Frlintrg ntt rnrubiug inVarliantrut.

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.

Honsx OP LORDS. Monday, May 15. Embodiment of the Militia ; Message from the Crown—Private Executions ; Bishop of Oxford's Suggestion—Irish Sedition ; Lord Westmeath's Motion.

Tuesday, May 16. Taxes on Justice; Lord Brougham's Statement.

Thursday, May 18. Soldiers' Wives Fund ; Duke of Newcastle's Statement— Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Bill committed—Leasing Powers (Ireland) Bill committed.

Friday, May 19. Loss of the Tiger; Lord Malmesbury's Question—Railway Re- gulation; Mr. Cardwell's Bill read a second time.

Rom Or COMMONS. Monday, May 15. Malt-tax ; Excise-duties Bill read a se- cond time, by 303 to 195—Embodiment of the Militia ; Message from the Crown.

Tuesday, May 16. "Taxes on Knowledge "; Mr. Gibson's Motion—Married Wo- men; Mr. Malins's Bill, leave given—Custody of Wills; Mr. Home's Motion for a Select Committee—Embodiment of the Militia ; Address to the Crown agreed to. Wednesday, May 17. Episcopal and Capitular Estates ; Lord Blandford's Bill read a second time, and committed pro formaDrainage of Lands • Mr. Ker Sey- mer's Bill read a second time—Married Women; Mr. Matins's Bill read a first time.

Thursday, May 18. Real Estate Charges; Mr. Locke King's Bill read a second time—Conventual Committee; Order for appointment discharged, by 100 to 1— Merchant Shipping; Mr. Cardwell's Consolidation Bill read a second time.

Friday, May 19. Excise-duties Bill in Committee—Ways and Means Committee; Sugar-duties, Income-tax—Stamp-duties; Committee—Chimney-Sweepers; Lord Shafteebury's Bill thrown out.

TIME- TABLE.

THE MALT-TAX.

On the second reading of the Excise-duties Bill, imposing the addi- tional tax on malt, Mr. CAYLEY opened a debate of some length, but of no substantial novelty, by moving that the bill be read a second time that day six months. He called it a violation of Free-trade principles ; a tax upon the consumer ; and also an injury to the agricultural interest, inflicting upon farmers what is equivalent to a tax of 25s. per acre on all the cultivated land of the country. Mr. Cayley was bitter against Mr. Gladstone and the Ministry, complimentary to Mr. Disraeli, and he opined that if Lord John Russell or Lord Palmerston had been at the head of our Foreign policy the Russian war would have been prevented. The amendment was seconded by Mr. STANHOPE ; and supported, generally upon the old and oft-repeated arguments, by Colonel GILPIN, the Mar- quis of GRANBY, Mr. POLLARD-URQUHART, MT. BENTINCIC, Mr. BARROW, Mr. NEWDEGATE, and Mr. SPOONER; while on the other side the speakers were Lord MONCK, Mr. WARNER, MY. FRANK CROSSLEY, MT. JOHN %MT, Mr. WILSON, and Mr. SA.NDAll8. Nothing occurred to relieve the debate from the monotony of old arguments until Sir BULWER Lvrrox made a party speech, charging Government with forcing on the House a subject which must revive the bitter resentment of the agricultural class, and create the deepest dissatisfaction in that very portion of the people upon whom for the endurance of the war all governments pro- verbially depend. He cited the testimony of M'Culloch that the malt- tax discourages production, and gives the agriculturalists a claim to com- pensation in the shape of a fixed duty on foreign corn. He observed that Government levies its taxes and looks for its soldiers from the same districts ; that their policy is one of determined hostility to the land. He ridiculed the Coalition of Conservative-Liberal with Liberal-Conservative : until we saw Lord Aberdeen and Lord John Russell acting together, 'Iwo should have no more supposed that a Liberal-Conservative in one House was the same thing as a Conservative-Liberal in the other, than that a horse-chestnut was a chestnut horse." [At this sally the Opposition laughed greatly.] He took Mr. Gladstone to task for sneering at Mr. Pitt's shortsightedness: "a gentleman who converts stocks and can't foresee the results—who has one budget in March and another in May—this is the gentleman who sneers at Mr. Pitt as shortsighted !" The present war is for posterity, and surely we may expect posterity to bear its share of the burden : but taxes unfair in themselves and odious in their assessment will disgust the people with the war.

Mr. DaninuoND amused the House by a speech of general onslaught. He was ready to join in any expression condemnatory of the malt-tax, as the worst tax possible. But all sides had cheered on the war, and now they wanted to shrink from the realities. The Opposition would lead the Minister into a mess, but would never get him out of it. The very stupidest man would find some valid objection to every tax. Mr. Disraeli proposed the best tax—the Rouse-tax; but power has been given to the householders, and when the question comes whose pocket is to be picked, the householders declare that theirs shall not ; and the agriculturists, being in a minority, must submit. As to loans—the loan- contractor simply takes the money out of the pockets of the public and

The Lords.

Hour of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment.

Monday Sh 7)53010 Tuesday 512 • . 71140m

Wednesday.... No sitting.

Thursday 511 . . 911 45ra

Friday 5h 7)54010 Sittings this Week, 4; Time, 12h 35in

this Session. 33; — 127h Wm

The Commons.

Hour of Hoar of Meeting. Adjournment.

Monday 4h (m) lh Om

Tuday 4h (m) 1)53010

Wednesday Noon 5h 30m Thursday 4h 11)53010 Friday 4h 12h Om

Sittings this Week, 5; Time, 30h 30m /Us Semion, 67; — 443h 22m puts it into his own. Some said, " Give, =paper" : but that would be doubly cheating posterity. If Mr. Gladstdne' i who had decently sneered at isf.*.‘Pitt, exposes to live.untiLthe end of the; .war, he must calculate upon living to the.age of Methuselah. We have heard of a partnership where one man found the money end another the brains : in this war the Emperor of thseFrench finds the brains. There is a talk of a camp at BOulogue, and it is saidialie for the purpose of watching Prussia : let them tell that to the marines. 'However, there is a select set, a pleasant club, meeting in Downing Street, and dining together every Wednesday, who are fully persuaded that the camp at Boulogne is for the purpose of watching Prussia.

He did not believe it ; and his advice was, that they should embody the Militia, and have three good permanent camps—in the North of England, in the Midland counties and in the South—of 30,000 men each. As to their getting rid of the malt-lax, they might think themselves lucky if they es- caped a double malt-tax and a double income-tax, with the addition of the house-tax. (Laughter.) After all, they mi„,,dat be well content if by such means they could save England from being the battle-field of Europe.

Sir JOHN PAKINGTON, amid cries of "Divide!" taunted the Government with not condescending to vindicate their propositions.

Lord Jonx RUSSELL made a vigorous counter-attack upon the Oppo- sition.

The question before the House was, whether all the burden of the war ought to be left to posterity ? "Don't tell me that the Malt-tax is a tax sq objectionable that you would be ready to vote any other tax, but that you cannot vote this. (Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) Don't tell me that the landed interest cannot bear 15d. additional duty upon malt. Tell me—what I should be sorry to hear, but what, at least, would be more fair, more manly, and more candid than your present declaration—tell me that you are in favour of the war, that you are ready to vote increases to the Army and to the Navy, but that you are not ready to pay the necessary taxes to defray the expenses. Tell me that you shrink from the unpopularity- which belongs to any proposal to lay considerable burdens on the country. (" Oh, oh ! " from the Opposition.) Tell me that you would wish to escape that obligation, by means of loans, or by any other means ; but don't tell me that the small addition in the duty upon malt from 2s. 9d. to 48. will prevent you from supporting the Government at the beginning. of a great war. (Loud cheers.) I can imagine what will be the consequence if, the very first time that you are asked for additional taxes to carry on the war— I say the first time, because the tax you have already voted was only for the purpose of defraying the necessary preparations—you refused to support the Government. I can conceive what the effect would be if, when you are called upon to make a great effort to raise, not 2,500,0001., but on the whole, about 7,000,0001. or 8,000,000/. to support the war, you were to deny to Government your support in carrying on that war. Would nct the effect be, that throughout Europe a feeling would arise that you did not mean to engage heart and soul in the prosecution of the war— that you meant to give the Government a temporary support, but to shrink from us at the very first opportunity—that you were ready to forego the de- clarations you had made, and to abandon the opinions you had expressed—in, fact, that you were ready to involve the country in a necessarily dishonour- able peace ? (Repeated cries of "0/i, oh ! ") I am not telling you that these are your intentions, but I am asking you whether this would not be the im- pression which would be produced. I will venture to say that no proposition can be more clear, more indisputable. No person will believe that it is merely on account of the increase of the Malt-tax from 2s. 9d. to -Is. that you refuse to consent to this bill. It would be said that as you have refused to agree to a tax which is necessary for the support of the war, that the war- will not be carried on with energy and perseverance. That certainly is my proposition. With regard to the Malt-tax, we have debated it for the last ten years, and its merits and defects have been canvassed over and over again. Mr. M'Culloch, who is cited as an authority against the tax, re- commended in time of peace that the Malt-tax should be increased, as it was a tax peculiarly well adapted to our system of taxation. Such is the case with regard to the Malt-tax ; and I must say, that if the House intends to. support this war, and to maintain the declaration they made when they- answered the message from the Crown, they will support the second reading of this bill."

Mr. DISRAELI heard with surprise and regret the extraordinary doc- trines laid down by Lord John Russell—that if an Opposition approve of a war, it is bound to vote, without criticism, every proposition and war- tax proposed by a Government. "I am of the same policy as far as the war is concerned as her Majesty's Government. I don't want to go into the causes and merits of the war ; it is enough that we are involved in a war ; and, as I said on the first night of our meeting, it is our duty to support her Majesty's Government." But the- Opposition reserved to itself the right of criticizing the means by which the Government propose to carry on the war. [The main part of Mr. Disraeli'a speech in opposition to the tax was a repetition of arguments previously used, except that he elaborately worked out a proposition that the barley- grower is subject to great competition with a foreign beverage—that he has to compete with the importer of tea.] He expressed his astonishment that Lord John [in a part of his speech which vindicated Mr. Gladstone's allusions to Mr. Pitt's errors and merits in finance] should have referred to 1797; for in that year Mr. Fox, Mr. Charles Grey, and the principal leaders of the Whig party, who had withdrawn from Parliament for a tame, came down to de- nounce the new principles of finance brought forward by Mr. Pitt ; and Mr.. Fox delivered one of his greatest speeches, in which he laid down the prin- ciples of Whig finance,— principles which Mr. Fox never deserted nor re- linquished, and which, notwithstanding the comparative degradation of the office which the noble Lord now fills, I did not believe that he, in deference to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Lord Aberdeen, would have relinquished in the House of Commons." (Loud cries of " Oh ." from the Ministerial, and cheers from the Opposition benches.) Mr. Disraeli attacked the Government for asking for 2,500,0001., and yet not expressing a word in its favour except on extreme compulsion. He asked whether the way in which the Treasury lately attempted to raise a loan is not more calculated to injure our credit than frank deliberation on the taxes to be imposed. "In my opinion," he said, " it is better that our foes should see that sums so vast as these—greater than those furnished by the largest provinces of our Imperial foe—should be frankly discussed • in my opinion, it is better, rather than see sums given in the churlish, undignified,, and un- manly manner in which the Government attempts to filch this measure, that our foes should see that we exercise our functions as representativ-O5oI the people and that, while prepared to support even a Government to which we are opposed, we will to the utmost do our duty to our constituencies to see-. that the ways and means may be adjusted according to the principles of eter-. nal justice." The House divided—For the second reading, 303; for the amendment,. 195' majority for the Government, 108. The announceraent was re- calved with great cheering from the Ministerial benches.

Tnar

The Duke of NEWCASTLE brought down a message from the Crown on Monday evening, which was read by the LORD CHANCELLOR,—t0 the effect, that the operations of the war with the Emperor of Russia having rendered it necessary to send a large part of her Majesty's regular army abroad, her Majesty deemed it proper to provide, without delay, additional means for the military service of the country ; and therefore, in pursu- ance of the act of Parliament enabling her Majesty to call out and em- body the Militia, her Majesty had thought fit to communicate to the House of Lords her intention of calling out some portion of that force, to be trained, disposed, and posted, as occasion might require. Later in the evening, the Duke of NEWCASTLE moved, without com- ment, the following reply-

" That we return to her Majesty the humble thanks of this House for her most gracious message ; and express the just sense we entertain of her Majesty's care for the security of the country, manifested by her gracious declaration that she will call out and embody the whole or such part of the Militia as her Majesty may think fit."

Earl GREY commented on the hardship which would be done to those who had vdlunteered into the Militia on the understanding that they were not to be called out except in case of invasion and he wished to know whether those who so volunteered would have the option of retiring from the force when the period for which they enlisted has expired ? The Duke of NEWCASTLE said, that Government do not contemplate any such extreme course as that indicated by Lord Grey, .that Mili- tiamen who object to serve under the new act might retire : but Go- vernment intend to meet the case in another way. Only 15,000 will at present be embodied, and those regiments will be selected who ex- press their readiness to serve. In many instances it will not be neces- sary to embody the whole of a regiment ; and no serious inconvenience will be occasioned by giving leave to those whose other engagements may make it inconvenient for them to come forward.

The Earl of DERBY thought there was great force in Lord Grey's argu- ment; but he was almost in hopes, from the Duke of Newcastle's expla- nation, that practically, although not technically, the Government would adhere to their original engagements.

If he understood aright, although the noble Duke did not lay down the principle that persons who were unwilling to serve under the terms of the new act should be absolutely free to do so or not, as they chose, yet the Government intended in the first instance only to select for further embodi- ment those regiments which, as a body, were desirous of acceding to these conditions, and in whose case, therefore, the further embodiment would be equivalent to a voluntary act. Then, again, he understood that in the regiments thus selected—each consisting perhaps of 900 or 1000 men—if 500 or 600 were willing to serve when called upon under the new measure, it was proposed to give the remaining section an opportunity of being re- leased from attendance. If that pledge were• specifically given to the country, no injustice would be done ; and in that case he should entirely approve of the course that was to be pursued.

The Duke of NEWCASTLE said that Lord Derby had not misinterpreted, but had more fully and clearly stated the intentions of the Government.

The address was agreed to, after a few more words from Lord GREY, enforcing the necessity of good faith.

.A similar message was brought down to the House of Commons by Lord PALMERSTON, and an address agreed to without debate.

MERCHANT SHLPPING.

Some debate occurred on the second reading of the Merchant Shipping Bill. Mr. Houses_LL raised several objections,—to the transfer of power from the Local Marine Boards to the Magistrates; to the non-reenact- ment of the apprentice-clauses; and to the absence of any provision ex- empting shipping from the operation of Lord Campbell's Act, originally intended to apply to railway accidents. He hoped that in Committee a clause would be introduced, confining the liability of shipowners to the value of the ship and freight. Such were the chief objections urged against the bill by other speakers ; but with regard to the apprenticeship- clauses, Mr. SCHAW LINDSAY and Mr. GEORGE THOILPSON declared that they would oppose any attempt to reenact them. Mr. CARDWELL ex- pressed himself well satisfied with the way the bill was received. The bill was an attempt to consolidate within a single act all the acts of Par- liament on the subject of shipping ; forty acts have been repealed, and one thousand clauses, from the time of Elizabeth downwards.

The bill began by taking a ship from the commencement of her building, her measurement registry, and dealt with the law of ownership ; it then went with her to sea, regulated the relative duties of masters and seamen, and provided for securities being taken against accident and loss of life. It dealt with the questions of pilotage and lights; and if the bill for regulating the law of wrecks and salvage should be agreed to, that would be incorporated with this bill ; and all these together would make a manual of the law on the subject of shipping. The laill was read a second time.

ham LAND BILLS.

The House of Lords went into Committee on the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Bill, after some statements of objections, especially to retrospec- tive compensation, made by the Marquis of CLANRICAREE, Lord BEAU- MONT, and other Peers. The Marquis of BATH moved the omission of clause 37, providing compensation for improvements; but withdrew his motion after brief debate. Clause 116 requires the landlord of a cottier tenement to keep the dwelling-house in repair; and provides that in case such dwelling-house should, by the landlord's default, be rendered unfit for occupation, no rent or compensation for occupation during the time it was in such condition shall be recoverable : on this clause the Marquis of CLANBJCARDE said, that by the terms of the clause if a tenant wilfully put his house out of repair—if he knocked down half of a chimney, or a hole in the wall, or took the door off its hinges for a dancing-party—he could prevent the landlord from recovering his rent. The Earl of CLAN- CARTY said that the clause would induce the tenants to commit wilful damages. But the LORD CHANCELLOR observed, that if a tenant com- mitted wilful damage, he could be summarily evicted by an order from two magistrates : the bill gives the landlord more summary powers, but before he could recover rent he would have to show that he had kept the property in proper repair. A division was taken on the clause; and it was carried by 17 to 10. The clause, and the other clauses of the bill, were agreed to.

The Leasing Powers (Ireland) Bill also went through Committee with- out amendments.

REAL ESTATE CHARGES.

The object of the Real Estate Charges Bill is to prevent the heir or de- visee of a real estate from claiming the payment of a mortgage on the es- tate out of the personal assets, unless so devised by the will. When Mr. LOCKE KING moved the second reading, on Thursday, Mr. MULLINGS moved the postponement till that day six months. The bill would alter the whole law of administration. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL supported the principle of the bill, but objected to the clauses as they stood. On a di- vision, the second reading was carried by 166 to 124.

LAND DRALNAGE.

Mr. HER SEYMER moved the second reading of the Drainage of Lands Bill. This measure is intended to remedy the deficiencies of Lord Lin. - coin's Act, and to facilitate the drainage of lands, now very difficult in consequence of the expense and delay and the obstacles interposed by neighbouring property. The bill enables the Enclosure Commissioners to. fix a fair amount of compensation, and guards against any infringement of the rights of property. Mr. CHRISTOPHER opposed the bill, as allowing any man to take the lands of his neighbour without his consent ; and he moved that it be read a second time that day six months. Sir Joule TROLLOPE seconded, and Mr. HENLEY supported the amendment. The bill was sustained by Sir JOHN SHELLEY, Mr. Herwoon, and Lord PAL- MERSTON ; and after a brief discussion the amendment was withdrawn, and the bill read a second time.

MANAGEMENT OF CHURCH PROPERTY.

The second reading of the Episcopal and Capitular Estates Bill stood for Wednesday ; and on the order being read, Lord ADOLPHUS VANE, commenting on the absence of the leading Ministers, and stating his ob- jections to the bill, moved the adjournment of the debate. Mr. GEORGE Burr seconded the motion. Although be approved of the principle of the bill, he thought that in the present state of the House, no good could be done by proceeding with the debate. The measure ought not to be dis- cussed without the presence of some influential member of the Govern- ment, who might say whether the bill would be sanctioned or opposed.

Mr. GRANVILLE BERKELEY explained, that the absence of the leading members of the Government was not owing to any want of courtesy to- wards the House, but to the extreme pressure of public business : an ex- planation received with ironical cheers.

Mr. Thant-mom) spoke at some length against the bill; deprecating such attempts to " reform " the Church, and recommending the appoint- ment of more Bishops. The bill would utterly destroy the cathedral es- tablishments, and turn every cathedral into a parish-church. The Church of England will not, he said, be destroyed by the opponents of Episco- pacy, nor by the Dissenters, nor by the Roman Catholics, but by its own members. In London alone there ought to be seven Bishops, and one in every town of ten thousand inhabitants. The Bishops and clergy ought to be compelled to do the duty for which they were appointed, and to perform service from morning to evening in the cathedrals.

After some general remarks from Mr. HADFIELD and Mr. SpooNart., Mr. WALeoLE put it to Lord John Russell, who was now in his place, whether it would not be better to adjourn the debate ? The question ought to be taken up by the Government ; and if they adjourned the de- bate, the House would not be committed to the principle of the bill, and the Government would be left free to inform the House what course they would pursue. Another reason was, that it would be undesirable to pro- ceed until the Cathedral Commission should have reported. For himself, he could not support the present bill ; but be was far from affirming that he would not assent to the proposition that it is advisable to relieve the heads of the Church from as much temporal duty as possible.

Lord Joule RUSSELL acknowledged that there was much force in Mr. Walpole's reasons for postponement ; but something was due to Lord Blandford, who had undergone so much labour to bring the measure be- fore the House, and who is animated by a zeal to improve the Church. He concurred with Mr. Walpole in thinking it inconvenient to discuss a measure of this importance on the proposition of an independent Member of Parliament, especially on a Wednesday ; and also in thinking it de- sirable that they should have the report of the Cathedral Commissioners. Some of the details of the bill, too, were objectionable : but if he were called upon to vote, he should rather affirm than negative the principle of the bill, which gives fixed incomes, to be paid by Commissioners having the management, but not the fee-simple of the land. It would not be de- sirable to go into Committee without further information ; and as there are many other subjects connected with the Church that have to be con- sidered, he hoped Lord Blandford would consent to the adjournment. There is the question of the distribution of the additional revenues for what is commonly called Church-extension, which has never be..:n before Parliament, but for which the Ecclesiastical Commissioners have esta- blished certain rules by their own authority ; there is the question of Church-rates ; the future constitution of Cathedral Chapters; and other questions affecting the Church, which, when Parliament should have time to consider them, it would be right to regard not as isolated measures but as a whole intended for the prosperity of the Church. The discussion was continued by Mr. II. G. LIDDELL, Mr. H. T. LID- DELL, against the bill, and Sir BENJAMIN HALL, Sir GEORGE GREY, and Mr. W. D. SEYMOUR, for the second reading. The Marquis of BLAND- FORD, replying to some objections in detail, declined to give way, and asked the House to affirm the second reading. Lord ADOLPHUS VANE pressed his motion to a division; and it was negatived by 123 to 62. On the question being put that the bill be read a second time, Lord BLANDFORD, in reply to several appeals for postponement, consented to postpone further proceeding if the bill were read a second time and com- mitted pro forma. This was assented to ; the bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed pro forma on the 21st June.

MARRIED WOMEN.

Mr. MALINS has obtained leave to bring in a bill to enable married women to dispose of reversionary and other interests in personal estate. Under the present law, married women can alienate real estate, but not personal property. If a wife join a husband in alienating personal pro- perty, the alienation becomes void as against her supposing she outlive her husband. This bill will correct the anomaly.

TAXES ON JUSTICE.

Lord BROUGHAM, in moving the resolutions of whist' he had given no- tice, setting forth the statistics of taxes on law proceedings, especially in County Courts, made a full statement of the facts; apologizing, at the outset, for not having brought the subject under the notice of the House before. The truth was, that sitting the whole morning engaged in judicial duties, he had not often felt "strong enough to make any statement, however short. Be hoped he should not be told that these discussions are inopportune ; that they are less important than discussions on the state of our foreign relations, or than the war in which we are unfortunately engaged. Just and neces- sary as that contest is, unavoidable as it has been, he implored them not to add to the mischiefs which that war has brought in its train, by turning a deaf ear to such proposals as may from time to time be made for the im- provement of our laws and of our internal condition. This would be to make war more mischievous, by adding an unnecessary evil to that contest. If he did not consider the subject of absolute necessity, he would willingly spare them the annoyance of hearing matters stated, not, he was afraid, for the first time. But stated they must be again and again, usque ad nauseam, until the evil complained of be remedied.

First of all, he called attention to the state of County Court jurisdiction ; because, although he should dwell upon the inequality, injustice, and ab- surdity of taxes upon all law proceedings, yet it is the application of those principles to County Courts which has chiefly urged him to bring the sub- ject before the House. He and those who think with him are met by two classes of opposite objections. One class of reasoners say they are the enemies of the County Courts. He could not have believed that any one could have paid so little attention to the history of the contest between himself and his noble friends opposite, as to dream that they who had been trying to get these taxes repealed to relieve the County Court jurisdiction were enemies of that jurisdiction. It is as a friend of the County Courts, that, for a year and a half, he has been incessant in his endeavours to obtain that change. Those who are really the enemies of the Courts held him and those who think with him responsible for the evils of the jurisdic- tion they had occasioned,—a responsibility lie readily accepted ; but they are not responsible for these burdens. Twenty-four years ago, he brought in a bill for the establishment of these courts : he was defeated in 1333, but the measure he proposed then laid the foundation of the present system.

Having vindicated his own course, Lord Brougham proceeded to make out his case of complaint. First as to the amount of the jurisdiction of the County Courts : the number of actions brought in those courts, upon the average of the last six years, was 435,641, yearly ; and the amount involved was 1,400,000/. During the last three years, since the extension from 20/. to 501., the average amount of the suits brought was 1,520,000/. The num- ber of suits brought last year was above the average-484,000. Now, how many suits had been brought in the Superior Courts before the establishment of the County Courts ?-120,000 a year; while since, the number has been only 81,000 a year. These facts demonstrate that previously to the year 1847 there was a complete denial of justice. Deduct the yearly average in the Superior Courts from the yearly average in the County Courts-120,000 from 435,000—and you will find, that but for the County Courts 315,000 cases would not have been tried. But the number of causes give nothing like an accurate measure of the benefits derived from these courts ; for the large number of cases settled without the suit being brought must be taken into account ; and also the indirect advantages,—especially the facility for improvements of the law and the new Evidence Act, which but for ex- perience in the County Courts would not have passed. These facts show that it is too late to think of retracing our steps, or of restoring central jurisdiction and abolishing local jurisdiction, or of halting in the work of improvement. The system of local jurisdiction is so deeply rooted in the affections of the community, and so intimately connected with our most immediate interests, that retrogression is out of the question ; and now and for ever this is to be part of our national jurisprudence. For this reason, it is necessary to im- prove and extend the system as far as that can safely and judiciously be done ; and above all, to relieve these courts from the burden of taxation under which they now labour. In talking of fees, be meant court- fees—the taxes imposed by Government on the suitor. What is their ex- tent ? On an average of the last two years, 1852-'63, they amount to 261,0001. yearly : the sums recovered by the courts, in respect of which these fees were exacted, amounted to 859,000/. ; the sums sued for to 1,500,000/. ; or 17i per cent upon the amount sued for, and 30 per cent upon the amount recovered. Citing bills paid by County Court suitors, Lord Brougham showed that in one case the court-fees were 4/. 13s. 4d. upon 17/. 88. M.—nearly 30 per cent, while the whole profits of the professional man were only 2/. 168. 84. : in another case—in a City Court—the amount sued for was 14/. 3s. 64., and the fees 71. 5s. 94.-51 per cent : in a third case, in Kent, the sum sued for was 51., the fees were 8/. Os. 64.—more than 150 per cent ! These fees were correctly and truly due, and the officer of the court would have omitted his duty had he not exacted them. Now, how stands the case in the Superior Courts, in which all the officers are paid out of the Consoli- dated Fund ? In the last two years, the fees did not amount to 50,000/. a year. That 50,0001., is 50,000/. too much, so paid ; but infinitely more in- defensible is the amount extorted from the inferior suitors in the infe- rior courts. And how has that change operated in the County Courts ? While there were 32,000 more suits in 1852 than in 1851, in 1853 the in- crease was only 10,000; and in cases above 20/. and under 50/. there was a decrease—from 12,500 in 1852, the number fell to 9206 in 1853.

It would be an intolerably superfluous thing, at this time of day, to show the utter impolicy and injustice of any taxes whatever on law proceedings. Sixty years ago, Mr. Bentham demonstrated their entire and monstrous absurdity and iniquity. Would it be borne that a tax should be imposed on a portion of the community for the benefit of the whole—that 100,000 persons should pay for the administration of justice ? The abuse is still greater, for the persons so mulcted are, from the very operation of the suit, least able to bear additional burdens. How would a proposition be received for casting on the Southern coast the whole burden of the defences of the country, on the plea that they would benefit most by the protection obtained ? Yet this is what is done with the suitors of the County Courts. Suppose a riot were to happen, and an attempt were made to set on fire the house of the Lord Chancellor, (which Heaven forbid!) and he called on the civil and military power to save his life anti property, how would he relish the inti- mation that he must pay the bill for the attendance of the soldiers and the police ? Adducing other illustrations, Lord Brougham contended that it is the duty of a Government to provide for the administration of justice, and to place the expenses upon the community at large. The present system reminded him of the story of a certain man who "fell among thieves." A person who appeared to be passing accidentally found him lying exhausted upon the ground, and inquired, in sympathizing tones, "Pray, what is the .matter with you, Sir?" "Oh," was the reply, "a villain has run off with my purse and my hat." "Why," asked the false Samaritan, "are you quite exhausted " "Ye, almost entirely." "Try, can't you move a little ? " "No, I cannot stir." "Oh, then, if that is the case," said the interrogator, "I'll take your wig." (Laughter.) Now, that was just the conduct of the citrifoweAment in this instance. '-remota' rived by Lord Brougham contained a formal array of the stic iaSis s eh, concluding with this declaration- ' -aLI pon law proceedings are contrary to every sound pt-in- work injustice and oppression ; but that those which suitors in County Courts are in an especial manner to g upon the classes of the community the least able to bear the burden, and as obstructing the access to those courts where alone the great majority of causes can be tried."

The LORD CHANCELLOR entirely concurred in the general views en- tertained by Lord Brougham; but he thought it would be inexpedient to pass the resolutions at a moment so peculiarly inopportune for any change that would add to the burdens of the country. Abstract resolutions, upon which the House is not prepared to act, are in the highest degree inex- pedient. On the general question, he thought that fees ought to b levied towards the maintenance of justice, upon wrongdoing suitor . The present system however, tends to saddle with fees those parties who are in the right. The Government, he added, has not overlooked the subject ; but they deem it proper to wait until the report of the County Courts Commissioners be received: they are of opinion that the subject ought not to be dealt with solely in reference to the County Courts ; and they hope to devise some plan under which the State may contribute its proportion, and the suitors their fair proportion, to the maintenance of the County Courts. Concurring in the eulo,gium on the County Courts, he said that Lord Brougham is richly entitled to the gratitude of the country for the great boon which has been conferred upon it by the system of the County Courts. Lord BROUGHAM observed, that, before fines are levied upon persons who misinterpret the law, the law should be made clear and certain : but as that is not likely to happen in our day, the remedy suggested would not meet the evil.

On the question being put, the resolutions were negatived without a division.

" TAXES ON KNOWLEDGE."

The House of Commons debated the old question of the Newspaper Stamp-duty on Tuesday night, at the invitation of Mr. Milner Gibson. Departing from his usual course, Mr. GIBSON, instead of moving the re-

peal of the stamp-duty and the duty on paper, moved a resolution, to the effect that "the laws in reference to the periodical press and newspaper stamps are ill-defined and unequally enforced" ; and that "the subject demands the early consideration of Parliament." In supporting his reso- lution, he carefully abstained from advocating the abolition of the stamp, and contented himself with making out the terms of the resolution ; ad- vancing facts and arguments of a character not at all new to the House. He showed that the law was ill-defined, by giving an account of the pro- secutions undertaken by the Government in the teeth of the decision of the Judges in the Exchequer Chamber ; and that it is unequally en- forced, by referring to similar prosecutions resulting in the suppression of isolated journals like the Potteries Free Tress, while class papers like the Racing Times and the Atheneum dared the Government to prosecute, and political papers of small size are capriciously suffered to escape the tax. Another aspect of the question is that the stamp is a tax on facts--on news ; while sedition or political commentary may be published without the stamp. Mr. KINNAIRD seconded the motion; and it was supported by Mr.

EWAIIT' Mr. HOME, Sir JOHN SHELLEY, and Mr. BRIGHT. Mr. Bright carried his argument a stage further than Mr. Gibson, and adduced an array of facts to prove that the stamp should be abolished ; unrolling be- fore the House the large and cheap papers of Australia and the United States, and showing that papers as large and as able as the Times are there sold for a penny or three halfpence ; that they are more valuable as property than the bulk of stamped English journals ; and that they are accessible to everybody. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL first met the motion by admitting that the law requires revision and amendment, but objecting that the terms of the resolution implied some censure on the officers of the Board of Inland Re-. venue, who have undertaken prosecutions on the complaints of parties paying the duties against those who are exempted. The law has not been arbitrarily and capriciously enforced. He moved the "previous question." The SOLICITOR-GENERAL followed the same line. The question, especially that part relating to bonds and securities, would receive the earliest atten- tion of the Government. Lord PALMERSTON thought that no fundamental difference of opinion had been expressed. Whether the law is ill-defined, is a question of legal opinion ; and it was hardly necessary for Mr. Gib- son's purpose to insist upon the assent of Parliament to the statement that it is ill-defined. No doubt, as explained by Mr. Gibson, it has been un- equally enforced. To any one who simply read the resolution, it would seem to imply that the law had been enforced with intentional injustice : but that, he apprehended, was disclaimed. He suggested that the resolu- tion should run in these terms—that "the laws in reference to the perio- dical press and newspaper-stamp demand the early consideration of Par- liament, with a view to their revision." He would not enter into the discussion raised by Mr. Bright, that the stamp-duty should be repealed ; but he would say, that be so far concurred with Mr. Bright in thinking that it would be a great public advantage to afford the lower classes all the means of instruction that can be brought within their reach. "The abrogation of this peculiar stamp is only a matter of financial con- sideration, and it can only be maintained as a matter of finance. Undoubt- edly, everybody will admit, that the larger we open the field of general in- struction, the firmer the foundation on which the order, the loyalty, and the good conduct of the lower classes will rest." (Cheers.) Mr. GIBSON declined to adopt the suggested resolution of Lord Pal- merston, as he did not desire the revision but the abrogation of the laws. On the understanding that no accusation of injustice or partiality against the Board of Inland Revenue was implied in the resolution, Lord PAL- MERSTON withdrew the opposition of the Government ; and the resolution passed, amid cheers from the Ministerial Members below the gangway.

THE CONVENT COMMITTEE.

Mr. NEWDEGATE resumed the adjourned debate on the nomination of the Committee to inquire into Conventual and Monastic Institutions, by recommending Mr. Chambers not to proceed further with the nomination, but to bring in a bill. The House had been placed at the mercy of a minority, enabled to domineer by the present rules of the House. Some bitter attacks on the Roman Catholics, and allusions to "Irish rows," drew from Mr. BRIGHT a lecture on the acrimony of Mr. Newdegate's language. He also defended the proceedings of the minoritT which is only omnipotent when the majority does what is improper. ihey talked of a minority in that House, but the opposition to the nomination of the Committee is supported by six millions out of doors. Mr. Chambers had failed with a bill last session ; he had failed with a Committee this ses- sion; and Mr. Bright hoped the House would not permit another bill to be introduced. Mr. ConLIHR said, that on no question ought a minority to override a majority in that House. It was said that the majority were wrong : were the minority to be the judge ? 'Upon this question the de- bate was continued. Mr. Joan BALL asserted the right of the minority to use the rules of the House. Mr. FREWEN drew attention to the lan- guage of a Mr. Wharton at a recent Catholic meeting in London, who mid that if insults towards the Catholic Church like those uttered the other day by Prince Albert were persisted in, they must look for aid to the Emperor Napoleon. Mr. CHAMBERS, in stating his reasons for with- drawing from the attempt to form a Committee, said that the minority had made it literally and physically impossible to proceed : but had not the Government set the example, no such opposition would have been raised against the bill. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the Go- vernment had opposed the proposition because they thought it improper. Both Lord Althorp and Sir Robert Peel had resorted to a similar kind of opposition. It is a privilege not only of the Government but of every private Member, to oppose the decision of a majority on any subject rashly or injudiciously forced upon them. Ile should regret if it were established as a precedent, that with Government aid a minority might override a majority ; but if anybody has given encouragement to such a precedent, it is Mr. Newdegate and Mr. Chambers, who say it is impos- sible to go on in opposition to the feeling of the House and the country. As to the opposition threatened on the Notice-paper, Government had nothing whatever to do with that, and was no party to the notion that they ought in any way to control the majority of the House. Sir Joule 13_exisioeosr remarked the dangerous precedent. Mr. DRUMMOND, agree- ing that they had been "absolutely murdered "—defeated by a factious opposition—said he should move for a Commission; which would pre- vent the personal animosity of nomination. After the withdrawal of the motion nominating Mr. Walpole, Mr. CHM:TURD forced the House to divide on the motion that the order be discharged; which led to a ludicrous result—that motion was carried by 100 to 1. When Mr. CHAMBERS announced the fact to the Speaker, he was received with much merriment and cheering.

CUSTODY OF WILLS.

On the motion of Mr. Hume, a Select Committee has been appointed to inquire into and report upon the state of the present public registry of the Prerogative Court, used as a testamentary office ; and whether a better office can be established for the keeping and preservation of wills.

DEATH PUNISHMENT.

The Bishop of OXFORD presented a petition from Aylesbury, praying the House to take into consideration the present mode of carrying into effect capital punishment; and, with an argumentative preface in lavour of private executions, he asked whether the Government would take the subject into consideration and announce their conclusions on a future day. The Earl of ABERDEEN said it was not easy to come to a decision on the subject. Some time ago a bill had been brought into the House of Commons to carry out the views advocated by the Bishop of Oxford, but it met with no success. Private executions might be extremely dangerous to the public peace. With respect to the bad effects of public executions, it must by no means be concluded that they do not have contrary effects on many. How do you know the number of those who may be wavering on the brink of crime who may return home altered and improved by the spectacle ? He could not give any countenance to the prayer of the petition.

SEDITION IN IRELAND.

The Marquis of WESTMEATH moved for copies of correspondence between himself and the Lord Chancellor of Ireland respecting Colonel Greville, a Magistrate of Westmeath. It would appear that Colonel Greville had been present at a meeting at Navan, in Meath, on the 17th January last, where the health of the Pope was drunk before that of the Queen, and a wish was expressed that the Russian cannon might destroy the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. The Earl of ABERDEEN defended the con- duct of the Lord Chancellor in not dismissing Colonel Greville from the bench. It would have been unjust to have made him responsible for a speech made by another person, especially when Colonel Greville declared that he had no sympathy with the sentiments uttered by the speakers at the meeting. Motion withdrawn.

SOLDIERS' WIVES FUND.

In reply to Lord Sr. LEONARDS, the Duke of NEWCASTLE stated that Government had abandoned the intention of issuing a Commission to dis- tribute the funds collected on the day of humiliation for the relief of the wives and children of soldiers serving in the East : it has been found that arrangements have been made for the distribution of the greater portion of the funds, and to institute a commission would seem like enter- ing on a course of rivalry with voluntary efforts.

THE STONOR CASE.

At the second meeting of the Committee to inquire into the case of Mr. Stonorisan Thursday, Lord Elcho appeared on behalf of the Govern- ment. Mr. Herman Merivale underwent examination, and gave evi- dence corroborating that of the Duke of Newcastle. He said he knew Mr. Stoner personally, but would not have recommended him had he not been satisfied of his fitness. He did not particularly call the attention of the Duke of Newcastle to the Sligo Election Committee's report ; nor did he think that report intended to render Mr. Stonier incapable of hold- ing office. He admitted that he ought to have brought the matter dis- tinctly under the notice of the Duke - but he did not think there was anything in the case to make it a moral duty to cancel the appointment. Mr. Henry Roberts, private secretary of the Colonial Minister, and formerly for twelve years Chief Judge of Common Pleas in Jamaica, was also examined. Nothing had ever been said to him about the House of Commons report affecting Mr. Stoner. It was his duty to read the testimonials; but in this case he did not, because he thought the Duke would be quite satisfied with Mr. Merivale's recommendation. The Duke of Newcastle had instructed him to answer any question re- lating to the appointments from the Colonial Office ; but he protested against this questioning of a private secretary being made a precedent. The Chairman Interfered to prevent the proposed questioning ; and Mr. Moore denied that he hid ever raised the question as to Colonial patron- age. Lord Elcho, however, obtained permission to put a question ; in reply to which, Mr. Roberts said he was quite sure that, since he had been connected with the Duke of Newcastle, that nobleman had made no appointment at the instigation of any Irish Member of Parliament, or of any other Member of Parliament.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The report of Sir John Pakington's Committee, appointed on the 7th February to consider by what alterations in the forms and proceedings

of the House of Commons the transaction of public business might be promoted, has been issued. Three witnesses were examined—Mr. lieu- verie, the Chairman of Committees ; Mr. Erskine May, author of a work on the "Law and Practice of Parliament "; and Mr. Shaw Lefevre, tho Speaker. The examination of these gentlemen occupied four sittings, but a longer time was required by the Committee to agree to its report ; a cir- cumstance which accounts for the delay which has taken place. Sir John Pakington, the Chairman, presented an elaborate report in which he sum- med up the evidence, and embodied most of the recommendations in the form of resolutions, extending to thirty-six in number. Sir John's la- bours met with little support ; the Committee " deeply" regretting that a great majority of his proposals could not meet with their concurrence. Sir George Grey was more successful ; the report and resolutions drawn up by him were adopted. The report is mainly taken up with the assignment of reasons for declining to follow the bolder recommendations of the gentle- men examined, and for preferring to trust still longer to the "good sense and right feeling" of Members to avoid whatever tends to obstruct the regularity of debate and to impede the progress of business.

RESOLUTIONS.

"1. That it be an instruction to all Corumittees of the whole House to which bills may be committed, that they have power to make such amendments therein as they shall think fit, provided they be relevant to the subject- matter of the bill ; but that if any such amendments shall not be within the title of the bill, they do amend the title accordingly, and do report the same specially to the House.

"2. That the questions for reading a bill a first and second time in a Cern- mittee of the whole House be discontinued.

"3. That in going through a bill, no questions shall be put for the filling up words already printed in italics, and commonly called blanks, unless ex- ception be taken thereto ; and if no alterations have been made in the words so printed in italics, the bill shall be reported without amendments, unless other amendments have been made thereto.

"4. That on a clause being offered on the consideration of report or third reading of a bill, the Speaker do desire the Member to bring up the same ;. whereupon it shall be read a first time without question put. "5. That Lords' amendments to public bills shall be appointed to be con- sidered on a future day, unless the House in any case shall order them to be considered forthwith. " 6. That every report from a Committee of the whole House be brought up without any question being put. " 7. That the standing order of the 25th June 1852, relating to Commit- tees of Supply and Ways and Means, shall be so altered as to allow such Committees to be fixed for any day on which orders of the day shall have precedence of notices of motion. "8. That bills which may be fixed for consideration in Committee on the same day, whether in progress or otherwise, may be referred together to a Committee of the whole House ; which may cousider on the same day all the bills so referred to it, without the Chairman leaving the chair on each sepa- rate bill, provided that, with respect to any bill not in progress, if any Member shall raise an objection to its consideration, such bill shall be post- poned.

"9. That the House at its rising on Friday do stand adjourned until the the following Monday, unless the House shall have otherwise ordered."

Considerable uniformity of opinion was expressed by Mr. Bouverie, Mr. May, and the Speaker, as to the changes which might safely be made in the forms and practice of the House. The gain, however, was nut so much in the saving of time as in simplifying the proceedings. As to the saving of time, the main reliance was placed upon stopping the flow of motions which sets in upon Supply nights, to the postponement of the real business of the evening without adequate reason or result. A rea- sonable latitude was proposed, and in addition an arrangement by which the safety-valve of Thursday would be made available to Members for a longer period than it has been for some sessions past. Mr. May illus- trated the working of the present practice. "During the last session, on twenty-two nights, there were motions and amendments proposed on going into Committees of Supply and Ways and Means. On all these twenty-two nights, motions were actually made by Members. The whole course of business, as appointed by the House, was consequently de- ranged, and from two to twelve notices of motion were set down on nearly every Supply night during the session." The Committee decline to recommend a formal check, lest it should obstruct the bringing for- ward of urgent and serious grievances, and prefer leaving the correction of the abuses to the discretion of Members. Another recommendation calculated to save time has been adopted by the Committee, that of making the adjournment from Friday to Monday a matter of course and not dependent upon special motion. Other proposals by the gentlemen examined, but not adopted by the Committee, can only be indicated : the re- scinding of the rule which requires bills relating to religion or trade to originate in a Committee of the whole House, experience having shown that neither class can be satisfactorily defined ; to allow unopposed Bills to be introduced in the early part of the evening ; that bills be read a second time or negatived without the appendage of "this day six months," or any other impossible time ; that when the second reading is affirmed the Committee follow as a matter of course and without discussion ; and that in certain cases the Committee itself may be dispensed with, at the pleasure of the House. It was also suggested that the members of Select Committees should be reduced to eleven in number, and nominated by a Committee of Selection ; and that when morning sittings are held, discussion shall cease at midnight. Further, that morning sittings be organized for the consideration of bills in Committee alone, to sit till four o'clock, with a quorum of twenty-five Members ; and that numerous " questions " be lopped where they answer no necessary purpose.