POSTSCRIPT.

SATURDAY.

The Peers took the lead, with the help of Lord Stanley, last night, in attempting a great improvement in the mode of conducting public business in Parliament. Lord STANLEY introduced a bill, which he explained in a very lucid and temperate speech. He described the hindrances which obstruct the progress of legislation in Parliament, in the earlier part of the session,—the lamentable facility of diction in the other House, until it is checked by the hot weather; the custom of im- mensely protracting debates; the amount of legislative improvements expected from the hands of Government; the tendency of Ministers to alter bills for the purpose of conciliating opposition; the incoherent amendments, which make it only matter of wonder when bills escape from Committee in decent English. Thus it is that measures, like Richard, are " Sent before their time Into this breathing world scarce half made up,

And that so lamely and unfashionably,"

that if dogs do not "bark," lawyers carp at them; and judges, forced to make sense where no sense is, find that at the conception

" Chaos sat supreme,

And by decision more embroiled the fray. There is less "discussion " on Scotch bills, and Scotch business bears a far larger proportion to Scotch speaking than is the case with English business.

Of 91 printed bills, (excluding routine bills and private bills,) brought to the Lords from the Commons in 1845, there were sent up in February, 1; in March, 5; in April, 12; in May, 4; in June, 9; in July, 59; in August 1. Of 79 bills J

in 1846, the number that came up by the end of June was 28; July, 15; in Au- gust, 36. In 1847, of 97 bills, 2 came up in January; in February, 6; in March, 7; in April, 10; in May 15; in June, 28; in July, 29-48 passed within the last six weeks, 28 were sent up within the last three weeks. The hasty legislation causes errors; after the passing defects are discovered; and it is necessary to in- troduce acts to amend acts.

Objections exist to the introduction of bills in the House of Lords, especial the jealousy and privileges of the Commons. It may be a question whether the Speaker and his Committee of Advice might not usefully consider how far the privileges of the Commons could be relaxed in that respect.

But to prevent this drought of business in the House of Lords at the beginning of the session and this deluge at the latter part, Lord Stanley proposed what he admitted to be an innovation. It was, to grant to that House, of course by an act of Parliament, the power, when they saw fit, upon the receipt of a bill passed by the other House of Parliament, and previously to the reference of the bill to a Com- mittee of their Lordships' House, to adjourn the consideration of the measure from the period of the session at which they could not deliberately enter upon its Con- sideration, to an early day to be named at the commencement of the next mai= of Parliament; and that tbe House should then be permitted to proceed with the bill as if the prorogation had not intervened, and as if the bill had just been seat from the other House of Parliament. He would also venture to suggest, that with respect to all measures so postponed, their Lordships might have ttZe; of referring them to some competent legal adviser for the purpose of e

their technical phraseology, and the bearing which one clause would hart uril another, as well as their bearing upon other acts, and more especially receriterla

of parliament; thus furnishing their Lordships with a legal report upon the bear- ings of every bill so suspended. He would lay the bill on the table, to be considered during the Easter recess. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE expresed perfect concurrence in the principle of the measure. So did Lord BROUGHAM and the Duke of RICHMOND. Lord REDESDALE was much alarmed at the innovation.

The bill was read a first time.

The House of Commons met yesterday at noon, and, after the disposal of some minor business, proceeded with the Crown and Government Security Bill. There was a long discussion, or rather series of discussions, on the /notion to go into Committee, and on several clauses of the bill: but the objections, and the arguments on both sides, were of precisely the same nature as those already canvassed with so much perseverance; the speakers were the same; and if we were to attempt an outline of the discussion, we should only have to repeat that which we have already placed before the reader with considerable fulness. The distinguishing characteristic of the proceed- ings was the unflinching support that Government received from an over- whelming majority. The motion for going into Committee was affirmed by 287 to 33; Mr. MOWATT'S amendment on the third clause, to omit the words " by open and advised speaking," was negatived by 188 to 79; Mr. HUME'S motion to report progress—far on in the night—was negatived by 305 to 48; Mr. Waser.Ev's motion to the same effect, by 270 to 39; the third clause was carried by 242 to 50; the fourth clause, authorizing a plurality of charges, by 221 to 33. The remaining clauses were adopted; the bill to be reported on Monday.

In the discussion of the third clause, Sir GEonoic GREY moved the following proviso as an addition; but it was obstinately contested on va- rious grounds, and ultimately postponed-

., Provided always, and be it enacted, that no person shall be prosecuted by virtue of this act for any words spoken, unless information of such words be given upon oath to one or more justice or justices of the peace within three days after such words spoken, and the prosecution of such offence be within three months after such information and within two years after the passing of this act; and that no person shall be convicted by virtue of this act for any such words spoken but by the oath of two credible witnesses." Some amusement was created when Mr. HUME, having made his motion three times without its being noticed from the chair, exclaimed, " Why do you not put the motion? Are you asleep, Sir?" Mr. BERNAL replied, that it was not competent for him to get up until Mr. Hume had sat down. Mr. HUME said, he had sat down, twice. Without further remark, the Chairman put the question. Mr. Plums,. HOwARD hoped that Mr. Hume would retract the observation he had made: but the further progress of this solemn question was lost in a roar of laughter.

The Loan ADVOCATE obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the Lunacy-law in Scotland.

The House adjourned at a quarter to two o'clock.