31 MAY 1862, Page 5

ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.

Moues or Loans, Monday, May 26. —Slave Trade : Convention with the United Slates: Lord Brougham's question.— National Education in Ireland : Lord Clan- carty's motion. Tuesday, May 27th.—Act of Uniformity Amendment Bill: Withdrawal of motion for third reading.

Moritz or. Coaaoss, Monday, May 26.—Highways Bill: Committee.—Merchant

Second Shipping Acts Amendment Bill: Committee.—County Surveyors (Ireland) Bill : reading.

Tuesday, May 27th.—Law of Patents: Sir Hugh Cairn's motion.—The Ballot : Leave given to bring in Bill.—Roman Catholic Pensioners: Mr. Hennessey's Bill.— Maynooth College: Mr. Whylley's motion. Wednesday, May 28.—Fisheries (Ireland) Bill: Second reading.—Juries' Bill; Second reading. —Elections for Counties Bill : Second reading. Thursday, May 29.—Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill: Committee.—Persia and Affghan- &tan : Lord Palmerston's statement • IN the House of Lords, on Monday night, 'Lord BROUGHAM, while congratulating Government upon the conven- tion recently concluded with the United States on the slave trade, asked if some arrangement could not be made by which right of search, now con- ceded within thirty leagues of the coasts of Africa and Cuba, could not be further extended to within thirty leagues of the island of Porto Rico ?

Earl GRANVILLE replied that as the United States Government were thoroughly in earnest on the subject, he had every reason to believe they would listen favourably to any suggestion such as that made by Lord Brougham.

'The Earl of CLANCARTY, in moving an address for a copy of a me- morial from the Bishop of Down and Connor to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, relative to the use of the Holy Scriptures in Irish National Schools, complained of the evident intention of the Commissioners to work out, bit by bit, everything relating to religion in their system of instruction.

After some discussion, the motion was agreed to.

Lord Gait/m..1LE, in reply to Earls Grey and Derby, fixed the order of the day for going into Committee on the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill for Friday.

In the House of Commons, Sir G. GREY (Home Secretary) moved that the House should go into 'Committee on the Highways Bill. - • A long discussion ensued, all the clauses of the bill being ultimately adopted.

The Merchant Shipping Acts Amendment Bill also passed through Com- mittee, and the House shortly afterwards adjourned.

In the House of Lords on Tuesday night,

Lord EBURT moved the second reading of the Act of Uniformity Amend- ment Bill. Two years ago he had moved for a royal commission to inquire into the Liturgy and the Acts of Uniformity, with a view to adopting such changes as might be requisite after the lapse of two centuries. Though the motion was negatived it met with support, which had led him to introduce two bills at the commencement of the session : the first, to give greater elasticity to the celebration of divine service than the present rubric allowed; and the second, which he then moved should be read a second time, to relax the extreme severity of the terms of subscription imposed by the Act of 1662. Besides that Act of Uniformity, however, the Act of 1st Elizabeth was still in force, with all the tremendous penalties of the age, and requiring an " unfeigned assent and consent to everything contained in and prescribed by the Book of Common Prayer," on admission to a benefice. The effect of this subscription had been to drive out hundreds of excellent and valuable ministers when first enacted, and to keep out thousands of similar ministers ever since, while no compensating advan- tages whatever had been received by the Church. Neither piety, unity, or even uniformity had been really promoted, and he called upon the House to do away with a superfluous form of subscription, and thereby promote that best of all things, Christian harmony.

lord DUNGANNON thought the measure would be productive of nothing but evil, and moved its being read a second time that day six months.

The Bishop of LONDON pointed out that, as the declaration proposed to be abolished applied solely to persons taking possession of benefices, and that people in the highest position in the Chura'a—even bishops—had never been called upon to make it, so that the number relieved by the bill would be comparatively but small. He did not believe at all in the gradual de- terioration of the standard of candidates for ordination, and was convinced that the proposed change would not really conciliate any Dissenters. He should vote for the amendment.

After some remarks from the Bishop of ST. DAVID'S and Lord Lyrret- TON, The Earl of SHAFTESBURY hoped the motion would not be pressed to a division, as the clergy and public were hardly yet prepared for a decision of the question. At the same time, it was one of vital importance to the Church, and he believed that it would be hard to maintain the integrity of the Church unless something in the way of liturgical revision, and some- thing analogous to the proposal before the House was passed.

Earl RUSSELL joined in hoping that Lord Ebury would not press the motion. The question was one which it was desirable should be fully dis- cussed at the Universities, and wherever men took an interest in the well- being of the Church. Such discussion would be conducive to its peace- able settlement, and he hoped it would be left to that discussion for the present.

The Bishop of OXFORD denied the alleged necessity for any measure of relief, and ridiculed the arguments and facts brought forward by Lord Ebury. Unless their Lordships were prepared to give up the principle of subscription entirely they could not pass the bill before them.

After some further debate the bill was, by leave, withdrawn. In the House of Commons,

Sir H. Camas (Belfast) moved for an address for a commission to in- quire into the working of the law of patents. There were 14,000 patents now in existence, representing an enormous amount of property, and the views taken on the subject of the Patent Laws, which affected that property, were very diverse. Since the Exhibition of 1851 there had been a great demand for the reconsideration of those laws. Mr. Ricardo had given notice of a motion for a committee of the House to inquire into the policy of the Patent Laws, but although their policy was a very arguable question, he thought investigations of the existing system, with a view to improve- ments, were preferable to the long series of duel': which would arise from a discussion of the higher and broader question. He then enumerated a number of the working imperfections of the present system, especially pointing out the existence of immense numbers of useless and trivial patents ; patents taken out in consequence of the ignorance of workmen, who were not aware of the previous existence of their invention; patents created or bought up by tradesmen as a kind of network to entrap unwary rivals in trade ; and patents taken out merely as advertisements. Other evils connected with the system were the cost of obtaining patents, the still greater -expense of protecting them against infringement, and the incompe- tency of the tribunal, to which recourse must be had in disputed cases, and numerous minor inconveniences.

Lord STANLEY (Kings Lynn) having seconded the motion,

The Arroaster-GENERAL said he sincerely hoped that the proposed Com. mission would effect a great improvement in the present law; and, after some further discussion, the motion was agreed to.

Mr. BERKELEY (Bristol) then, in a House of less than forty members, moved for leave to bring in his annual Ballot Bill, stating that, "as the arguments he had heretofore advanced were unanswerable, he should simply place the question in the Speaker's hands."

After the question was put, there was a large influx of members, and Lord Palmerston rose to speak, but was, just too late. A division was called for, and the motion was carried by 83 to 50, amid great cheering, the whole affair being, apparently, the result of a preconcerted arrangement among the supporters of the ballot.

Mr. A. SMITH (Truro) then obtained leave to introduce a bill authorizing the use of the ballot at Municipal Elections, the numbers being almost identical with those of the previous division.

Mr. POPE HENNESSEY (King's County) obtained leave to introduce a bill to remedy the grievances of Roman Catholic prisoners, who, as they received their religious instruction under an act passed before the period of emancipation, were not allowed to assemble for religious worship within the walls of the prison.

Mr. WHATZLICY (Peterborough) took the opportunity for a few violent remarks on priests and Roman Catholics in general, and was severely cen- sured for so doing by

Mr. BRIGHT (Birmingham), who could not understand "the wisdom, patriotism, generosity, or Christianity" of any member of that House who could make so violent and abusive an attack on 6,000,000 of his fellow- subjects.

Leave was subsequently given to introduce the bill.

After some further business, the House adjourned.

In the same House, on Wednesday, After a rather lengthy conversation the bill was read a second time.

In the same house on Thursday,

In reply to Mr. GRIFFITH (Devizes),

Lord PaLstanarost stated that the recent disputes in Affghanistan were simply between different States of that country, and he had no reason to believe that any breach of the treaty of 1857, excluding Persia from any interference in Affghanistan, had taken place.

The remainder of the sitting was taken up with the discussion of the Poor Relief (Ireland) BilL