POSTSCRIPT.

SATURDAY NIGHT.

The proceedings in Parliament yesterday were of the miscellaneous complexion that has of late obtained on Fridays.

The House of Commons had a morning sitting, devoted to Committee on the Highways Bill; which encountered an obstinate and fatal opposition. Mr. HENLEY began by moving that the House be counted; but exactly forty Members showed themselves; and then many went away again to Select Committees. Mr. HENLEY and others next objected to many parts of the bill, especially to the enactments which vested the whole supervision of highways in two Central Commissioners. On a motion to substitute "Justices of the Peace" for " Commissioners" in certain cases, Sir GEORGE GREY agreed to take the division as testing the sense of the House on the question of a Central Board: the amendment was carried, by 50 to 48; upon which Sir George withdrew the bill ; and the House adjourned.

When it resumed in the afternoon, Mr. WARD moved the recommittal of the Thames Conservancy Bill; respecting which he gave some further explanation—

The great want is one competent authority; and the conflict of powers is fur- ther embarrassed by a Chancery snit between the Crown and the City, which may last for twenty years, arresting all improvement of the navigation. By the present bill all tolls and dues on the river were to be vested in the Con Bervators ; the rights of the Crown and the City were merged; united powers were to be created; and precautions were taken to provide against the possibility of abuse. He might be fairly asked what those precautions were; and he was the more bound to state what they were, as the bill consisted of 176 clauses. A su- perior Board of Conservancy was to be created, consisting of the First Lord of the Admiralty, the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests, and the President of the Board of Trade. By the 49th clause they were to have entire control over the by-laws. The Board of Conservancy were to send in a quarterly report of their proceedings ; Parliament was to be furnished with a statement of the accounts; there was to be entire publicity of the proceedings; there were to be no superan- nuations of any kind without the leave both of the superior court and of the Treasury; and the services of the Commissioners were to be completely gratuitous. By the 102d and 103d clauses, provision was made for removing the whole of the shoals which impeded the navigation of the river, and for increasing, widen- ing, and deepening gradually within six years the navigable channel of the river throughout its whole extent. The estimate made by Mr. Walker of the cost of removing the shoals was 100,0001., and 850,000/ for deepening and widening the channel to the required extent. According to the arrangement originally made with the Government, the Board of Conservancy was to consist of nineteen members,—the Lord Mayor of London, five Aldermen, and thirteen Common Councilmen. There was a general feeling, however, on the part of the House, that the members of the Board should not consist exclusively of persons connected with the City of London; and that it' was desirable that new blood should be infused into the Board. The Select Com- ' mittee accordingly agreed that the number of the Commissioners should be re- duced from nineteen to fifteen; that of these fifteen the City should choose ten, and that the remaining five should be appointed by the Crown, and should not , be Aldermen or Common Councilmen. l'he City authorities refused to accept the alteration; but a suggestion was made that an arrangement might be come to if the City were allowed to propose the five Commissioners, subject to a veto ' on the part of the Crown. It was for the House to consider whether that proposal might not be fairly and honourably entertained by those who were desirous of seeing the question placed on a fair and intelligible basis.

Mr. HUME opposed the motion. He contended that the Municipal Cor- poration of London was an improper body to be intrusted with the conser- vancy of the Thames; and objected to divers details in the expenditure of the bill. The whole system of managing the river by the City, with the dues on goods imported by the Thames' demands revision; and'meanwhile, the best way would be to introduce a bill simply and specifically for carrying out the requisite improvements in the Thames. He moved an amendment , to that effect.

After some discussion, Lord MORPETH said he understood that the Cor- poration were prepared to submit to the terms originally proposed by Par- liament; and Alderman Hinter:luny suggested that the recommittal of the• bill would afford the Corporation an opportunity of accepting the Govern, • mint terms.

On a division, Mr. Ward's motion was carried, by 92 to 24.

Sir DE LACY Evans put a string of questions respecting education; to which Lord JOHN RUSSELL -made an explanatory reply— As he had stated in previous debates, in cases where the managers of a school conformed generally to the rules of the National Society, but did not follow that - rule which obliged the children to learn the Catechism and attend church, the Committee of Council would feel themselves at liberty to extend aid. In con- sidering the amount of aid, [supposing the support of the National Society were withdrawn,) each case would rest upon its own merits. It was intended to meet the objectious entertained by COngregational Dissenters, as well as there of Roman Catholics. Those Dissenters object to interference in religions matters, even to the extent of requiring the local managers of a school to say whether they are satisfied with the religious instruction of a school. That requirement will be waived.

Lord INGESTRE moved for a Select Committee to consider the report of the Commissioners appointed to investigate Captain Warner's invention. The report of the Commissioners, Colonel Chalrner and Captain Chads, (that the experiment on Cannock Chase was a failure,) was he contended, hasty and pre- mature. The balloon took up more than the stipulated number of shells, and dropped them in a continuous line; but the Commissioners did not take the trou- ble to inquire what had become of the shells. The Marquis of Anglesey, however, had inquired into the case, and was prepared to give evidence before a Committee; and Lord Ingestre, who was present at the experiment, also testified to its pro- bable success. Lord JOHN RUSSELL maintained that the experiment had proved that Mr. Warner's invention was neither new, successful, nor impenetrably secret. Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS followed, with much ridicule on the cost and the impracticability which he ascribed to the plan. Mr. I:Wixom), Mr:

BROTHERTON, and Captain BERKELEY, also deprecated the useless expen- of public money. And, perceiving the temper of the House, Lord I. 8TRE withdrew his motion.

r. FERRAND moved for a copy of the correspondence relating to the impriaonment of Mary Dawson, a girl who had been committed to egeld -House of Correction, where she worked on the treadmill for three weeks, on account of having refused to perform her work. Sil GEORGE GREY explained the case. The girl had obstinately refused to return to her employment, and the Magistrates were evidently inclined to leniency; but there was a technical flaw in the commitment, which was made out under an act that had been repealed, instead of an existing act. On ascertaining those facts, the girl had been released. After a short con- versation, the motion was negatived without a division.

Mr. HUME again brought forward the case of the Rajah of Sattarah; which he declared that he would never give up till he died. He renewed his charge against Colonel Ovens for forgery in using the Rajah's seal; and against Sir John Hobhouse for the "complete fictions which he palmed off on the public " in order to get rid of the case. Sir JOHN HOBBOUSE re- peated former reasons for objecting to the motion, and retorted by counter- charges against Mr. Hume: he described Mr. Hume as " the dupe and tool " of a house of agency at Bombay: a secret despatch had been improperly divulged, and Sir John asked whether Mr. Hume had " stolen "it; a question which Mr. Holm characterized as "impudent." Eventually, Lord Rai.- IOSBETON suggested that the motion should be brought forward at some more seasonable hour, [it being then about half-past one or more]; and the subject was suffered to drop.

The House then went into Committee of Supply pro forma, and resumed.

Sir Cautr..za WOOD obtained leave to bring in some bills; among them, one to facilitate the recovery of public money advanced for the employ- ment of destitute persons in Ireland.

In the other House, after a trivial and fruitless discussion on the Bir- mingham and Oxford Railway dispute, Lord REDESDALE moved the fol- lowing resolution ; which was at once adopted without division- " That the Railway Commissioners be directed to inquire into the accommoda- tion afforded by the several lines of railway now open, or in the course of con- struction, or projected, between London and Birmingham; and to report to this House, early in the ensuing session of Parliament, in what manner they are of opinion that the interests of the public may be most effectually secured in regard to such lines; and whether it is expedient that the broad gauge should be ex- tended to Birmingham, and if so, in what manner such an arrangement can be carried into effect with the least interference with existing interests, and with the system of railway communication as settled by the act for regulating the gauge of railways; and what conditions it would be desirable to annex to any permission granted to the Great Western or other railway companies to lay down a broad gauge contrary to the provisions of the said act."

The Royal assent was given by commission to the Lunatic Asylums, the Representative Peers (Scotland), Landed Property (Ireland), Prisoners-. Removal (Ireland), Destitute Persons (Ireland), and to several other public and private bills.