Eth tato guh Vrartritt4go,ts' Varlirournt.

PRINCIFAI• IIIISINIMIS OF MEE 41VBEN.

Horsy. OF Loans. Monday, July 26. The IliAht Sd "kit; Lord Lyndhurst'

'

Statement—Law of Copyright ; Lord Lyndhtuest'e Complaints—Government ct

British Columbia Bill read a second time—Appropriation Bill read a first time.

Tuesday. July 27. Local Government Bill read a thied time—Joint Stock Bank- ing Companies Bill read a third time and passed—Legitimacy Declaration Bill read a third time and passed—Metropolis Local Management Act Amendment Bill read a second time—New Writs Bill read a second time.

Wednesday, July 28. Local Government Bill passed. Other bills advanced a stage. Thursday, July 29. Universities (Scotland) nil!; Amendment not insisted On— Corrupt Practices Prevention Bill reported—Government of India (No. 3) Bin. Commons reasons considered—Drafts on Bankers Act Amendment Bill read ; third time and passed—New Writs Bill read a third time and passed. Friday. July 30. Baronies in Abeyance ; Lord Redesdale's Statement—Tele- graphic Communication with India; Lord Wodehouse's Question —Bankruptcy- Lord Chelmsford's Bill read a first time—Appropriation Bill read a third time aid passed.

House OF COMMONS. Saturday, July 24. Appropriation Bill read a third time and passed—Metropolis Local Dlana,gement Bill read a third time and passed_ Militia (Service Abroad) Act Continuance Bill read a third time and passed. Monday, July 26. Baron Rothschild admitted to the House—Corrupt Practices Prevention Act Continuance Bill read a third time and passed—Universities (Scot- land) Bill ; Lords Amendment disagreed to—Probates Act Amendment Bill read a third time and passed—Divorce &c. Bill read a third time and passed—Harbours of Refuge; Mr. Wilson's Motion. Tuesday, July 27. Government of India (No. 3)Bill ; Lords' Amendments con- sidered—Wellington Monument ; Mr. Stuart Wortley's Motion. Wednesday, July 28. No sitting. Thursday, July 29. Consideration of Lords' Amendments on several bills. Friday, July 30. India ; Mr. Vernon Smith's Questions—India (No. 3) Rill; Lords' Reasons considered.

TIME-TABLE.

T7re Commons.

Hour of Hour of

Meeting. Adjournment.

Saturday Noon.... Sh /Str, Monday Noon.... 2h Om 611 .... 91145ra Tuesday Noon .... 4h cm

Sh .(0012h Era

Wednesday No sitting. Thursday . 91545m Friday th . Ilh XIII Sittings this Week, 8; Time, Oh 7ca this Session 131; — 870h 12m THE INDIAN BLLL.

Much of the time of the House of Commons was taken up on Tuesday mottling and evening, in considering the Lords' Amendments to the India (No. 3) Bill. First, Colonel Sauces, out of gratitude to the East India Company, made a fruitless attempt to throw out the bill altogether, and Mr. MANGLES also put in a last defence of the Company's government. Circumstances, he said, might occur which would render that the last time he should have the honour of addressing the House—an allusion to his probable appointment as Member of Council which called forth general cries of "Hear !" After this episode the House proceeded to -discuss the amendments. In clause 27, the Lords had inserted words providing that no order should be sent to India by the Secretary of State unless it had been previously communicated to the Vice-President anal one other Member of Council. Lord Joust RUSSELL moved that the clause should run a Committee con-

sisting of the Vice-President and four other Members. Mr. DISRAELI thought the original arrangement of the House of Commons was the best—that is the total abolition of the Secret Committee. Mr. Witsox supported, and Lord PALMERSTON opposed Lord John Russell. The amendment was put and negatived without a division, and the House disagreed to the Lords' Amendment by 106 to 38; thus restoring the original arrangement.

The Lords' Amendment in clause 29, which omitted, in respect to the appointments to be made with the approbation of her. Majesty by the-Se- cretary of State in Council, the words requiringthat they should be made with the concurrence of a majority of Members present," was disagreed to with the consent of Lord STANLEY.

The amendment made by the Lords in clause 32, relating to competi- tive examinations occasioned a brief debate. The Lords had struck out of the clause the words directing that candidates should be recommended for appointments in the order of the proficiency shown at their examina- tions. Lord Scotts Resszza. reminding Lord Stanley that he had de- clared in favour of the principle of competitive examinations asked him to give an explanation of the views of the Government. The clause, as amended by the Lords, would enable the Minister of the day to put an end to these examinations or not as he might deem it expedient. As that would be unadvisable, he moved that the Lords' Amendment be dis- agreed to. Lord STANLEY said that Lord John Russell bad only done him simple

justice in stating that he was favourable to the principle of unrestricted competition. That remark is equally applicable to other Members of the Government. If the Lords' amendment in clause 32 would have the effect of destroying the principle of free examination, he would rather re- sign office than assent to it. But it will have no such effect. Ne existing right will be impaired by the amended clause. He had originally in- tended to recognize in an act of Parliament, instead of in an Order in Council, the right of admission to the public service by competition.

"When that change was proposed we were told that it would be quite

opposed to constitutional practice, inasmuch as its effect would be to privo to administrative and executive appointments the sanction of a Parlia- mentary title. There is, as far as I can ascertain, no precedent for adopting such a course. We, therefore, felt ourselves obliged to admit that the ob- jection was a valid one. Then arose the question, how were we to secure the adoption of this competitive principle ? The clause under consideration was passed as affording the best means of attaining that object."

continuance of the system would not altogether depend upon the Minister of the day. The regulations for these examinations must be laid down by an Order in Council. If that order is modified, it must be laid before Parlia- ment ; but as the majority of the House is known to be in favour of unre- Now, the stricted competition, that is a sufficient guarantee that no order will be sanctioned which will modify or repeal that principle. Suppose a Minister returned to the old system of nominations. Then the House would discuss the change, and would it be possible for any Minister to carry out his views in opposition to the Howie? Therefore, the practical guarantee for the maintenance of the principle rests on the known feeling of the House of Commons.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM said he had full confidence in the assurance of

The Lords.

Hour of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment.

Monday Oh .. 9h Om Tuesday 5h .. 9L 15m Wednesday 4h 6h Om Thursday Oh Oh 15m

Friday Oh 9h Om Sittings this Week, 5; Time, 181i 90ra — this Session. Si; — 131h 30m Lord Stanley; but he could not agree with him that there is no differ- ence between a statntahle recognition and an Order in Council. The change made by the Lords amount to, a reversal of the decision of the commons, and as Sir James has "the highest confidence in the success

f the competisystem," he should vote with Lord John Russell.

otive Mr. Wesposs said that the only question was should the system of competition be tied up in the four corners of an act of Parliament, and leave no opportunity for any modification that might be desirable. That is a course quite unprecedented. Some discretion must be left to the Crown. Mr. Witsox said, that argument implied the surrender of the principle of competition. The Sotierron-Gnxertar, repeated the ar- guments; of Lord Stanley. Sir EDWARD COLEBROOKE and Mr. Vemsarse Sean supported the original clause.

On a division, the House voted to disagree with the Lords' amend- ment by 73 to 60, and the words struck out were restored.

The House divided upon the Lords' amendment to clause 55. They had inserted the words "preventing or" before the word " repelling " with reference to threatened invasion. The ground of objection was that the new words gave the Governor-General too great a latitude. The amendment was sustained by 95 to 28.

A Committee was appointed to draw up reasons for disagreeing with some of the amendments of the Lords.

The Commons' reasons were speedily sent up to the House of Lords, and on Thursday that House took them into consideration.

The Earl of DERBY, to save time, made a general statement embracing the whole of the amendments to which the Commons had objected, taking each seriatim, The result was that, although on some points he still maintained his opinions, he agreed not to insist upon any of the amendments but one—the amendment relating to competitive examina- tion for appointment to the scientific branches of the Indian army. Ile said- " If you provide, as I think you must do, that with regard to the military service of India, as well as with regard to the military service of this country, all appointments of this description should be vested in the Crown, it is almost a contradiction in terms to say, in the first instance, that all cadetships in the scientific branch flail be vested in her Majesty, and to follow that up by saying that no persons shall be recom- mended except in the precise order as they come out of a competi- tive examination, and that the Crown shall be compelled to exercise its authority according to the result of that competition This was done without taking into serious consideration and discussing whether there isnot a broad constitutional distinction between the power of the Crown over the civil and the military departments respectively. This is a point of such great moment that, without saying that, even if the other House should adhere to its opinion, I should think it preferable that this important measure should be lost, and that these long discussions should be protracted to another session, with all the inconvenience attending such an act interim government of an empire like India, still it would be unwise for your lordships haatily, and at once to 'adopt the decision of the House of Commons in rejection of your amendments. And as respects the provision that the Crown shall be bound to grant cadetships precisely in accordance with the WOMB; of the candidates in a competitive examination, it is, r be- lieve, due to the prerogative of the Crown, due to your lordships' own po- sition, due to the great interests involved, as well as respectful to the other House itself, that it should be invited to consider the marked distinction between the two oases, and that as the formal mode of attaining that end your lordships should be advised to insist on your amendment, whieh strikes out that absolute and imperative condition imposed on the Crown of select- ing for cadetships in the scientific branches cf the army those persons who v have most distinguished themselves at the examination, and that, too, in the exact order in which they have so distinguished themselves." One other change he proposed : that any order to commence hostilities in India shall be communicated to both Houses of Parliament within three months after the sending of such order if Parliament is sitting, and if Parliament is not sitting at the end of such three months, then within one mouth next after the meeting of Parliament.

Earl GRANVILLE took the opportunity of pointing out the strange con- duct of the Government. The Prime Minister at this season is virtually the master of that House, and bound to watch over the dignity of its proceedings. The Opposition had remonstrated 'strongly against the proceedings on the Jewish question as likely to throw discredit and ridi- cule on the House. The public and every side of the other House ex- pressed the sense the Opposition anticipated they would, yet no member of the Government vindicated the condaet of the House of Lords. The clause on competitive examinations was proposed by a member of the Government, one who was bound to be in accord with the Government. Lord Granville objected to the clause reconstituting the Secret Commit- tee, but being proposed by Lord Derby, it was carried. "Now, if this ainendment was worth anything, it was to have been ex- pected that her Majesty's Government would have made some efibrt to com- plete that which was the work of the Prime Minister. But not a bit of it. If I am to believe the reports of the proceedings of the other House, the President of the Board of Control voted against this amendment, end stated that in his opinion the amendment was perfectly indefensible. Well, then, I come to the next clause. What the House of Commons have done with regard to it, I think rather bears-me out in what I took the liberty of point- ing cut on each successive clause connected with patronage,—that whereas a great outcry was raised against the late Government as to the imaginary mount of patronage which they were about to transfer to themselves, every single change that has taken place under the direction of her Majestv'e present Government has been to •increase the patronage conferred upon the Secretary of State; and, therefore, I am not surprised that the House of Commons should have insisted on some cheek being retained upon the exercise of patronage. If your lordships had adopted the course which we on this side of the House had suggested, and which was so strongly sup- ported by the noble earl the late President of the Board of Control, you would not now ho obliged to abandon your amendment as to the noniina- tion ef the members of the Councils of the Governor-General and Governors runpectively. I think the House has Borne reason to complain that that confident communication which they should for their own sake have main- tained, has not, at all events, been maintained between the members of the Government sitting in each House in order to keep up that consistency be- tween the proceedings of the two Houses which I think is most important tO the dignity and honour of both Houses of Parliament." Lord CAMPBELL was astonished at the passionate affection which the Rouse of Commons had recently shown for competitive examination. They had actually gone wild on that subject. (Laughter.) Competitive examination might most usefully be applied to the House of Commons itself- (Renewed laugh(er.) The Earl of ELLMBOILOUGH made a long

speech directed mainly against the principle of competitive examination, and in favour of a Secret Committee.

The House agreed to the proposals of Lord Derby.

THE JEW QUESTION.

The Oaths Bill and Jews' Bill having received the Royal assent, steps were at once taken to make use of the " means " "provided" by the latter for the admission of the Jews.

When the House of Commons met at noon on Monday, the SPEAKER directed any Member who wished to be sworn to conic to the table. Thereupon Baron Rothschild appeared at the bar, and was conducted to the table by Lord John Russell and Mr. John Abel Smith. Mr. Wanitrer rose to " order," but was immediately declared to be out of order himself. After the oath had been read Baron Rothschild said he could not conscientiously take it in the form in which it was tendered. 'I he SPEAKER. theui desired him to withdraw, and he retired behind the bar.

Lord .1-WIN Russees moved a resolution simply stating the fact that Baron Rothschild was prevented from sitting and voting by his conscientious objection to take the oath • and Mr. JOHN ABM. P,,arrrr seconded the resolution. Mr. W,uusex, paying a tribute to the spotless character of Baron Rothschild, and declaring that he acted without a particle of animosity to the Jewish race, met the resolution with a direct negative. Mr. War.roaot said that as the resolution was formal, he hoped Mr. Warren would not divide the house—reasonable advice which Mr. Warren took, and the resolution W.:S agreed to.

Then Lord Jens RUSSELL referring to Lord Imean's act and reciting its provisions, moved, in conformity with the terms of that set, the following resolution- " That any person professing the Jewish religion may henceforth, in taking the oath prescribed in an net of the present session of Parliament to entitle him to sit and vote in this House, omit the words ' and I make this declaration upon the true faith of a Christian.' " Mr. JOHN ABEL SMITH seconded this resolution also.

This led to a small debate in which the dissidents took the chief part. Mr. Waimea: said he should divide the House against it. Lord HOTHAM remarked that he bad not intended to vote on the question ; but being present he felt bound to oppose the resolution. Mr. WALPOLE said he had always regarded this as a religious rather than a political question. He did not think Jews ought to sit in a Christian Legislature : and must oppose the resolution. But he was bound to say that Baron Rothschild had never permitted himself to do one act contrary to the law of the land. He also said that the course taken could not be too much depre- cated, and that if the Jews were to be ndmitted they ought to have been admitted in a frank and honest manner. Let them not suppose, however, that they wee: closing the question. Mr. SPOONER repeated his objections, declaring that in doing so he was not actuated by pre- judice. Mr. NEWBEGATE followed Suit Mr. Pox said there are two ways of showing the Christianity of the Legislature : one by words and oaths ; the other, and better way, by deeds. lie felt satisfied that they never had acted snore in accordance with the spirit and character of a Christians Legislature than they were about to do by the admission of Jews to Parliament. Lord June RUSSELL reminded Mr. Walpole that the mode of settling the question had not been proposed by the advocates for the admission of the Jews. "It is not our choice, but the choice of the other House of Parliament." Mr. Walpole said this was not the end of the question ; but he trusted none would hereafter attempt to deprive the Jews of the privilege about to be conferred upon them.

On a division the resolution was carried by 69 to 37.

Baron Berrnseersn, greeted by loud cheering, was introduced as hoe fore. He took the oath on the Old Testament, omitting the werda " and I make this declaration on the true faith of a Christian." The n he signed the roll of Parliament ; shook hands with the Speaker and Mr. Disraeli, and took his seat on the opposition benches between Lord Harry Vane and Mr. Craufurd. He subsequently voted twice before- he left the House.

THE RIGHT OP SE-LI:Cit.

Lord LYNDHURST, in asking whether the Government would produce the correspondence with the American Government on the right of search,, called attention to the whole subject. Mr. Dallas had said at - the 4th July meeting that the question was finally settled. It is impore - tent that the terms cf the eettlement should be known. He, therefore, asked for an explanation. Some persons thought we had surrendered a valuable right. " The. - answer which I make to that is this—that we have surrendered no right,.. that in point of fact no such right as that which is contended for has ever - existed. We have abandoned the assumption of the right, and in doing so, we have, I think, acted justly, prndently, and wisely." No writer on international law has ever asserted the right, and there is no decision of any court of justice having jurisdiction to deride that question in which this right has been :ohnitted. Iti support of these propositions Lord Lynd- hurst quoted Lord Stowell, Mr. Wheaton, Mr. Justice Story, and Mr. Cass. "It is said that the flag of Anieriea limy be fraudulently assumed by [mother Power. How eau that by possibility affect the rights of env third Power or the subjects of ally third Power ? Take a coos. By an lgnelish treaty we have the right of visiting Spanish vessels, iii order tu prevent the slave-trade. But bow can thet agreement between us anitSpain affect the rights of Ameriea ? Clearly in no way at all But, then, what are our cruisers to do ? They am placed in a most difficult position ; because it is quite clear and cloin, if one of our cruisers sees a vessel bearing the American thug, and has reason to believe that that flag is assumed, he. must examine and inquire into her right to curry that flag as well as he can. If it is suspected that n vesssel has no right to use the American flag there may be an examination of her papers, and if it is found that the suspicions are correct, that vessel may ho dealt with in the same manner as in the case ef a search between England and the country to wide!' the vessel belongs. America would have nu right to interfere ; it Would be a right exiting be- tween the English cruiser and the vessel that was seized. The flag would give no right to America to interfere in a owe of that kind ; hut if it should turn out that it was an American vessel, justified in using the American flag, then this country would have to apologise and make mu de eompensa- tion." There is no distinction between the right of visit and the right of search. You visit for the purpose of auscertaiuing the nationolity ef tha vessel ; but you cannot ask to examine the papers for the purpose, because that would be a search ; so that when you visit to ascertain the catiotudity of s vessel, it is in effect a visit to search.

The Earl of Mattevennae said that Lord Lyndhunit's opinion must finally settle the question. It confirms the opinion of the law-officers of the Crown upon which the Government have acted. "Upon obtaining the opinion of the law-officers of the Crown, her Ma- jesty's Government acted at once with frankness, and confessed to having no right of visit or search, and abandoned both these claims. At the same time, they placed before the American Government the paramount necessity of instituting and drawing up some identical instructions to be placed in the hands of officers of both Governments and of other maritime nations, and by which all should be guided, and operate in a manner less oppressive to American vessels.

Negotiations have gone so far that we have given up the assumption of right of visit and search, and the American Government, on their part, have received our communications with equal frankness, and have stated that they are willing to accept from us and to consider any suggestions that we may make to them for the purpose of verifying the national flags. We have gone further, and we have made the same suggestion and offer to the Government of France. That Government has answered in the same spirit, and has agreed to consider any proposition we may make. Under these circumstances I think there can be no doubt that all are agreed that the dignity of each separate nation would be compromised if the right of visit and search were insisted upon; - yet, having regard to the extended interests of commerce, it is necessary to have some security against the fraudulent use of the national flag. Further than this we have not gone." He was willing to produce the correspondence.

The Earl of ABERDEEN had hoped that the question was settled. It was with the greatest astonishment he heard of the American complaints. Up to this day the British Government had acted upon principles in which the American Government of 1843 had acquiesced. They had been told that the right of search and visit had been given up. Why twenty years ago he' on the part of the Government, renounced all pretension to the right of visit or search in time of peace ; while he had maintained the right to visit a vessel suspected of fraudulently hoisting a national flag.

What her Majesty's Government had so frankly and so fairly given up had been given up years ago. He did not apprehend that the noble earl had given up anything at all, inasmuch as we had never made an assertion of any such right at all. In the last despatch he wrote on the subject, Lord Aberdeen said that "the British Government are opposed to no just claim of the United States, and have no intention of interfering by way of visitation or search with vessels known or believed to be American, yet they still maintain that right of searching suspected vessels which is necessary to the integrity of any flag." That is the footing upon which, in common justice and common sense, the question stands at this moment ; and he was much pleased to see that General Cass had adopted the language which he had himself used.

Earl GRANVILLE said he had never heard the law, as laid down by Lord Lyndhurst, questioned. He wished to know whether the Govern- ment intended to alter the instructions to our naval officers before communicating with the United States.

Lord MALMFSBURY said that Lord Granville had omitted to say that the American Government not only objected to the right of search, but had always asserted their right to maintain their own police. The instructions remain precisely as they were, but they have been suspended during negotiations. The American flag will be respected under all circumstances. The Americans have increased their cruisers, and had promised, during that period of inactivity, to do all they could to vindicate the honour of the American flag, which has been for some time prostituted to the purposes of the slave-trade.

THE EiEcruyar BILL.

The Corrupt Practices Prevention Act Continuance Bill was read a third time and passed on Monday. It experienced great opposition to the last. Mr. HENRY BERKELEY, denouncing the bill from a ballot point of view, as a source of intimidation and bribery, moved that it should be read a third time that day six weeks. Mr. ABEL SMITH de- scribed it as retrograde ; Mr. Thomas DUNCOMBE said it would _prove very expensive to candidates ; Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought it would have been better to have proposed a mere continuance bill. Mr. ROE- BUCK said although the bill provided that electors might be conveyed to the poll it did not provide that they might be conveyed home again. This will cause doubts and litigation. Mr. Rica said the bill legalized treating. (Cries of "No I") Yes ; treating to a ride.

Mr. Wurresine and Mr. WaLroLe defended the alterations in the bill as a declaration of the law on a point heretofore uncertain.

On a division the third reading was carried by 93 to 60. Mr. Os- BORNE then divided the House on the question that the bill should pass —carried by 92 to 59. The bill passed.

The bill was read a second time in the House of Lords on Tuesday. Earl GRANVILLE, strongly objecting to the clause legalizing the carriage of voters to the poll as a provision for facilitating bribery, put it to the Government whether it would not be reasonable to pass a mere con- tinuance bill, especially as so many Peers—among others, Lord Brougham, Lord Lyndhurst, and Lord St. Leonards—who took an interest in the question were absent, and as the Government had promised a comprehen- sive bill next session. This request was supported by the Duke of NEWCASTLE, the Duke of Soateesrr, and Lord El3URY, but Lord DERBY, defending the clause as reasonable and only just to voters, would not grant their demand, and so the bill was read a second time.

The bill passed through Committee without alteration ; but on the mo- tion that the report be received, Lord EBURY moved the omission of the fiEd clause, which enacts that a candidate may provide vehicles for the conveyance of electors to the poll but shall not give them money to pay for their conveyance. The clause is uncalled for. The Earl of HARD• WICKE Said the clause was intended to settle the state of law on the question. Lord CAMPBELL said that far from removing doubts on the point of law the clause would increase them. Earl Grtarrvri.i.e described the measure as premature and ill-considered. But on a division the re- port was ordered to be received by 43 to 23.

ITNrvEmerries (SeorLAND) BILL.

On the consideration of the Lords' Amendments to this bill, Mr. DUNLOP moved that the amendment to leave out clause 3 should be dis- agreed from. [This clause abolished the test heretofore applied to all theological professors.] He complained that clauses to which the late Lord Advocate Inglis had assented should be altered by the Government in another place. The motion was supported by Sir JAMES GRAHAM, Mr. Rossucx, and Lord PALMERSTON ; and carried without a division.

Clause 26, the object of which was to do away with all distinctions among the professors of the University and College of Glasgow, but providing at the same time that no claim was thereby given to any par- ticipation in the income or emoluments already appropriated to existing

chairs in the University and College, was also restored to the bill. These amendments have been assented to by the Lords. THE WELLINGTON MONUMENT.

Mr. STUART WORTLEY in calling attention to the course pursued by the Government in reference to the Wellington monument, said that he was not actuated by any hostile spirit. He agreed that the model of Mr. Stephens, which had been selected from those exhibited in the competi- tion, was the only one that could have been chosen. He concurred in the change of site—that now chosen, a chapel in St. Paul's being admirably suited for the purpose. But what he complained of was, that the Government had selected not the artist who had obtained the first prize, but one who had obtained the sixth, and that this had been done although the site had been completely changed. He thought it was open for those artists who had previously exhibited, to say that had they known the extent of the space which it is now proposed to allot to the monument, they would have produced better models. Lord John Manners seemed to think he was bound to employ some one of the artists who exhibited, but Mr. Wortley did not so read the terms under which they had competed. On the contrary he thought that the competing artists could not have fairly complained had none of the prize models been accepted. Mr. Wornagy argued rather against competition, and urged that a noble emulation should be encouraged among artists in such a case. He moved a reso- lution based upon his speech, proposing that a limited number of artists should be employed to furnish models with special reference to the site and that they should be remunerated for their labour. Mr. HOPE opposed the proposition. Why have a third questionable and expensive competition ? Mr. Stephens's model exhibited true genius, and Lord John Manners has arrived at a true decision. Mr. Corrixonsit took the same view. Lord JOHN MANNERS defended the course adopted. He had obtained the most valuable advice and had conferred with per- sons competent to arrive at a decision. If the motion were adopted, everything would be thrown into confusion. If the House did not interfere, the Government would be able to erect a monument worthy alike of the great man whom it will commemorate and the building in which it is placed. Mr. COWPER said, that Lord John Manners had omitted to notice the point that the monument to be erected was not the monument competed for. All the designs sent in were different from what they would have been if they had known of the new site. He hoped that Mr. Stephens's design would not be hastily selected, but that sculptors of eminence would be consulted before further steps were taken. Mr. STIRLING con- curred in the course taken by Lord John Manners, but hoped that Mr. Stephens had been selected because he had produced a design of merit and might be expected to produce a better. He hoped his prize design would not be adopted, for the erection of a monument consisting of a dome and canopy, and a horse on the top, in the cathedral of St. Paul's would be a most disastrous exploit. Lord Er.cao took an unfavourable view of the course taken by the Government, and Mr. MexarroN MILNES recommended that the artists of all countries should be recommended to exhibit models simply to show the best possible monument that could be produced. On a division the motion was negatived by 44 to 26.

THE THAMES BL.—On the motion of the Earl of.Deany the Metropo- lis Local Management Act Amendment Bill was read a second time on Tuesday. His explanation of its provisions drew forth a speech from the Duke of NEWCASTLE, who reminded Lord Derby when he took credit for giving assent to no scheme in particular, that practically Parliament will assent to that particular scheme which the Metropolitan Board is pledged to undertake; and that while he boasted of having recourse to the popular Finciple, he had adopted the very minimum of that principle in the bill. However, the bill will render necessary the establishment of municipal in- stitutions for the whole of the metropolis. He regretted that it gave powers to the City authorities to interfere in regard to the construction of the sewers.

Miriam COLUMBIA.—Many exceptions have been taken to. the name of our new colony, west of the Rocky Mountains—New Caledonia. On the second reading of the Government of New Caledonia Bill in the House of Lords, the Earl of CALWARVON said that it was the name given in the oldest maps, and was used by Humboldt in speaking of the territory ; but that the Queen has signified her pleasure that henceforth the colony shall be known as " British Columbia."

COPYRIOHT.—Lord LYNDHURST presented on Monday, a petition, from the Society of Arts, the Royal Institution of British Artists, and a great number of artists, praying for an extension and amendment of the law of copyright. He mentioned several cases in which copies of pictures had been surreptitiously taken, and the copies sold as the original. There are dealers in spurious copies who employ inferior artists to carry on the fraud. Among the cases he cited were these : a lady of very large fortune, who is remarkable for the admirable manner in which she applies it, purchased a picture from an artist for 600/., on the understanding that it should not be copied ; and she was very much astonished on going to the Manchester Ex- hibition a few years afterwards to find there a painting which, with the exception of some of the subordinate details, was an exact copy of her own. One gentleman with whom I have communicated upon the subject says, that he has known as many as seventeen copies made from one picture. noble Marquis purchased from the Exhibition a picture of some merit, called "Second Class—The Departure," for which he paid a considerable sum. He was asked to allow it to be engraved, and with his usual kindness and fondness for the arts, he consented. Some time afterwards he found that while it had been in the hands of the engraver it had been copied, and the copy sold as the original at a sale in London. A naval officer, whose novels and writings of that sort are very popular sent two pictures to be lined. They were detained a long time, and when he went to inquire after them the man to whom he had intrusted them said, that his workshop was not there—it was at a place some miles off. The officer went to this workshop, but he did not find his pictures. The servant there said that they were at another place a mile or two off, but, seeing a ladder slung under a trap-door, he ran up it, opened the door, and in the loft to which it gave access found his pictures, surrounded by copies, three or four of which were completed, and two or three more still in progress. He suggested that the whole sub- ject should be investigated by a Select Committee. HARBOURS OF REPUGE.—On the motion of Mr. WILSON, it VMS ordered that an address should be presented to the Queen, praying for the appoint- ment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the recommendations of the Select Committee upon Harbours of refuge. The Committee recommends that harbours of refuge should be erected between the Pentland Forth and the Firth of Forth, between St. Abb's and Flamborough Head, between the Land's End and the Bristol Channel, and on certain parts of the coast of Ireland.