27 MARCH 1852, Page 9

POSTSCRIPT.

In the Parliament last night, the subjects which occupied most time were the explanation in the House of Commons of the Charitable Trusts Bill by the Arroaarair-Gatczasr, and an adverse debato on the second reading of the Foreign Deserters Bill, moved by Mr. HENLEY. The first measure was explained by the Arrormst-GaNzaat, before Wing into Committee on it, to be founded simply on the report of the 'table Trusts Commission issued in 1849 ; the credit of it was there- fore wholly due to the late Government.

It proposed to establish a Board of five Commissioners, of whom two were to be paid—and Sir Frederick Thesiger doubted whether, from the great pressure of business, there must not be three paid Commissioners. This Board to be strictly a board, and not, as proposed in former unsuenessful measures, a court. The Board would be for the purpose of supervision, of control, and of advice: and it was proposed that no suit or proceedings should be instituted in respect to any breach of trust, or of any matter con- nected with these charities, without the consent of the Commissioners. As to the jurisdiction of legal courts over charities, in respect to charities with incomes under 301., it was proposed to give jurisdiction to the County Courts, or the district Courts of Bankruptcy ; and as to charities with in- comes between 30/. and 100/., to give jurisdiction to the Masters in Chancery, not compelling parties, as now, to go by petition to the Court before they could be sent to the Master. The Commissioners might check and stop pro- ceedings taken at their instance, but the Attorney-General might commence or proceed independently of them. The cost of the machinery would be raised by a tax of 2d. in the pound sterling, provided that no charity should Pay more than 501. • and that rate would yield 8500/. a year. When it was stated that since 1800 there had been 135 private bills to regulate and con- trol charities, at a cost of 81,000/., and that 600,0001. had been recovered by proceedings taken in the courts, the prospective benefits of the measure might be guessed. The measure was objected to by Alderman THOMPSON and Sir ROBRRT Nous' on behalf of well-managed London charities. It was supported by the Law-officers of the late Government, and by Alderman SIDNEY and Mr. Gourainnx; and it went into and passed through Committee.

The Foreign Deserters Bill was attacked by Mr. CHISHOLM ANSTEY, and some other Members, as nn accommodation of our laws to meet the purposes of despotic foreign powers. After explanations by Mr. HENLEY and Lord PALMERSTON, that the measure originated with the late Govern- ment, in order to procure reciprocal advantage for British interests, and engagements that it should be revised in Committee, the bill was road a second time.

The St. Alban's Disfranchisement Bill was read a third time, and passed. The House granted the Ordnance and Commissariat votes ; and for- warded the Exchequer Bills Bill a stage.

In the House of Lords, the Earl of DERBY stated that the Lord Chan- cellor of Ireland thinks it will be practicable to engraft on the Irish Court of Chancery some of the simple machinery of the Encumbered Estates Court : he is considering and contriving the matter.

Lord Briononara met a check to the progress of his bill for shortening the interval between the dissolution and reassembling of Parliament ; Lord CaaNwortur Lord REDESDALE, and the Loan CHANCELLOR, (as at present advised,) ;link the bill unnecessary. But Lord Baorronesi pressed on, and got his bill read a second time. He has shortened the proposed interval from thirty-five days to twenty-eight days.