trlintro an rnrrr tugø in atliamtut.

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OP THE WEEK.

Horan OP LORD% Monday. March 13. Russian Confidential Communications; Lord Derby's Questions—Civil Service; Lord Alonteagle's Motion—Scotch Mercan- tile Law; Lord Brougham's Bill, read a first time. Tueaday, March 14. Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill, read a second time. Thursday, March le. Coasting Trade ; Mr. Cardwell's Bill, read a second time. Friday, March 17. Foreign-Office Clerks ; Explanation—Rights of Neutrals and Privateering; Lord Clarendon's Statement.

House OF COMMONS. Monday, March 13. The Reform Club Dinner ; Mr. French's Question, and Mr. Bright's Attack—Greek Insurrection ; Mr. Monckton

Motion.

Tuesday, March 14. Book of Common Prayer; Mr. Heywood's Motion, carried by 132 to 83—Juvenile Reformatories ; Mr. Adderley's Question—Declarations for Oaths; Mr. Pellatt's Bill, leave given, by 109 to 108—Irish Law of High Treason ; Mr. Whiteside's Bill, read a first time—Property Disposal; Mr. Whiteside's Bill, read a first time.

Wednesday. March 15. Wages ; Mr. Forster's Bill against Truck Payment, read a second time.

Thursday. March 16. Negotiations with Russia ; Mr. Disraeli's Question—Laws of Mortmain ; Mr. Headlam's Bill, leave given—Endowed Grammar Schools ; Mr. Pellatt's Motion.

Friday, March 17. Oxford University ' • Lord John Russell's Statement, Bill read a first time—Rights of Neutrals ; Mr. Gibson's Motion—Ways and Mean,; Income- tax Resolution —Russian Confidential Communications, laid on the table.

TIME- TABLE.

The Lords.

Hour of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment. Monday 5h .. 8h 30m Tuesday 511 . . Mr Om Wednesday No sitting. Thursday 6h. 6h 301a

Friday 5h 65 30m

The Comnums.

Hour of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment Monday 45 . (m) 12h 301n Tuesday 4h .... 81115m Wednesday Noon 315 15m

Thursday 4h .... ih Om

Friday 4h . Cm) I25 30ra Sittings this Week, — this Session. 4 ; Time, 9h 30m 27; — 57m Sittings this Week, 5; 'Time. 27h 301n — this Session. 34; — 18715 7m RUSSIAN CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS.

The Earl of DERBY raised a debate in the House of Lords on Monday, in putting questions respecting the confidential communications between the Russian and British Governments last year, recently avowed in an authoritative manner by the St. Petersburg lournaL He began by refer- ring to th article in the Times of Saturday, and pointed to Lord Aber- deen as the source of its information. (Ironical cries of "Hear, hear !" from Lord Aberdeen, followed by general laughter.) Ministers, therefore, knew what were the aggressive designs of Russia ; and they had no right to express surprise, or imply that they were ignorant of them. Lord Derby did not complain that this correspondence was withheld in the first instance : he himself was aware of its existence; but as the Go- vernment did not produce it, he thought it would not be fair in him to make the information public. But how is it that the Times gets these Cabinet secrets ? for this is not the first occasion on which the Times has proved that it possesses secrets known only to the members of the Cabi- net. Lord Aberdeen's disclaimer of all communication with the Times would not convince him nor anybody else. But the Times not only knew of these confidential Russian communications but of the indignant answer which Lord John Russell gave to them. 'How could Ministers reconcile the good faith which they expressed in the solemn assurances of the Emperor of Russia, with all the warnings they received—from these documents, from Colonel Rose, and from others ? There were, too, communications in 1844, when the Emperor of Russia was in this coun- try and Lord Aberdeen was Foreign Secretary. Yet Ministers professed confidence in the Russian Government ! Lord Derby asked whether they would produce the confidential correspondence, and, if reduced to writing, the communication made by the Emperor of Russia to the Fo- reign Secretary in 1844? The Earl of ABERDEEN admitted that theStatement referred to by Lo.:-; Derby was of considerable interest and importance ; " and finding it in the paper as we do, it may be. regarded as possessing a sort of official clia- reeler."

" More than this I know nothing, and the noble Earl is quite as well able as Ism to form an opinion on the subject. Lhare seen the statement no- where else but where it is; and, as I said before I know no more about it. The communications which took place between gis Majesty the Emperor of Russia and some of her Majesty's Ministers, were, as the noble Earl has stated, and has not disapproved, retained by her Majesty's Government, and not printed with the papers laid on the table, in consequence of the confi- dential character which was considered to be in some degree attached to them. It has not been usual, under circumstances similar to those under which these communications were made, to lay upon the table of Parlia- ment a statement of familiar conversations, such as those described, between a sovereign and a foreign minister ,• and her Majesty's Government did not think it proper or consistent with that respect or delicacy which was due to a prince with whom we were on terms of alliance to produce papers which hail a somewhat private and confidential character. This statement in the St. Petersburg Journal, by which it appears that there is no reluctance on the part of Russia that her Majesty's Government should produce and make public all communications which had passed on the subject, relieves her Ma- jesty's Ministers from much difficulty in treating with the matter, and re- moves any reasonable scruple they might have entertained relative to the production of the papers. I can assure the noble Earl, that, if he had not made the observations which he has, I should still have laid these communi- cations before your Lordships. The whole of this correspondence will there.. fore be laid upon the table ; and I think, upon a perusal at the same, the noble Earl will find himself egregiously mistaken in endeavouting to cast imputation of any kind on her Majesty's Government for the part they have taken in this transaction. (Cheers.) I have nothing more to say upon the subject, and the papers will speak for themselves." With respect to the commentary in the Times, Lord Aberdeen said— "The noble Earl will probably be surprised to learn, considering what he calls our connexion with that newspaper—or rather, what be seems better pleased to call my connexion with that paper—that until this morning I never read the article or the comments to which he alludes, nor had I heard of them either directly or indirectly. In making this. statement, I find, my Lords, some advantage in a man's having a character for truth and honour ; and I again repeat, that until this morningI never had the most remote conception of the article in question, or the origin of the comments which have been made upon it. I can say nothing more about it, except again to repeat that I am entirely ignorant of the source whence the comments alluded to arose; nor can I form an opinion or conjecture on the matter, except this—that I have been given to understand that some clerk in the Foreign Office, but who

as

is not a clerk there now—and who w introduced, by the •, by the noble Earl opposite [Lord Mahnesbury]—had scandalously betray his duties by revealing the contents of some papers. ("Hear, hear ! " and a laugh.) However, I know not whether it is through that source or not that this correspondence has been made public' and on which the comments are based to which the noble Earl has attached so much importance." With regard to the communications in 1844, some communications did. then take place between the Emperor of Russia and the Duke of Wel- lington and Lord Aberdeen—he was not sure whether any took place with Sir Robert Peel. About that time, Count Nesselrode embodied those views in a memorandum; but Lord Aberdeen had not seen. that document for ten years, and could not say whether it might be fit or not to lay it on the table. The Earl of ELLENDOROUGH stated, that in 1844 there were communi- cations between Sir Robert Peel and the Emperor of Russia. in reference to Turkey. The Marquis of CLANRICARUE pressed for the whole of the papers. The Earl of MALMESBURY was scandalized at the allusion made to the betrayal of secrets to the Times by a clerk of his appointing. ("No, no ! " from Lord Aberdeen.) Then what did he say ? If he had not been sure such was the ease, he had no business to say what he did. It was not consonant with the manners of that House. What wail the name of the gentleman ?

Lord ABERDEEN said he did not know his name.

Earl GB.EY expressed his regret that these sort of official communica- tions should be made to particular newspapers. Earl Fiezwitu.sm made some remarks in the same strain : all Ministers are too much under the dominion of the press. Next day, the Earl of MALMESBURY returned to the subject of the. clerk ; explaining, that one of the four clerks he had appointed had mar- ried, and had left the Foreign Office. The editor of the 7Tmes positively denied that he had any communication with that gentleman ; and Lord Malmesbury trusted Lord Aberdeen would frankly state that he had been mistaken.

Lord ABERDEEN desired that the matter should stand on an accurate footing. He had heard from so many quarters that the gentleman alluded to did talk of the correspondence of which he was cognizant confiden- tially, that he would, be satisfied to refer to the gentleman himself. In, the heat of the moment, and in reference to the insinuations of Lord Derby, he did certainly refer to the quarter from which the information might have come. What is spoken of in one society may very well be known in another : Lord Derby himself said he was aware of the cor- respondence at the beginning of the session. "How did he learn it? Certainly not from me." Lord MALMESBURY threw doubts on Lord Aberdeen's previous state- ment, that on Monday night he did not know the name of the clerk who bad divulged a state secret. The manner in which Lord Aberdeen had brought forward, and had closed the subject, was not an honour to that House.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, similar questions were put by Mr. Dissent; with a studiously dry introduction. Lord JOHN RUSSELL answered in substance the same as Lord Aberdeen.

THE REFORM CLUB DINIMIL On Monday, Sir James Graham was' catechized respecting the lan- guage used by him at the Reform Club dinner last week. Mr. Emmen asked by what authority Sir James had given Sir Charles Napier per- mission to declare war ? Sir JAMES GB AnAw—protesting against the right to question him with regard to what passed at. the Reform Club "after dinner "—replied, with much formality, that no declaration of war has yet taken place ; that no order has been given to Sir Charles Napier to enter the Baltic ; and that when war is declared a formal com- munication will be made to him. Mr. BRIGHT then lectured Ministers at great length on the subject contrasting the presence of three Cabinet Ministers at the Reform Club, with the marked absence of Lord John Russell, and the Ministerial stop to a military dinner at the Mansionhouse which Lord Mayor Sidney pro- posed ; contrasting Lord Palmerston's former language about a French invasion with his present language about the "good faith" of the Empe- ror Napoleon ; comparing Sir William Molesworth's present position with his past language against nonintervention ; and reproving Lord Palmer- ston for levity on so awful a subject as war. Lord PAransaarost retaliated the lecture with studied "indifference and contempt " ; replied to cries of "Order," that he would not insist on the expressions if they were not parliamentary; explained that attendance at dub dinners is not a Cabinet but an open question. and quizzed Mr. Bright as to his own relations with the Reform OA. Sir WILLIAM Motzswoarn contradicted Mr. Brig,ht's insinuation that he had changed his opinion, for he had never belonged to "the Manchester School" ; and characterized his censor as an able man, but full of "illiberal and narrowminded prejudices." Sir TROXAS HERBERT questioned Sir James on a boast that "the Reformers" might be proud of the appointment of Admiral Dundas and Sir Charles Napier. Sir Jamie GnAtress insisted that he might appro- priately, at a Reform Club dinner, congratulate the club on the appoint- ments attained by two of its "oldest and most distinguished members " ; but he had also observed, that in his opinion polities are rightly excluded from the naval profession. Mr. DISRAELI threw in a speech satirically playing with the subject, —as in finding that it was not dangerous to let Sir Charles Napier de- dare war, since he "never obeys orders" ; and that past invectives against Louis Napoleon warrant the expectation that the Emperor of Russia will soon be counted as a faithful ally. Mr. Srooszen supported Mr. Bright. Mr. COBDEN mournfully noted that Sir William Molesworth ought to have given up non-intervention or his seat in the Cabinet ; and that the speeches of Ministers had rendered peace impossible.

RELATIONS 'WITH RUSSIA.

Mr. DISRAELI asked, on Thursday, "whether any official information that renewed propositions for the settlement of the misunderstanding in the East have been submitted to her Majesty's Minister at Vienna ?"

Lord .Tosx Russell. answered, that 'no proposition of the kind has been submitted to her Majesty's Minister at Vienna."

Simms OF TURKEY.

On the order of the day for the Committee of Ways and Means, on Monday, Mr. MONCHTON MILNES, in pursuance of notice, called attention to the Greek insurrection in Turkey ; and moved that the circular of Sir Henry Ward to the residents of the Ionian. Islands should be laid on the table. It was natural to expect, he said, when the Emperor of Rus- sia laid upon a religions basis the foundation of hostilities, and professed to occupy the Principalities as a guarantee for the freedom of the Chris- tians, that the Christian subjects of the Porte would have risen to sup- port his claims. But it has not been so. In certain portions of the Ot- toman territory, however, which almost join the kingdom of Greece, an insurrection has broken out, which though not very important threatens to be of a dangerous character. The causes do not lie beneath the sur- face. He showed from the blue books, that on the withdrawal of the regular troops, the Albanian soldiery had committed excesses, especially in Epirus and Thessaly ; and that the outbreak was not casual, but had its origin in real injustice. Considering our position at the Ionian Is- lands, some means should be found of limiting and if possible of stopping the evil. He hoped the Egyptian troops would not be sent ; and he sug- gested the appointment of a British Commissioner, who should point out to the insurgents the real state of the ease, and hold out by reference to the condition of Poland, Circassia, and the Principalities, good reasons why the insurgents should abandon their hostility to the Porte. He was very anxious on. the subject, because he feared England might ap- pear as- an accomplice in suppressing an attempt to obtain what is only just and right. It has been said that England and France have come to an understanding for the forcible suppression of popular tumult ; but he trusted England would not act as France had done at Rome. Govern- ment should remember, that however important the political exigencies of Europe may be, there are matters more sacred even than those. Lord JOHN Russets. concurred in much that had fallen from Mr. Milnes. It is our duty to do all we can to improve the position of the Christian subjects of the Porte. Notwithstanding the liberal policy of the Sultan, the Christians have had much cause of complaint. Lord Stratford's advice has tended to mitigate these evils ; and but lately he had advised the Sultan not to send any but regular troops to suppress the insurrection. It is our duty to discourage this insurrection, which can- not lead to any improvement in the condition of the Christian subjects of the Porte; while the House might be assured that Government would en- deavour as much as possible to place the Christians and Mahometans on the same footing of equality. The-debate was continued in a very discursive style.

Mr. Men regretted that no distinct assurance had been given with re- spect to the conduct Government would pursue in regard to the Christian population of Turkey. Lord LOVAINE insisted, that to expect toleration from the Turks is absurd, and amalgamation between Turks and Chris- bans impossible. The insurrection of the Greek Christians is warranted by the oppressions of four hundred years. Lord DUDLEY STUART vindi- cated the Turks; showed that Russia had interfered because Turkey was making reforms ; and asserted that the Christians of Bulgaria are not dis- affected. Lord CLAUDE HAMILTON spoke against the war altogether, as unjustifiable, and especially against the employment of British troops to put down men only seeking to regain liberty of which they have been cruelly deprived. The present crisis must not be attributed to Russia, but to the internal weakness of Turkey. Mr. LAYARD recalled the House to the question. What was the origin of this outbreak ? Early last year the Russian Admiral Kornilef was sent to Athens : then was the time to check the growing movement in the Greek states but these intrigues had gone on unchecked until they ended in a general outbreak He knew from personal experience, that last year there was scarcely a convent on Pelion or Olympus in which presents from the Emperor of Russia were not to be seen. Matters had arrived at such a state, that not only the soldiers but the ministers of the King of Greece were deserting him. If they were not to permit the Porte to put down the insurrection, nor do it themselves, by whom is it to be quenched? As to the massacres by the Turks, did not Ypsilanti massacre gent ? But when the fleet was burnt at Navarino, Sir Stratford Canning did not need to seek the shelter of our ships from the fury of the Turks. As to religion, the maxim of the Sultan Mahmoud—that the

Turkish Government desired to recognize the Turk in his mosque, the Jew in his synagogue, and the Christian in his church—is founded on principles of liberality that no nation has surpassed. Mr. Layard drew a shocking picture of the state of Greece. Much misconception as to the state of Turkey has arisen from the reckless report of the British vice- consuls, most of them Ionian Greeks. When a new pasha is appointed, all the vice-consuls in turn wait upon him, proposing some new scheme of taxation or local administration: receiving all courteously, he probably sees no ground for any of the suggestions, or is unwilling to listen to one more than to another ; and forthwith elaborate and highly-coloured com- plaints are sent by the vice-consuls to their respective representatives at the Porte. Sometimes these functionaries work up charges for the pur- pose of extorting money. The only way to prevent these grievances is to appoint proper consuls, and to do away with the capitulations, so that the Turks may deal with malefactors, great numbers of whom are Bri- tish subjects : but they should avoid a convention which would speedily involve England in a quarrel with Austria and France.

Mr. E. BALL protested altogether against the war, and the means by which its expenses are to be paid.

Lord PALMERSTON repeated the assurance that Government desires to place the Christian subjects of the Sultan on the same footing as the Ma- hometans ; but their endeavours must be tempered by what is due to the independence of the Sultan. But recently the Sultan has sanctioned a firman by which Christians are allowed to give evidence in the courts, criminal as well as civil, in the same way as the Mussulmans—that is, without the form of oaths. With regard to the Greek insurrection, he did not share the apprehensions as to the extent to which some think it will be carried ; and it is impossible not to see that it is not wholly of domestic origin, but is stimulated from without. The troops sent from England are sent to maintain the great principles of national independ- ence, not for Turkey alone, for this question is not merely one between Turkey and Russia, but concerns the great interests of Europe and the civilized world.

Mr. MILNER Gismos confessed that he had not sufficient information to form a correct opinion on the policy of the Government. One noble Lord in the other House told them that the object of Ministers was to resist Russian aggression ; then they were told it was to secure the civil rights of the Christians ; and now Lord Palmerston said that the Chris- tians had not much to complain of, and that it would be strange for the Government to follow Russia and endeavour to get a protectorate over the Christians. The statement about our taking care of the civil rights of the Christians was a mere misstatement made to console the misgivings of tender consciences, just as when the French occupied Rome it was said that it was not for the purpose of restoring the Pope, but the Pope with a constitution. How could the English Government enforce gua- rantees and securities ? It would be impossible to maintain for all time the rule of the Turks in Europe ; and if we could, ought we, for the sa- tisfaction of some political theory, to rivet on the Greek population a government which they detest ? He protested against any such doc- trine.

Sir ROBERT PEEL defended the policy of Ministers. At the same time, he insisted that Turkey is effete, and that it is only kept up by the jea- lousy of Cabinets. But this is not the moment for a Greek insurrection. We have now to crush Russian aggression ; next we shall have to make arrangements for putting a stop to Turkish rule in Europe.

Mr. DRUMMOND enforced the duty of avoiding religious questions, and keeping clear of a treaty guaranteeing religious privileges.

Mr. MILNES withdrew his motion.

TESTAMENTARY JURISDICTION.

Before the motion for the second reading of the Testamentary Juris- diction Bill was made, three petitions against it were presented ; one from the College of Advocates, another from eighteen registrars, and a third from a large body of proctors.

In moving the second reading, the Loan CHANCELLOR referred to these petitions, the only ones, he believed, that had been presented to the House ; petitions that came from persons whose interests were or were supposed to be affected by the proposed alterations. It is difficult, he said, to speak of giving compensation to practitioners when their practice is affected only because matters are put on a better footing for the public. But the evil to the individuals would be mitigated, because the bill would allow proctors, under certain advantages, to enter into part- nership with solicitors.

Lord BROUGHAM admitted that the Court of Chancery has been greatly improved of late ; but he had some difficulty in seeing bow time could be spared to carry out effectually the labour the bill would entail. Sir John Nicholl had stated that he was employed 60 days of the year in court, and 180 days in considering the same cases at his own house. To lighten the labour, he trusted oral evidence would be substituted for written . lie trusted that compensation would be given to proctors and advocates for the loss they would sustain. He also hoped some provision would be made for the better keeping of wills.

He could relate hundreds of cases in which wills bad been lost through accident or carelessness, but he would content himself with stating two in- stances in which wills, supposed to have been lost, or not to be existing, afterwards came to light. The first case was one in which one of his noble friends, as heir-at-law, lost, and another of his noble friends, as devisee, gained 30,000/. a year; and how the first lost it, and the last gained it, was by a will being found in an old rusty box in an old travel- ling carriage, and which, therefore, might have been lost by accident or de- stroyed from ignorance, and yet upon which so large an amount of Ptdepended. The second case was one also in which some of his nobleg:nrtZ were concerned, and the sum in question was no less than 160,000I. ; which sum would have been entirely lost to the purpose for which it was intended if the inquiries relative to the existence of a will with respect to it had been instituted in the winter instead of in the summer. The will was searched for everywhere, but could nowhere be found, until, at last, it was discovered in a grate, and stuffed like a piece of waste paper through the bars; so that, as he said before, if it had been winter instead of summer, in all probability when the fire had been lighted it would have been destroyed. The Bishop of Sr. ASAPH hoped expense would be seriously considered. Under the bill, persons in his diocese might have to go a long way to prove wills for a small amount of money ; whereas now there are six courts held twice a year, at which a poor man may prove his will. The Earl of HARROWBY thought there should be a separate court and sepa- rate bar for the adjudication of these matters. Surely there is some virtue in the status quo. Lord FEVERSHAM objected to the transfer of

the jurisdiction to the Court of Chancery. He would rather curtail than extend the jurisdiction of that Court.

Lord Sr. LEONA.RDS was inclined to think that it would be desirable if the business transferred to the Court of Chancery could be kept together; and he thought arrangements might easily be made, as the Judges of Ap- peal do not seem likely to be pressed for some time to come. He vin- dicated the Court from the charge of delay. If there are any eases which have lasted for thirty years, no doubt they are cases in which it is desired that the funds should be left in court. If any party has a long suit pend- ing, it ought to be wound up ; and he begged to tell him from that place, that it is entirely his own fault, or the fault of his solicitor, if it remain another week undisposed of. With respect to the learned persons whose practice the bill would break into, a greater case of hardship he could not conceive' but at the same time it would be utterly impossible to grant compensation in respect of legislative changes involving a loss of practice.

The Earl of Doziononstoae spoke in favour of granting compensation. The Loan Cnextesizort said a few words in reply. The bill was read a second time, and ordered to be referred to a Select Committee.

PROPERTY OF Nero.

Mr. WIIITESIDE has obtained leave to bring in a bill to secure to per- sons under religious vows the free exercise of their lawful rights in the disposal of their property : it had reference principally if not entirely to the case of persons termed " nuns "—" ladies who are inmates of con- yenta." He cited cases in support of his views,—such, for example, as the Macarthy case. He contended at some length, that ladies in convents are subjected to undue influence in the disposal of their property, and are by their vows incapable of exercising their free will,—a condition in the disposal of property required by the law of England. The title of his bill was "A Bill to secure to persons under religious vows the free exercise of their lawful rights in the disposal of their pro- perty " ' • and its recital was to this effect—" that whereas females, on being received into communities as professed nuns, bound themselves by certain vows, and, among others, by vows of obedience to persons claiming to be their religious superiors or spiritual directors ; and whereas cases had been established in evidence before tribunals of the realm, in which it appeared that females, acting under the authority of their spiritual directors, had been induced to make dispositions of their property in contravention of their own personal wishes ; and whereas such dispositions of property had been set aside by such tribunals, as having been made under undue Influence; and whereas, by reason of the secluded life of inmates of convents, there was great difficulty in getting at evidence of the circumstances under which the disposition of their property had been made." (A laugh.) The pre- amble appeared a little long, no doubt, but it was necessary to establish the principles upon which he wished the House to legislate. His measure pro- posed to enact that any deed, contract, gift, grant, or conveyance, done, exe- cuted, or made by any female who had or should have bound herself by such vows, should be taken as done, made, or executed under the coercion of such vows, and under the dictation and exercise of authority claimed and assumed by her spiritual director, against her own free-will and judgment, unless satisfactory proof of the contrary was given before the tribunal which should be required to adjudicate in the matter. The second clause provided, that presumptive evidence of the person having taken those vows should be fur- nished by the fact that the lady was treated as a nun and taken as an in- mate of the convent. This measure proposed to shift the onus probandi upon the persons who obtained these deeds, gifts, grants, and conveyances : and what objection could there be to this, if they had been fairly obtained and not obtained by coercion?

Mr. Moon; Mr. BOWYER, and Mr. JOHN O'Comeme, objected that the bill was unnecessary. Mr. MAtres approved of the measure. Mr. LUCAS said it was a conclusive objection against the introduction of the bill, that a Committee is already ordered to inquire into the status of nuns and their condition before the law.

Lord PALMERSTON thought there was some force in that objection.

It would certainly be better to postpone any specific measure until the Committee have made its report. At the same time that he was not disposed to object in principle to the measure, and that he thought these establish- ments would be benefited by getting rid of the suspicions attached to them, he considered that the proposal did not go really to the point to which Mr. Whiteside's argument would extend. For he said that the vow was so strong on the mind of the nun, that whatever she was told to do she did ; so that if an independent solicitor were called in, and he asked the nun whether a pro- jected conveyance of property was the result of her own free will, of course the nun, whose mind would be actuated by the vow taken, and by the orders she had received from her superior' would reply in the affirmative. It was, in truth, the will forced on her by the restraint of her own vow ; but it was for the moment the will of her mind, and therefore he was afraid that the provision which Mr. Whiteside proposed to introduce by way of security would fail. lie would suggest, that if permission were given to bring in the bill, it should be on the clear understanding that the bill should not be pressed until the report of the Committee had been received.

Mr. WHITESIDE would adopt the suggestion, if he were certain that the Committee was empowered to investigate into property. The ATroarezy- GENERAL said, that no doubt the terms of the appointment of the Com- mittee included the question before the House. He thought Mr. White- side had proved too much ; for if what he stated were true, then nuns ought to be prevented from making any testamentary dispositions what- ever.

On a division, 68 voices to 40, leave was given to introduce the bill.

LAW OP MORTMAIN.

Mr. Helmut has obtained leave to bring in a bill for the amendment of the law relating to the disposition of property for religious and cha- ritable purposes. He asked the House to repeal the whole law on the subject, and substitute provisions in its stead which would effectually remedy existing abuses. After an historical disquisition on the law, he stated the provisions of his measure. Leaving the law as it now stands with regard to the granting of land as a permanent source of income for charitable purposes, he proposed that there should be no restriction with respect to the gift of land as a site for churches, chapels, schools, museums, or libraries, except due notice to the Charity Commissioners in order that it be registered. With respect to personalty, he proposed to place every description of personal property on the same footing; requiring that any will bequeathing it for charitable purposes should be executed three months before the death of the testator; and that notice of the gift, and of the purposes to which it is to be applied, should be given to the Charity Commissioners. But he would place no restraint on bequests of pictures, books, statues, or matters of that kind. Another provision of the bill was for curing titles bad in consequence of the defects of the

existing law. With respect to secret trusts, he proposed that if any person accept property upon trust, and do not give notice of it, he shall be personally liable to refund the rents of the property which have been applied in this manner ; and if no suit were instituted for that purpose in the course of five years, the Attorney-General should at the end of the five years be at liberty to institute a suit against him.

LAW OP Hum TREASON.

Mr. WHITESIDE has obtained leave to bring in a bill to assimilate the law and practice existing in cases of high treason in Ireland to the law and prectice existing in cases of high treason in England.

DECLARATIONS FOR OATHS.

Mr. Per.s..err has obtained leave to bring in a bill to substitute decla- rations for oaths in eases where a person from conscientious scruples ob- jects to take an oath. His bill provides that a person convicted of making a false declaration shall be liable to the penalties of perjury.

Lord PALMERSTON said he would not oppose the introduction of the bill, but would reserve to the Government full discretion as to what course they would take at the second reading. He thought that Mr. Pellatt might have waited to see the bill introduced by the Lord Chancellor. The whole discussion turned upon the question, whether oaths could in all cases be dispensed with : Mr. Perms= maintaining that oaths are objectionable ; Lord Perrszasroir and the ATTORNEY-GENERAL showing that they are necessary to meet the case of those who fear the Divine wrath but not the penalties of perjury. On a division, leave was given to bring in the bill, by a majority of one ; the numbers being—for the motion 109, against it 108. The an- nouncement elicited both cheers and laughter.

Semen Menu/mix Lew.

On the motion of Lord BROUGHAM, a bill was read a first time, import- ing into England certain provisions of the Scotch mercantile law with regard to bills of exchange.

The effect of the law as it now stands is, that while in England., if a bill is dishonoured, the only remedy which the holder has is by an action at law, giving the drawer all the advantages of the law's delays to put off or escape payment, in Scotland the holder of a protested bill has only to register it: by that simple operation he at once puts a stop to all dealings with his debtor's property, and in six days afterwards he is entitled to execution against his property and person. To provide, however, against mistakes and fraud, there is a process of suspension of execution' after which the matter is decided before a tribunal in the regular manner : but before he can obtain the advantage of that, the defaulting party has to give security for the debt, and the costs as well.

The second reading is postponed, so as to give the Lord Chancellor an opportunity of considering whether these provisions cannot be introduced into the Common Law Procedure Bill.

PAYMENT OF WAGES BILL.

When Mr. Fonsresmoved the second reading of this bill, a discussion arose on the propriety of legislating on the subject ; and Mr. CRAUFURD moved an amendment, to the effect that an inquiry into the relations between masters and men should take place before farther legislation. Mr. Hume, Mr. HEYWORTM, Mr. MOFFATT, Mr. BRIGHT' and Lord STANLEY, maintained that past legislation had been fruitless ; that further legislation was unnecessary ; and that the workmen had better be left to fight their own battle. Mr. Datrentown, Sir Josirue Watirster, Mr. BOOKER, and Mr. H. Banc; contended that past legislation had been beneficial; that it was necessary to redress the grievances which the strong inflict on the weak ; and that contracts should be carried out in the spirit in which they are made. Sir GEORGE GREY said that there was no need for further inquiry : some abuses existed, and ought to be redressed ; others cannot be reached by enactment. On a division, the amendment was negatived by 166 to 56. The bill was read a second time, and referred to a Select Committee.

JUVENILE REFORMATORIES.

In reply to Mr. Annenrarr, Lord PAIXERSTON said he could not state when he should bring in a bill for the promotion of juvenile reformatories. The subject requires great deliberation; but he had not lost sight of it He hoped to take advantage of the voluntary efforts of other institutions, and by their cooperation to increase the number of youthful members of the proposed reformatories.

THE CIVIL Seatvice.

In moving for the instructions given to the Commissioners who have reported on the state of the Civil Service, and the evidence taken before them, Lord liforirmote strongly censured the report as a libel on the service, and inveighed against the plan recommended by the Commis- sioners. The examination scheme had only been tried in Prussia, where it produced a bureaucracy, and in China, where it was all "humbug." Earl GRANVILLE said, there would be no objection to produce the instructions, but no evidence had been taken in short-hand at all. He guarded himself against indicating the nature of the Government plan, but to some extent he vindicated the report. Lord Baorrons.st objected to the plan of the Commissioners, that it would vest patronage in the board of examiners, and would be subversive of discipline. THE Paaren-Boow.

Mr. HEYWOOD has carried an address for a copy of the alterations in the Book of Common Prayer proposed by the Royal Commissioners for the revision of the Liturgy in 1689. The original is now in the library at Lambeth, having descended through successive Archbishops of Canter- bury, from Archbishop Tillotson ; and the present Archbishop thinks he ought not to give a copy, unless it were for publication under the author- ity of the House of Commons.

Lord PALMERSTON said that Government did not oppose the motion. But it was opposed by Mr. Gouminarr, Mr. HENLEY' and Mr. Kee. SET-. men, on the ground that the document is in a privatelibrary, and that in- formation respecting it can be obtained from another source. Mr. Lazon- CHERE said that the library had descended from Archbishop to Archbishop, and could hardly be called a private library. Mr. GLADSTONE explained, that there was a difference between this motion and one in which the House is moved for returns. In the latter case, the returns are compulsory ; but in an address like this, referred to the discretion of the Crown, the Home Secretary could frame his commu- nication so as to avoid any interference in a private matter. The question was pushed to a division, and the motion carried by 132 to 83. ENDOWED GRAMMAR SCHOOLS.

Mr. PELLATT moved for a Commission to inquire into the state, re- venues, bequeath, and libraries of endowed grammar schools, with the view of increasing the educational advantages of the public in general. Lord Jonas Breams. objected, that the inquiry would be expensive, and would interfere with the Charity Commissioners. Removed "the previous question." The motion met with general objection, and was withdrawn.

STONOR.

Early in the week, Mr. MOORE put a question to the Under-Secretary for the Colonies respecting Mr. Stonor, who had been found guilty of bribery at an Irish election, and yet had been appointed to the office of Puitme Judge at Melbourne. Mr. PEst. defended the nomination of Mr. Stoner: the Election Committee were not unanimous in their decision, and some of the members thought Mr. Stoner had been unjustly treated. The Chairman of the Committee, Mr. DivErr, however, stated that the report of the Committee was borne out by the evidence. On a subsequent day, Mr. PEEL said, that in consequence of the state- ment of the Chairman of the Election Committee, the Duke of New- castle had decided not to confirm the appointment of Mr. Stoner. Hp to the last week, neither the Duke of Newcastle nor Mr. Peel knew any- thing of the circumstances. But it was just to Mr. Stoner to say that he was not the cause of that ignorance. The packet of testimonials for- warded to the Colonial Office contained Mr. Stonor's report of the cir- cumstances; but that packet had not been examined at the time.

ELECTION COMMITTEE.

The Select Committee to inquire into the petition of Mr. Somers with respect to the Sligo election have reported that the main allegations of that petition are proved ; that an attempt was made by the two Simpsons and Gethin an attorney to bribe the sureties to make false statements with regard to their property, in order that they might withdraw their re- cognizances ; that the evidence given by the Simpsons and by Gethin was by its evasiveness and inconsistency disgraceful to them ; that their con- duct deserves the serious animadversions of the House and that Mr. Sadleir was not personally implicated in or cognizant of the proceedings.