POSTSCRIPT. SATURDAY.

In the House of Commons last night, a marked progress was made with the Oath of Abjuration Bill and the Police Bill.

In Committee on the Oath of Abjuration Bill, Sir FREDERICK Tits- WOE; complaining that Mr. Gibson had not raised a direct issue, but wished to remove the Jewish disabilities on pretence of getting rid of the obsolete portions of the oath as it stands, moved a series of amend- ments, which would remove the obsolete portions only. But he did not press them, and they were negatived without a division.

Lord Joan Romani, thought it desirable to have some positive clause containing an oath securing the Protestant succession. He therefore moved the following clauses.

" That in lieu of the oath of abjuration, and of the assurance set forth and prescribed by the said recited act or any other act, the following oath shall be substituted, which shall be entitled An oath for securing the Protestant succession to the Crown as by law established,' and shall be in the words following, that is to say—' I, A.B., do faithfully promise to maintain, sup- port, ancedefend, to the utmost of my power, the succession of the Crown ; ' which succession, by an act entitled An Act for the further Limitation of the Crown, and better securing the Rights and Liberties of the Subject,' is and stands limited to the Princess Sophia, Electress and Duchess Dow- ager of Hanover, and the heirs of her body, being Protestants. So help me God.'

" And every statutory enactment now in force with respect to the Oath of Abjuration or the assurance hereby abolished shall henceforth apply to the oath hereby substituted, in the same manner as if such last-mentioned oath had been expressly mentioned or referred to in and by such statutory enact- ments, instead of the oath of abjuration and the assurance hereby abolished.

"Every person permitted by the said act of his late Majesty King William IV. to make his affirmation instead of the oath of abjuration and assurance, shall, in lieu of the oath hereby substituted, and of the affirmation contained in the last-mentioned act, make his solemn affirmation in the following words; is to say—' I, A.B., being one of the people called Quakers, [or one of persuasion of the people called Quakers, or of the 'United Brethren called Moravian, as the case may be do solemnly promise, that I will be true and faithful to the succession of the Crown ; which succession, bj- an act entitled An Act for the further Limitation of the Crown, and the bet- ter securing of the Rights and Liberties of the Subject,' is and stands limited to the Princess Sophia, Electress and Duchess Dowager of Hanover, and the heirs of her body, being Protestants.' " Mr. NAP/ER opposed the clause.. There was some smart discussion on the " sham " character of the opposition, between Mr. NEWDEGATE and Sir FREDERICK TERMER on one side, and Mr. ROEBUCK supported by Mr. HENRY DRUISMOND on the other. if. ROEBUCK wanted to know how the opponents of the bill could think it necessary to retain wordiin the oath of abjuration which are not in the oath ofallegiance ? Lord PAL- MERSTON gave his cordial assent to Lord John Russell's clause ; not that he thought any omission of the Act of Settlement in the oath would impair the force of that law, but because it is fitting an acknowledgment of the Act of Settlement should continue part of the engagement under- taken at the table.

The clauses and the preamble were agreed to without a division, and the House resumed.

On the consideration of the report on the Police (Boroughs and Coun- ties) Bill, Mr. BENTINCK raised a discussion, by proposing a clause fix- ing the minimum police force at one per two thousand in counties, and one per thousand in boroughs. Sir Gaoaos GREY said, ho bad original- ly been in favour of a minimum limit ; but reflection convinced him that if a minimum were adopted those districts in which the police exceed the proportion proposed might reduce the force to that amount on the ground that Parliament thought it sufficient. Clause withdrawn. Lord LOVAINE moved a clause vesting the appointment, government, and dismissal of the borough police force, in the hands of the head consta- ble ; but he met with great opposition, and withdrew the clause.

The bill was ordered to be reprinted, and read a third time next Fri- day.

Several questions were put to Ministers on the motion for the adjomin- ment of the House.

In reply to Colonel NORTH, Mr. PEEL stated that Government has resolved to give gratuitous education at Sandhurst to a certain number of the sons of officers killed in the service of the country. Parliament will have to furnish the funds.

The Marquis of BLANDFORD asked whether, in consequence of the state of health of several of the Prelates of the Church, who are un- happily disabled from attending to their dioceses, it is the intention of the Government to take any steps to put in force the powers of the act 26th of Henry VIII. chap. 14, "For the Nomination and Consecration of Suffragans within this Realm" ; or, if not, whether the subject is still one which occupies the attention of her Majesty's Government with a view to providing a suitable remedy ? The act referred to is a sleeping statute : it enables a Bishop who requires the assistance to nominate two persons, of whom the Crown selects one for consecration by the Arch- bishop. Such person might hold two benefices and perform all the duties attaching to them, in addition to those which might be delegated to him by the Bishop who appointed him.

Mr. HADFIELD interposed " a supplemental question." Did Govern- ment intend to relieve the Bishops from the pressure of their Pediment- ary duties ? Lord PALMERSTON, in reply to Lord Blandford, said that the subject is beset with difficulties ; but it has engaged the attention of the Govern- ment, and they will endeavour to find a remedy.

" With reference to the supplemental question, which has been put to me by my honourable Mend the Member for Sheffield, I must say that I do not at all concur in the opinion he has expressed that the Bishops are out of their place in taking their seats in the other House of Parliament ; and I beg to inform my honourable friend, that it is not the intention of her Majesty's Government to make any change in that respect. I hope no honourable gentleman will put any further questions to me, at least upon this subject; because honourable gentlemen must recollect, that when ques- tions are put to any .honourable Member, and he has once answered them, he cannot speak again on the same subject. I hope,. therefore, if any other questions are put, they will be upon some other subject." (Laughter.) In reply to Mr. THOMAS Denman; apprehensive of broken windows on the 29th, Sir GEORGE GBEY said, that no order had been given for a general illumination—Government has no power to give such an order. It is neither wished nor expected that there should be a general illumi- nation, in the sense of an illumination of the houses of all private per- sons. It will be the duty of the Police to give all the protection in their power to private property.

The House of Peers occupied itself with a conversation on the ornaments, or rather the disfigurements, of the Metropolis. Lord Revenswowrit opened with a long complaint of the defects of St. James's Palace,— without, the paltry buildings on the East side of the 'central gateway, filled with cold bleak windows, and surmounted by chimney-stacks and pots that would not be put on a farm-house ; within, the reverse of ac- commodation for ladies attending drawingrooms. He hoped that im- provements would be made when the road is opened from Pall Mall into the Park. Touching on the statues of the Metropolis, he said there is a good statue of Lord George Bentinck in Cavendish Square, but it is hidden from sight by Duke William of Cumberland- " the figure of a fat man on a fat horse" ; the statue of the Duke of Kent at the end of Portland Place would never be seen unless carefully looked for—it appears to be "a small black man hiding him- self among the trees." It would be a proper compliment to the Queen to remove the statue to one of the courts of Buckingham Palace. He also complained that valuable pictures—Mr. Turner's, for instance—are stowed away in inaccessible places. Several Peers added their complaints. Among them, Lord Sr. Laciness':A said, that the beauty of Somerset House is disfigured by stacks of red chimneys, which for years he had been trying to get removed. In Palace Yard, they had run up a shed for horses like a coal-shed. The Earl of N[ALDLESBURY was eloquent on the dangerous dilapidation of the Foreign Office, and its total want of accommodation for the Minister.

'The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that the Government are anxious to provide a place for Turner's pictures. A plan has been agreed upon for the concentration of the Public Offices, and is about to be laid before a Committee of the House of Commons.

We are to have a blaze of "rejoicings" next week, and Pediment intends to take holiday. On Monday Lord PALMERSTON is to move that the House at its rising on Tuesday do adjourn until Friday.