'Mates an 113rocuilings faiiarliamtnt. SUSPENSION OP RAILWAY. SPECULATION.

The Select Committee appointed by the House of Commons to consider the expediency of suspending Railway Bills, made their report on Monday; and Sir CHARLES WOOD endeavoured to proceed with the matter on Wed- nesday, but the House gave the preference to Sir Henry Salford's Hosiery Bill; and a special morning sitting on Thursday was appointed for con- sidering the Railway subject. On that day, accordingly, Sir CHARLES WOOD moved a series of reso- lutions recommended by the Committee for the adoption of the House. They were discussed with some length and minuteness; some slight verbal alterations were introduced; attempts at resistance were made at one or two parts; but the resolutions were adopted without any material alteration. We subjoin the substance, in an abridged form,

Promoters of all bills are empowered, under conditions, either on the second reading or on the completion of any subsequent stage, to suspend all further pro.. ceedings ; with liberty to resume neat session at the point of suspension. Promoters of bills who intend, to suspend proceedings are to give notice of their intention at the Private Bill Office, by the 18th June, or (if the bill be in Committee) within six days of the Committee's report. Promoters intending to petition for the reintroduction of their bills must give notice, by advertisement for three successive weeks during October and Novem- ber, in the London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Gazettes, or in the newspapers of the counties through which the lines are to pass. Petitions presented during the session of 1848 will be referred to the Examiner [or Committee if the bill were reported]; who will ascertain the identity of the measures and of the promoters, the validity of the subscription-contract, and the lodgment of the deposit of 10 per cent. In respect of all petitions thus examined and found correct, the Standing Orders are to be held to have been complied with. The time between the second reading and the Committee is altered to three days; regular notice to be given at the Private Bill Offioe. The deposits are to be returned in the mean time to the depositors, but must be paid in again on renewal of the bill.

A clause is to be henceforward inserted in every railway, bill prohibiting the payment of any interest or dividend in respect of calls (except in cases of certain prepaid subscriptions under the 8 Vic. cap. 1.6) out of the capital. In all cases of application from existing railway companies for power to con- struct branches, or to contribute towards the construction of other railways, a subscription-contract for two thirds of the additional capital must be given in, and the deposits duly paid.

A clause is to be inserted in all railway bills prohibiting companies from pay- ing out of the capital raised under existing acts the deposits for any new schemes. Railway companies are to be prohibited from exercising powers of purchase, sale, lease, or amalgamation, until after proof to the Railway Commissioners that a sum has been expended equal to one half of their capital. No railway acts, in future sessions, shall contain powers of purchase, sale, lease, or amalgamation.

No railway company is to be allowed to guarantee interest on shares issued for the creation of additional capital, or to guarantee any rent or dividend to any other railway company, until the first-mentioned company shall have completed or opened its line.

The united capital of railway companies amalgamating is in no case to exceed the sum of the capitals of the amalgamated companies. Railway companies empowered to purchase other railways shall not be allowed to increase the capital beyond the amount of the capital of the purchased rail- ways; and where a premium is given, no addition on account of it is to be made to the capital of the purchasing company.

RAILWAY ACCIDENTS.

A conversation took place on Tuesday respecting the railway accidents. Mr. GISBORNE alluded to a statement by Mr. Locke, at the Dee Bridge inquest—that "the Admiralty and Board of Trade were disposed in many cases to attend more to the requirements of water-way and navigation than to the safety of the public, and very unnecessarily to place upon engineers the necessity of covering li width of span that could not be made entirely safe; that Mr. Stephenson, Mr. Brunel, and himself; addressed a joint letter to Lord Dalhousie, embodying these opinions; to which letter they had not received any reply."

Mr. Smarr said, that among the papers of the Railway Commissioners there was nothing referring to this matter. There was indeed the letter in question; but it referred to a clause in an act of Parliament, and not to the conduct of the Commissioners. With respect to the Board of Admiralty, which performs most useful functions in protecting the rights of the public in navigation, if further information on the point were required, application should be made to the Admiralty.

Sir GEORGE CLERK remarked, that if a railway company desired to run their line across a river, it was the business of the engineer to see, if he ob- tained powers, that the bridge constructed was of suitable dimensions and of sufficient strength; and, if any casualty occurred, on him must rest the entire responsibility.

Subsequently, Mr. STRUTT stated that the Railway Commissioners had sent down gentlemen to inquire into the accident of the Dee Bridge, and that he expected soon to have a full report.

THE FRAMEWORK Kurrrints.

On Wednesday, Sir HENRY HALPORD moved the second reading of the Hosiery Manufactures Bill, with an intimation that he would move to re- fer the bill to a Select Committee.

Mr. MILNER GIBSON strenuously opposed the bill, as an improper inter- ference with the rights of property. The endeavour to raise wages by suppressing frame-rents and middlemen, if successful, would not have the intended effect of raising wages; but the restrictions would most probably be evaded.

The bill was as strenuously supported by Mr. Thomas Duncomen ; who quoted several instances illustrating the system of middlemen. At Sutton in Ashfield, the frames belong to a set of bakers and butchers; they are hired by persons at 6d a week, and then relet to the poor workmen, on condition that the poor man shall take his bread or his beef, as the case may be, from the owner of the frame. In one case, a man with a wife and five small children earned 71. 16s. 6d. in twelve weeks; but out of that there was stopped for bread 41. 3s. 9id. and for frame-rent 11. 15s. 6d.; the charge for bread being 25 per cent above the market-price. In another case, a frame was bought by a truck-master for 151.; it was let at 2s. 6d. a week, or 61. 6s. 3d. a year: in ten years the rent was 631. 2s. 6d., the re- pairs 101. 10s.

Several other Members joined in the debate on both sides. The second reading was negatived, by 77 to 57; and the bill was lost.

EDUCATION COMPROMISES.

On Monday, the Bishop of EXETER asked whether the President of the Council and the Premier had received any deputation from the Wesleyan Methodists, or any other Dissenting body, on the subject of education? if so whether any and what promises of alterations bad been made in the Minutes of Council? and whether there was any printed record of the same? The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, that communications had been sought with Lord John Russell and himself by various bodies of Dissenters, and especially on the part of the Wesleyans; explanations were afforded them; a record of the explanation does exist; and it will be laid on the table of the House. No alteration in the Minutes of Council has been made in

consequence of that communication. In fact, the only result was an ex- planation of the Minutes and of the principles on which they rested. The Dissenters had feared that the post of schoolmaster would be raised into too direct a relation to the Church of England—that it would be made, in fact, ancillary to the Church. The objectors were told that persons exercising any ecclesiastial functions would not be appointed as schoolmasters. The Bishop of EXETER put several other questions; eliciting from the Marquis of LANSDOWNE statements that this exclusion would apply to religious functionaries of all denominations, and to both classes of school- officers—teachers and inspectors. The school-officers were not to engage in any other pursuit inconsistent with their duty as inspectors or teachers. . Next evening, the Bishop of EXETER gave notice, that on Friday he should move this resolution- " That it is the opinion of this House, that persons in holy orders, not exer- ecclesiastical functions, ought to be eligible to fill the office of schoolmasters itte cols receiving aid from the State."

BISHOPRIC OF MANCHESTER.

In the House of Lords, on Thursday, the Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the second reading of the Bishopric of Manchester Bill; with a somewhat curt explanation of its import. It had been thought desirable to leave the two Bishoprics of St. Asaph and Bangor as they were originally; and in consequence of regulations adopted by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, such a surplus of income has accumulated as to af- ford independent means of creating the Bishopric of Manchester.

A second question arises, respecting the seat of the Bishop in the House of Lords. It was not held to be desirable to increase the number of Lords Spiritual; and it was therefore proposed that the Bishops should succeed to the vacant seats in the House according to seniority. There would, however, be exceptions: the more important Bishoprics would be permanently represented in the House,— namely, the Archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, the Bishoprics of London, Durham, and Winchester. The population of the new see would be 1,123,000; the income for the Bishop, 4,2001.

A short discussion arose, less upon the immediate object of the bill than upon other points. Lord MONTEAGLE and some other Peers regretted that provision had not been made for increasing the emoluments of the clergy of North Wales.

Lord STANLEY foresaw that it would be necessary to have a much larger number of Bishops—he firmly believed that the Church would require an increase of twenty-four: with so large a number, each Bishop would have little prospect of succeeding to a seat in the House until he had at- tained a considerable age; and it would be very undesirable to have so large a proportion of the Bishops permanently excluded from the House. As a better course, he suggested a return to the unrepealed law which Unctions the appointment of Suffragan Bishops. That would supply the means for episcopal supervision, and yet avoid the question of seats in the House.

Earl FITZWILLIAM approved of this idea; but the Bishop of SALISBURY doubted whether it would be satisfactory.

Lord BROUGHAM reserved to himself the right of amending the clause by which the new Bishop was to be excluded.

The bill was read a second time.

REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND MARRIAGES IN SCOTLAND.

On Monday, Mr. RUTHERFURD (the Lord Advocate) made some ex- planations respecting the Registration of Births, &c. (Scotland) Bill. The object of the bill is to establish in Scotland a registration of births, mar- riages, and deaths. It is not only desirable to obtain materials for statistical information, but it is also of the utmost importance to the interest of families and individuals that the doubtful parts of the law of marriage should be settled. It was proposed to ex- tend to Scotland the English system of registration; with the exception that the Sheriff-Clerks and Town-Clerks would be able to fulfil the duties of Superintend- ing Registrar; which would save expense. The cost of registering births and deaths was estimated at about 9,5001. The marriages would pay the expense of their own registration. The outlay would be paid by a rate based upon the poor. law assessment; though the accounts might be kept separate. Mr. Rutherford explained how marriages in Scotland may be inferred from written or oral statements, even of intention; and he gave instances. One was the case of a gentleman who contracted marriage with a lady, in the Scotch sense, about 1802 or 1803: the marriage was contracted by an interchange of writing; the parties never lived together; the gentleman came to England in 1808, forgot his engagement, and married an English lady; about a year subsequently a snit was instituted, in Scotland, by the first wife, and it resulted in annulling the se- cond marriage. Another case was that of a gentleman who merely, in the presence of witnesses, declared his domestic servant to be his wife, without re- sponse on her part; he shot himself the same day; but the children, born pre- viously, inherited estates to the value of 20,0001. a year. A third case was that in which the marriage took place before a clergyman, who pronounced the nuptial benediction; but the House of Lords decided that there was no intention to marry; the decision proceeding upon the conduct of the parties, not before the marriage, but afterwards.

Mr. Rutherford did not propose to touch the celebration of marriage by

clergymen: he left ..the right to ministers of all denominations, but pro- posed to reduce the acts of celebration to two classes,—those before a re- gistrar; and those performed by ministers of religion. All would agree with him, that obstacles thrown in the way of ill-considered marriages

would offer no just ground of complaint. As he had no intention, however, to press the bill until its effects should be thoroughly understood by the people of Scotland, he moved that the bill be committed that day three months.—This being agreed to, the bill is postponed for the session.

COLONIZATION.

Lord Monteagle's Colonization Committee is composed of the following Peers—.

The Archbishop of Dublin' the Marquis of Lansdowne, the Earl of Minto, the Duke of Richmond, the Earl of Devon, Earl Fitzwilliam, the Earl of Wicklow, the Earl of St. Germans, Earl Grey, the Earl of Stradbroke, the Earl of Ripon, the Earl of Ellenborough, Lord Beaumont, Lord Lyttleton Lord Wodehouse, the Marquis of Ormonde, the Marquis of Clanricarde, Lord Wharncliffe, Lord Brough- bra the Earl of Fingal', Viscount Falkland, Lord Stanley, Lord Ashburton, Lord Gleneig, and Lord Munteagki. In the Douse of Commons, on Monday, the Earl of LINCOLNl allu- ded to the manner in which Mr. Godley's plan had been spoken of by Ministers in the debates of last week—

Mr. Hawes professed to have expected that Mr. Godley's plan would have been brought forward substantively by Lord Lincoln: but this was said in a manner that did not demand reply. Subsequently, however, the same thing had been more explicitly stated elsewhere, [by Earl Grey, in the House of Lords,] and in a way which seemed to impute to him a hostile manceavre. From the very first, however, he had determined not to bring forward any particular plan. He had told Mr. Godley so, and he had never varied in the form which he contemplated

up to the moment of making the motion. Another individual was still more inte- rested in this denial—Mr. Godley himself; because the chime implied positive falsehood on his part. Lord Lincoln read a letter from Mr. Godley, explaining what he did say. It was simply that Lord Lincoln intended to bring the subject of colonization before Parliament; an assertion which would be corroborated by Lord Coartenay, Sir Ralph Howard, and Mr. Morgan John O'Connell. Mr. Godley added, that he had always stated the same thing in conversation, and also in a letter addressed to the Spectator under his own signature, within a few days of the interview. Mr. Godley also observed that the assertion of Lord Lincoln's having " anxiously repudiated " his plan in the debate of the 1st instant, was equally re- moved from the truth. Lord Lincoln regretted, with many others, that a gentle- man like Mr. Godley, who had liberally and patriotically devoted his time and at- tention to the subject, should have been made the object of the petulant and dis- courteous flippancy with which he was treated [by Lord Grey] a night or two ago. Mr. MORGAN JOHN O'CONNELL corroborated Mr. Goffiey's representa- tion as to what passed at the interview with Ministers before the notice of motion.

Lord Joust RUSSELL also confirmed the representation—

Two subjects were discussed at the interview: one was Mr. Godley's plan—and he deserved great credit for the talent and industry with which he had prepared it; the other was a Commission of inquiry into the subject of colonization, which was much urged. Lord John said that he could not appoint a Commission: and then Mr. Godley stated, that the subject would be brought forward in the House of Commons by Lord Lincoln. Lord John was left in some doubt whether it was to be the general subject of colonization, or the appointment of a Commission of inquiry; but he certainly never expected that Lord Lincoln would bring forward Mr. Godley's plan.

PENAL DISCIPLINE: TRANSPORTATION.

On Thursday, the House of Commons resumed the adjourned debate on the Prisons Bill and the Custody of Offenders Bill; the real subject of dis- cussion, it will be remembered, being the system proposed by Government in lieu of transportation. The speakers in favour of the measure were Mr. MONCKTON MILNES, Mr. CHARLES BULLER, and Lord JOHN RUSSELL; against it, Mr. NEWDEGATE, Mr. MILES, Sir ROBERT INGLIS, Sir JAMES GRAHAM, and Sir FREDERICK THESIGER. None of the arguments ad- vanced on either side possessed novelty; those which were r=ed with most effect being well represented in the speeches of Sir James Giuliani. and Mr. Charles Buller.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM brought forth a formidable array of objections. He objected to the Custody of Offendeis Bill; especially to the first clause, which gives to the Crown a power of bringing Irish convicts to England, and of detaining Irishmen sentenced to transportation in this country for solitary con- finement; a measure of very doubtful policy. He objected to the Prisons Bill. It establishes a "Board of Commissioners of National Prisons,"—" National Prisons" being a name unknown to the country. The bill transfers the whole responsibility and patronage of the Secretary of State to the Commissioners.

He admitted that when he resigned office, last summer, the state of the Penal Colonies was so unsatisfactory that it had become necessary to suspend transporta- tion for some time, in consequence of the great accumulation of convicts in those settlements during the five years that he had been in office. He imputed tine greatly to the hasty if not imprudent pledge given by his predecessors to the co- lony of New South Wales, that no more convicts should be sent there. This threw the entire stream on Van Diemen's Land. Sir James was willing to sanction the suspension of transportation for a year or two, until a better plan of secondary punishment could be devised. The question now is, whether transportation as a secondary punishment is to cease, or not.

He reviewed the actual state of the administration of the criminal law. It is the policy of modern times to mitigate " the sanguinary character of the law "- that which disgraces without adding to its efficiency. Capital punishment has been remitted in most cases; and it is not to be denied that crimes for which that punishment has been remitted have increased. Transportation, by the present measure, is to cease, at least in the rigorous sense of the term: the punishment of the hulks has been condemned, and is no longer resorted to: objections have been made to the Separate system; and then they fell back upon the Silent system, which was condemned also: and so it went on, until at last it appears that great offenders are to be visited with long periods of imprisonment. This he strongly objected to, because in course of time the pressure on the Executive for the re- mission of sentences would be very great, and perhaps many rogues would be permitted to escape with comparative impunity.

Sir James made other more specific objections to the plan. The system of de- portation with tickets of leave will require the whole machinery in the way of establishments needed by transportation. The casting back on society at borne has proved most dangerous in France; while the reformatory system is both safe and practicable in the Colonies. He should be willing to go into Committee on the two bills, which were of minor importance, if he were assured that, during the recess, Government would take an extended view of the whole difficulties of the question, embody their own plan in a bill, and lay it regularly before Parliament; the prerogative of the Crown meanwhile to be exerted only in mitigation of fixed punishments.

Mr. CHARLES BULLER defended the measure, and replied to several points in Sir James Graham's speech; observing, however, that none of the speakers who had criticized the measure had condescended to suggest a better course.

The continuance of transportation had become impossible. New South Wales, South Australia, and New Zealand, had extracted pledges that they should not be subjected to it; Sir James Graham himself consented to suspend transporta- tion to Van Diemen's Land; and there remains in fact no colony (for Bermuda is not worth mention) available for transportation. The difference between the present Government and Sir James Graham is, that Government would inflict the coercive punishment in this country with the penalty of transportation afterwards; Sir James would banish the prisoner in the first place, and inflict the penalty in the Colonies. Now, every mode of inflicting the penalty in the Colonies has failed. No one proposes the restoration of the best

of those modes, the assignment system, since it" ire down through its own in- herent vices: it had lost its terrors even for the labouring classes in this country, being in fact a premium on crime. The opposite system of penal settlements resulted in scenes horribly disgraceful to the English name. As to the opinion of the Judges, it is to be remembered that if the House had always been guided.by the opinion of the Judges, the criminal code would not be so perfect 83 it is. But in fact, their opinion has not been expressed on the whole subject.

As to the abuses of the French galley system, they are admitted; but the whole police system of France is the worst in any civilized country. If it is said that the Government have acted precipitately, the change has been forced upon them. It is not they who have made the sentence of transportation uncertain. Ten years ago, a man who was sentenced to transportation remained on board the hulks. Mr. Buller, however, gave the pledge required by SirJames Graham, and stated that next session Ministers would bring forivard a bill upon the subject, on which Parliament could minutely and deliberately decide.

The House divided; and the motion for going into Committee was car- ried, by 124 to 76. SIR EARDLEY WILMOT.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, Mr. Sews(En drew attention to the official correspondence respecting the recall of Sir John Eardley Wilmot from the Governorship of Van Diemen's Land. He recapitulated the whole case in a narrative form, adding a few particulars not previously known.

One was the precise nature of the charge made against Sir Eardley Wilmot; which had only been communicated to his family within the last few days. It was that of " living in scarcely disguised concubinage with some women who were received as guests at Government Muse."

Mr. Spooner alluded to sacrifices which Sir Eardley had made to assume the appointment. Ho had given up his seat in Parliament, and in the Magistracy of Ins county; separated himself from his family; incurred considerable expense and a long voyage; then found himself, in another hemisphere, at twenty days' notice, deprived of his office and of income, and proscribed from restoration to office until rumours of which he knew nothing should have been satisfactorily answered.

Mr. Spooner read letters from the Bishop of Tasmania, from Bishop Wilson the Roman Catholic Bishop of Hobart Town, and from the Colonial Treasurer of Van Diemen's Land, all testifying to the propriety of Sir Eardley's conduct, and to the fact that the calumnious rumours were not credited by any respectable persons in the colony. Speaking hypothetically of such testimonials, Mr. Glad- stone had declared, in a letter dated 9th March 1847, that they constituted a full acquittal; and he added—" It can scarcely be necessary for me to say with how much avidity I should have been prepared to recognize a just occasion of with- drawing the reference I had made." Subsequently, after he had seen the testi- monials, Mr. Gladstone writes, on the 31st of May, that they constitute a more than sufficient refutation of all the private reports against Sir Eardley. Sir Eardley had petitioned the Queen to give such orders and directions as should enable him to prove the falsehood of the charges: that prayer was refused. He sent another petition to the Queen, praying her Majesty to "confer such an appointment, or such mark of her gracious Majesty's favour upon him, as would prove to the colony and to the British public that her gracious Majesty would never suffer any act of injustice to be done to any one of her subjects with- out full and immediate reparation." That also was refused: and Mr. Spooner blamed Mr. Gladstone's successor, Earl Grey, for undue harshness in his part of the transaction.

Lord BROOKE and Mr. DUGDALE, Sir Eardley Wilmot's former col- leagues as representatives of Warwickshire, bore testimony to the propriety of his conduct as Member, and as Chairman of the Quarter-Sessions.

Sir ROBERT PEEL declared his belief that the charges were utterly unfounded; but he endeavoured to show that his friend Mr. Gladstone was not to blame.

Sir Robert went back to show why Sir Eardley Wilmot had been selected for the

office of governing Van Diemen's Land. It was a subject of no small difficulty to make an appointment to so distant a colony as that to which Sir E. Wilmot had been promoted. Lord Stanley's sole motive in the appointment of Sir Eardley Wilmot was a conviction of his fitness, in consequence of the experience which he had in the administration of the criminal law as Chairman of the Quarter-Sessions in a county where there were peculiar means of obtaining experience in such matters; and having been appointed to that office by the unanimous voice of his constitu- ents—having also filled the office of a Representative of the People in the House of Commons and having his attention directed to the improvement of the criminal law,—these were the only motives which influenced his noble friend in making the appointment, and coming to the conclusion that it would be difficult for the Government of the time to procure an officer more qualified for the duties of the post. Mr. Gladstone had distinctly stated that there was nothing in Sir Eardley's public conduct which would have prevented his reappointment in a similar capacity in another place. Mr. Gladstone, however, was placed in a peculiar and painful position: three persons of unexceptionable character in- formed him that the private life of Sir Eardley was, in their opinion, incom- patible with the proper discharge of his duty as a public officer. It was right that Sir Eardley should know of these impressions; and accordingly he was informed of it in a secret despatch. One of the informants was in this country; and he was asked to sanction the use of his name, but he declined.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL defended Lord Grey for not recommending Sir Eardley to another appointment—

Surely, because unjust charges on private grounds have been brought against a gentleman under a previous Administration, this formed no ground to fetter the present Colonial Secretary in the choice of a Governor. Lord John thought that all these charges respecting Sir Eardley's private conduct had been swept to the winds.

The discussion was protracted at considerable length; Mr. VERNON %MTH and some others attacking the conduct of Mr. Gladstone; while Mr. NEWDEGATE, Captain GLADSTONE, and other Members, attacked Lord Grey; who, again, was defended by Mr. Rawns. A few additional facts were elicited. One was first pointed out by Sir JAMES GRAHAM: Mr. Gladstone's letter was strictly a private letter, without record at the Colo- nial Office; and it was meant only in kindness, for the information of Sir Eardley Wilmot. Mr. Hawes said that the only record of the private let- ter known to the Colonial Office was the despatch by Sir Eardloy Wilmot himself, in which it was incorporated.

Mr. ROEBUCK turned the discussion to some account as an illustration of

irresponsible Colonial administration. A Governor in a distant colony is dismissed on calumnious, false, and unsupported charges, whispered against him in this country : that is only one illustration; Sir Eardley Wilmot was not a solitary victim, but hundreds are now pining away the victims of Co- lonial misrule.

After a good many more speeches, the discussion closed with Sir ROBERT liensis's declaration that a complete answer had been made to the personal imputations on the character of Sir Eardley Wilmot.

On Tuesday, Mr. Ilonsmaw and Mr. BICKHAM ESCOTT pressed for the names of the informants. Mr. HAWES adhered to the statement, that in the Colonial Office there is no official record of the names, and he was therefore unable to give an answer. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, the per- sons who supplied the information were three. One had been in the ser- vice of the Crown, but was so no longer, and he refused to allow the use of his name. Mr. thadstoue's letter, however, rested on the information of two other gentlemen, one now occupying a high station in the colony, and the other a public servant. The names had been communicated to the present Sir Eardley Wilmot; who would probably himself require an ex- planation. Sir James did not feel warranted to mention the names, because it would leave the person, exposed for twelve months to the

under which they would lie on the presumption that they had ItijfbJiyion.

RoVAI. As was gives, Commission, on Tuesday, to the Poor- reland) Bill /Landed Propett y (Ireland) Bill, and a number of private NEW WRIT WASAIMPIed,, Milady for Cork county, in the room of Mr. < trade' O'Cunnell, DURATION OF Emmons IN IRELAND. On Tuesday, referring to the en- suing general election, the Earl of St. GERMANS pointed to the expediency of avoiding the great evil caused by the long duration of polls at elections in Ireland; which may be kept open for five days. He asked whether it would not be pos- sible to assimilate the law of Irelaiid, at least to a certain extent, to that of Eng- land? The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that the attention of Government had been turned to the matter, and they were most desirous to accomplish the object of placing the law on the same footing as that of England: but it was not pro- posed to introduce any measure at present, because it was deemed advisable that it should be considered with reference to another most difficult matter, the ques- tion of franchise.

Conn-DUTIES AND NAVIGATION-LAWS. IR Committee, on Thursday, Lord JOHN RUSSELL carried resolutions for suspending the Corn-duties and Naviga- tion-laws until the 1st of March next.

MR. SPOONER'S Brix. for the Prevention of Trading in Prostitution and Se- duction was read a second time on Wednesday; after a discussion during which strangers were excluded from the House. The bill was referred to a Select Com- mittee.

Porerensz. The subject of British intervention in Portugal has been alluded to, in one House or the other, almost every day; Members pressing for the pro- duction of the correspondence, which has at last appeared. On Monday, questions were put, by the Fari of ELLENBOROUGH in the House of Lords, and by Lord GEORGE BgarriNc the House of Commons, as to the command of the allied forces; an idea being entertained that the command would devolve on the Prince de Joinville. Lord LANSDOWNE was not prepared with an answer; but Lord Paratensrox stated that no arrangement had been made for putting the forces of the different nations under the command of any single officer. Sir Wil- liam Parker had been instructed not to take command either of the Spanish or the French fleet; and there was no reason to suppose that the Prince de Joinville would even go to Portugal.

PROGRESS OF RAILWAY BILLS LN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

razeunzEs PROVED IN COMMITTEE. June 7111.—London-Brighton-and-South-Coast (London-Bridge station enlargement and arrangement). Midland (Gloucester and Stonehouse junction). Liverpool-Manchester-and Newcastle-on-Tyne Junction Acts amendment. Fleetwood-Preston-and-West-Riding (Burnley and Colliery branches). East-Lancashire (deviations and Rawstenstall coal branch).

June SM.—South-eastern (widening of the Greenwich Railway, and arrangement and enlargement of the London Bridge station). South-eastern. (London Bridge station arrangement and enlargement). Mauchester-Sheffield-and-Lincolnshire (station at Sheffield) (No. 2). Manchester-Sheffield-and-Lincolnshire (Sheffield Canal purchase). Northern-Countles-Union Railway deviations.

June 10111.—Great-Northern (deviation between Grantham and York) jin part proved]. Clarence and Leeds-and-Thirsk amalgamation. Caledonian (Edinburgh station, and branches to Granton, and to the Edinburgh-and-Glasgow).

June Ilth.—Eastern-Union (Manningtree to Harwich).

PROGRESS OF RAILWAY BILLS IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

PREXIIBLE3 PROVED IN COMMITTER. June 8:h.—Gloucester and-Dean-Forest (con- struction of docks). Cornwall. Wexford-and-Va'encia. Wilts-Somerset-and-Wey- mouth (No. I). Glasgow-Paisley-Kilmarnock-and-Ayr (No. 4).

June Wt.—Waterford-IV oxford-Wicklow and-Dublin. Cork-and-Bandon. Cork- Blackrock-and-Passage. Midland-Great-Western of-Ireland. Ditto (extension !tom Athlone to Galway). Glasgow-Barrhead-and-Nellston-Direct, and Glasgow-Southern- Terminal amalgamation.

June 11th.—London-and-South-Western (widening, &c.) Great-western (branch to join the South-western at Lambeth). Windsor-Staines-and-South-western (Stables to Ascot and Wokingluun, with branches). Windsor-Staines-and-South-western (Richmond to Windsor, &c.) Southampton-and-Dorchester (Weymouth branch).

ROYAL ASSENT.

June 8Th.—Newmarket-ana-Chesterford (extension to Bury St. Edmund's, with branch to Ely). Newmarket-and-Chesterfonl (repeal of provision authorizing the Com- pany to use the line of the Eastern-Counties Railway). Newmarket-and-Chesterford (extension to Thetford). Colchester-Stour-Valley-Sudbury-and-Halstead (extension to Melford. Lavenham, end Clare). Colchester-Stour-Valley-Sudbury-and-Halstead (lease to the Ipswich.end-itury-St.-Edmund's Railway Company). Colchester-Stour- Valley-Sudbury-and-Halstead (extension from Lavenham to Bury St. Edmund's). Caledonian (extension of Motherwell branch of Clydesdale Junction Railway to Auchinheath Mineral Field, with branches to the Wishaw and Coltness, Can- derside, and Hamilton). Caledonian (branches to Wilsontown, to Fauldhouse, and to Biggar and Broughton). Caledonian (branches from the Clydesdale Junction to the Douglas and Leemahagow Mineral Fields, and to Strathaven). Eastern-Union and Hadleigh-Junction (sale to the Eastem-Union Railway Company). Ayrshire-and Gal- loway (SmIthstowa to Dalmellington).