVILLE asked the UnderSecretary for War, whether it is the intention of the Government to issue pay to the surgeons of militia regiments who have been called upon by the War Department to reside at the head quarters of the permanent staff, for the purpose of taking medical charge of the officers, non-commissioned officers, and their families; and, if so, at what rate. SIR JOHN RAMSDEN said, it was the intention of the Government to issue pay to the surgeons of the militia regiments when they were residing at headquarters. The rate at which it would be issued, would be that which was fixed by the militia regulations of 1854. CUSTOMS DUTIES-QUESTION. MR. W. EWART: It appearing from a Return made to this House on the 20th day of January last that there are, in the table of Customs Duties, sixty articles producing to the revenue not more than £200 yearly, each; fifty-three articles producing not more than £100; thirty-six producing not more than £20; and thirteen producing only £5 or less than £5, yearly, each, asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether it is the intention of the Government to consider the expediency of abolishing any of these duties, in the interests of commerce, and for further simplifying the tariff of Customs Duties? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, the subject was under consideration, and there would be no objection to abolish the greater portion of the table of duties to which the hon. Gentleman had referred. But at the same time he would 2 E remind the hon. Gentleman that the list THE ATTORNEY GENERAL in reply, would require careful revision, because there were some of the articles to which reference had been made, included in the tariff on special grounds. Paper, malt, and hops, being subject to an Excise duty, it would, therefore, be necessary to impose a countervailing Customs duty on beer, paper, and pasteboard, all of which were included in the duties to which the hon. Member referred. LABOURERS IN BRITISH GUIANA. QUESTION. MR. CHEETHAM asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, if he had received any communication from British Guiana, complaining of the difficulties which at present exists in obtaining an adequate supply of immigrant labourers for that colony, and whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to take any steps in reference to the same. MR. LABOUCHERE said, the Colonial Office had been for several years past in constant communication with the colony on the subject. During the last nine years. no less than 30,000 had emigrated to the tropical colonies of this country. The Government were most anxious to promote by every means in their power, the emigration of labourers to those colonies; subject to their being treated when there as freemen, and to the engagements with them being strictly fulfilled, the Government would promote the sending of labourers in every possible way. On a future occasion he would lay such papers on the table as should inform the hon. Gentleman and the House of the facts in regard to the ques tion. LEGISLATION FOR IRELAND-QUESTION. SIR JOHN PAKINGTON asked the Attorney General, whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to introduce in the present Session Bills for Ireland, relating to Probates and Administrations, and to Divorce and Matrimonial Causes, similar in principle to the Bills for England now before the House of Lords. Also, whether it is intended that the Bill relating to Clergy Discipline, which the Lord Chancellor stated, shortly before the dissolution of Parliament, was then in preparation, should be introduced this Session, and whether it will include the Church in Ireland. said, the Government never intended to introduce those Bills with regard to England only. There were, however, some technical difficulties which rendered it inexpedient to include Ireland in the Bills which had been introduced. When, however, the Bill relating to Divorce and the Probate of Wills came down to that House, his right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General for Ireland would move for leave to introduce Bills extending their principle to Ireland, and also for the establishment of a General Ecclesiastical Registry in that country. With regard to the subject of Church Discipline, a Bill had some time back been prepared and submitted to the Bishops for their approval. Those right. rev. personages had returned the Bill to the Lord Chancellor; but some doubt existed as to whether it could be introduced during the present Session; however, if it were introduced, he could assure the right hon. Gentleman that a Bill applicable to Ireland would also be introduced. STOPPAGES FOR FORAGE-QUESTION. MR. NOEL asked the Under Secretary for War, what is the total annual amount of the stoppages which are deducted from the pay of cavalry officers for forage for their chargers, and whether the Government will take the matter into their consideration, with the view of doing away with those stoppages? SIR JOHN RAMSDEN said, he could not state the exact amount of those stoppages. Cavalry officers had been subjected to them for a very long period, and a reduction in their amount must, of course, be regarded as an addition to their pay. The Government had had the subject under their serious consideration, but they were not prepared at the present moment to recommend that a reduction should be made. THE SOUND DUES-COMMITTEE ORDERED. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER moved, that the passage in the Lords Commissioners' Speech relative to the treaty with the King of Denmark respecting the Sound Dues be read. Paragraph in the Lords Commissioners' Speech at the opening of the Session read, as follows: "We are commanded to inform you, that Her Majesty, in conjunction with several other European Powers, has concluded a Treaty with the King of Denmark for the redemption of the Sound Dues. This Treaty, together with a separate Convention between Her Majesty and the King of Denmark, completing the arrangement, will be laid before you, and Her Majesty will cause the measures necessary for fulfilling the engagements thereby contracted to be submitted for your consideration." THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I beg to move, that the House take this passage into consideration on Friday the 5th of June. Committee to consider the redemption of the Sound Dues on Friday, 5th June. DOWRY OF THE PRINCESS ROYAL. MR. FITZROY brought up the Report of the Resolution on Queen's Message [18 May]. "That the annual sum of eight thousand pounds be granted to Her Majesty, out of the Consolidated Fund of Great Britain and Ireland, the said annuity to be settled on Her Royal Highness The Princess Royal, for her life, in such manner as Her Majesty shall think proper, and to commence from the date of the Marriage of Her Royal Highness with His Royal Highness Prince Fre deric William of Prussia." Resolution read 2°. quer on Friday night-he alluded to the 66 The VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: I cannot help expressing my great regret that the hon. Gentleman has thought fit to raise a discussion on this provision. I had hoped. that after what the hon. Gentleman himself has admitted to be the general con MR. CONINGHAM rose, for the purpose of proposing an Amendment to the Resolution which had been adopted appa-currence of the House with respect to the rently unanimously on Friday. He regretted very much that the House had not been afforded an opportunity of dividing upon the question on that occasion, as he felt assured that the public out of doors would have been undeceived with respect to the general concurrence with which the Resolution would seem to have been adopted. He was of opinion that if a division had taken place a very large minority would have been found to be opposed to the proposal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. For his own part, he objected to the proposal on principle; he objected to its amount, and viewed it with disfavour as a precedent. The reasons which he had on the former occasion urged against the annuity still continued to have weight with him; but he should abstain from repeating them, and should content himself with moving an Amendment to the effect that the amount of the proposed annuity be reduced from £8,000 to £6,000. He could not, however, pass over a very remarkable omission which had occurred in the speech of the Chancellor of the Exche Resolution before us, even those among us who might entertain individual objections to the amount of the Vote, or the relative amount of the votes which are to constitute the marriage portion of the Princess Royal, would be content to merge their objections in the almost unanimous wish of the House. I must again say, that in asking that a suitable provision should be made for her whom the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield has very properly described as "the eldest daughter of England upon the occasion of her going forth to hold a great and important position in a foreign kingdom-I did hope that we should not have been called upon to discuss the difference between £8,000 and £6,000, particularly when we reflect that either sum must be regarded as utterly insignificant when compared with the resources of the country, but which are of value as indicating the attachment of this House to the Sovereign and the dynasty under which it is our happiness to live. I shall, at all events, follow the example in one respect of the hon. Gentle COLONEL FRENCH said, he regretted that the noble Lord had thought fit to address the House, which he felt confident would vindicate by its Vote the decision at which it had arrived on Friday. MR. GILPIN said, that had Mr. Roebuck-["Order!"]-he begged to apologize for calling the hon. and learned Gentleman by his right name; but had the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield thought fit to divide the House on a former occasion, he (Mr. Gilpin) should have voted with him. He did not think, however, that it was wise for his hon. Friend the Member for Brighton to reopen the question. He would yield to no one in a desire to do what was right to all parties-towards Her Majesty as well as towards his constituents and was not prepared to divide against the Vote to which the House had come on a former occasion. man who has proposed this Amendment in | had made, he considered, ample provision not making any lengthened observations, for the eminent personage with whom they but shall content myself with earnestly en- were now dealing. He should not be acttreating the House to abide by the Reso- ing as what he professed to be a fair lution.. representative of the people-if he objected to give an amply sufficient dowry to the young Princess the eldest born of our Sovereign; but he should not be what he professed to be, a just representative of the people, if he did not express his opinion that an annuity of £8,000 was amply sufficient. Therefore he thought that the sum of £40,000 included in this Vote was unnecessary liberality on the part of the representatives of a nation which comprised many millions of poor and needy persons. He knew that many hon. Gentlemen might differ from him and accuse him of presumption for venturing to express his opinion upon the subject; but the feeling which he entertained on this subject on Friday night he entertained most strongly at the present moment, namely, that he was greatly disappointed by the conduct of the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield and on the part of some hon. Members he begged to say that they were equally disappointed. That hon. and learned Gentleman by assuming the position which he had on Friday night prevented hon. Gentlemen from putting the sentiments expressed by him into a practical form. The hon. and learned Gentleman came forward even before the Motion was proposed, and made a solemn appeal to the representatives of the people. He (Mr. Maguire) was greatly struck by the justice of the hon. and learned Gentleman's observations, and he believed that many hon. Gentlemen would have gone into the lobby with him if he Question put, "That the word 'eight' stand part of the Resolution." The House divided:-Ayes 328; Noes 14: Majority 314. Blackburn, P. List of the NOES. Blake, J. Bowyer, G. Corbally, M. E. Dalgleish, R. Jones, D. MacEvoy, E. Maguire, J. F. O'Donoghoe, The Pease, H. Resolution agreed to. TELLERS. Coningham, W. Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. FITZROY, had laid his proposition in a practical form the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, and Viscount PALMERSTON. Bill read 1°. SUPPLY-REPORT. before the House. The hon. and learned Gentleman had no right to express his opinion in the manner he had, unless he had intended to test the feeling of the House upon it. He addressed the House (1.) "That the sum of £40,000 be upon two separate occasions in support of granted to Her Majesty for the marriage his view, and it was his duty to have portion of Her Royal Highness the Prin-pressed the House to a division. The cess Royal, read 2o. Resolutions reported. MR. MAGUIRE said, he did not know whether he was in time to express an opinion and propose an Amendment to this Resolution; but he thought that himself and many other hon. Gentlemen were rather badly treated by the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) on Friday night. By the decision at which the House had just arrived they hon. Gentleman concluded by moving that the Vote of £40,000 be negatived. MR. SPEAKER said, that the proper course would be to move the Amendment on the Question that the House do agree with the Resolutions of the Committee, and those who concurred in the opinion of the hon. Gentleman could vote in the negative of that Question. MR. CONINGHAM also thought that |