Ethan mill uttiringo in furliannt.

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS, OF Tilt w Bra.

Rom es Loans. Monday, June 21. Government of India ; Lord Lansdovrne's Questioa—The Coolie Trade ; the Bishop of Oxford's Motion, Tuesday, June 22. Probates and Letters of Administration Act Amendment Bill read a third time and passed—Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Act Amend. meat Bill read a third time and passed.' Thursday, June 24. The Regina Coll; Lord Malmesbury's Statement—Transfer of Real Estate Bill withdrawn—Oathe ; Consideration of Lords' Reasons post- poned.

Friday. June 25. The State of the Thames ; the Duke of Buccleuch's Question —Colonization .of India; Lord Albemarle's Miltion for Papers.

Moon or COMMONS. Monday, June 21. Commissioners for Exhibition 1851 Bill committed—Paper Duty ;,. Mr. Gibson's Motion—Supply; Education Eau. mates—Playgrounds Bill read afthird time and passed—Joint-Stock Compaidee Acts Amendment Bill read a third time and passed.

Tuesday, June 22. Local Government Bill in Committee—Rewards to Members: Lord Hotham's Motion—Collection of Taxes ; Mr. Lindsay's Motion—cheneen Lunatics ; Mr. Tite's Motion—Bankruptcy and Insolvency • Lord John Russell's BIA read a first time—County Management Bill read a third 'time and passed—Joist. Stock Banking Companies Bill read a third time and passed. Wednesday. June 23. Registration of Partnerships Bill withdrawn—Election Committees Scrutiny Bill withdrawn. Thursday, June 24. London Corporation Regulation Bill; debate on second reading adjourned—Government of India Bill read a second time-8elo and Transfer of Land (Ireland) Bill in Committee. Friday. June 25.11 Universities (Scotland) Bill in Committee—State'of the Thames ; Mr. 0, Stanley's Questions—Governmenk:of India (No. 3) Bill in Cons. mittee—Commissioners for Exhibition 1851 Bill read a third time and passed.

TIME-TABLE.

Sittings this Week, 4; Time, 8520m Sittings this Week, 8; Time, 471s 5m — this Session, 69 ; 1395 40m -- this Session 91; — 61611 67m GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.

The Earl of MAL3EESBIIRT replied on Monday to the question put on Friday, by the Marquis of Lansdowne. On the score of "income. nience," he declined to lay on the table a copy of the Indian resolutions lately discussed in the House of Commons. If they were debated while the bill is before the other House extreme inconvenience would result. The Marquis of LAsaiDowwz, Earl GRANTII.LE and Earl GREY ex- pressed their fears that the bill would not reach the House of Lords in time to meet with that consideration it deserved, especially as many Peers capable of bringing valuable information to bear upon the subject would be absent. The House of Lords has not been well treated by the Government in this matter.

On Thursday Lord STANLEY moved the second reading of the India Bill (No. 3) and explained its provisions. The plan he adopted was to state the nature of the clauses and then the reasons that led to their adoption. This course necessarily led to the repetition of arguments al- ready much employed in previous discussions. The bill provides that the government of India shall be transferred from the Company to the Crown and the administration of the affairs of India by a responsible Minister, assisted by a Council. The Council will be cons- posed fifteen members., appointed for life. Seven of these will be elected by the Court of Directors from among themselves.; eight will be appointed by the Crown. The selection by the Directors will take place within four- teen days, the nomination by the Crown within thirty days, after the pas- sing of the act. The object of this provision is to enable the Crown, if it think fit, to select as its nominees any Directors not elected by their col- leagues. The vacancies will be filled up by an alternate nomination by the Crown and election by the Council. [.re Lord Stanley defended at length the mode of election, showing that the inconveniences of self-election are checked by the power of the Crown to nominate alternate members.] A majority of the Council must have resided or served ten years in India. Mem- bers of Council will be prohibited from serving in Parliament. Their salaries will be 12001. a year. After ten years' service, they will be entitled to a retiring pension of 500/., and after fifteen in service to a pension of 800/. The course of procedure, not embodied n the bill, but intended to be adopted, was then explained. There will be six committees; in these committees all correspondence with one exception, will originate. If judged to be of sufficient importaxice, either by the committees or Secretary of State, this correspondence will be sent before the whole Council. The one exception will relate to the business now " nominally " transacted by the Secret Committee but in reality by the Minister. It is proposed that there shall be no Secret Committee, but that the Minister shall deal with all that busi- ness upon his own authority. He thought that the occasions will be rare when the Minister will act on that authority. How far shall the Council be a check upon the Minister? The Council will have a "moral influence and control." The Minister's decision will be, as it is practically now, final on all matters, but all the members of Council will be empowered to pub- licly. and formally protest, and if they disapprove of the course taken by the Minister they may compel him to record his reasons in writing. As to finance, the check upon expenditure proposed by .Lord Palmerston—the consent of four members—is inadequate and illusory. The beet check will be the regular, periodical, and minute publication of Indian ac- counts. The Council must be consulted on finance. It can never require Becresy. Any member may protest and Parliament may call for his protest. The clauses relating to the Army, he admitted, are obscurely drawn. It is intended that the civil service shall remain open to competition, and that in addition the scientific corps shall also be thrown open. One tenth of the other military cadetships will go to the sons of civil or military servants in India ; the remainder, as nearly as possible, will be disposed of as it is now. Any eattempt now to reorganize the Indian army would be premature, but it is intended to prepare for it by issuing a Commission to inquire into the whole subject. The heads of this inquiry will include the relative propor- tions of the European and the native force, the question whether the European army should be a local army or one for general service, whether exchanges from one branch to another are possible, and generally on what terms the transfer of the Company's army to the Crown should take place. A Commission will be sent out to investigate the financial state of 'mils- In conclusion, he said—" I do not propose this bill as a measure to remedy all the abuses and grievances of which complaints have been made with re- gard to our Indian administration. I propose it simply for what it is—as a reform which, I believe, will lead to other reforms, and without which those other reforms could not be so easily or conveniently carried out. I propose it as a necessary and desirable simplification of a system of government which all persons acknowledge to be complicated and cumbrous, and as the

Monday Tuesday Wednesday No sitting. Thursday 6h . .. Sh 23m Friday 5h . 7h Sm

The Lords.

Hour of Hour of

Meeting. Adjournment. 5h....7isSm

6h . 7h 46m

The Commons.

Hour of Hoar of Meeting. Adjournment. Monday 4h .(m) 19h 45m; Tuesday Noon 411 Om 611 .(m) 17.h 45m Wednesday Noon bh 90so Thursday Noon 35 Enn 65 .(m) Iii 15m Friday Noon ... 411 Om 6h .(;) lb Om

tification of an anomaly which has encitiedd foe long, and which at the waerec nt day can serve no useful purpose. I propose it as the substitution las a provisional form of government of a more permanent and, I believe, more salutary form of administration, and as a measure which will vest the r;o emment of that great dependency of England, India, in the English Dsa, aa will place it under the direct authority of an English Minister, responsible to this House and to the public opinion of England." (Cheers.) M. BRIGHT took the opportunity of making some observations upon sfis general question of India. He admitted that no single step could be ken for the real and permanent improvement of the Indian govern- ment without improving the basis of the government at home. He admitted the necessity of simplifying the government at home, but he • tained that the more important reform lies in the reorganization of the Indian government. He described tlfe cumbrous machinery of Indian administration, as rendering government impossible, a system in which every despatch, however voluminous, must be accompanied by copies of all former correspondence on the subject ; so that in 1845 there was a military despatch with 13,611 pages of collections ; in the Revenue Department much more recently a despatch with 16,263 pages of collections, and one some years back with 46,000 pages. Mr. Bright described the impoverished state of the Indian population under what has been termed civilized and Christian government—an impoverishment which he ascribed to the neglect of public works, bad finance, &c. The city of Manchester has spent more in water supply than the East India Company spent in fourteen years ending 1848 in public works of every kind throughout India. Although 30,000,000/. a year is raised to govern India, there is a permanent deficiency, and the debt of 60,000,0001. is constantly increased by loans. But 30,000,0001. where labour is not worth one twelfth what it will procure in England, is equivalent to more than 300,000,0001. in England. A part of this expenditure Mr. Bright ascribed to the lavish habits of the civil servants, for whose interest the whole system is carried on. He objected to the government through the Governor-General, who can never acquire a knowledge of his

vast dominions. He proposed therefore to abolish that officer and to establish five Presidencies in India, each separate, with capitals at Calcutta, Madras, Bombay, Agra, and Lahore; each Presidency to have its Governor equal in rank, a separate army, separate telegraphic communications with the Indian Office in London. This would render authority commensurate with the practical extent of territory and would promote a constant rivalry for good. As auxiliary measures he would offer in India a general amnesty, would proclaim security of property as complete as in this country, would proclaim perfect recognition of the right of adoption, and perfect freedom for the religions held to be true in India. He believed the announcement of these measures would avail more in restoring tranquillity than the presence of an additional army. The debate lost all interest after this long speech. The official answer to Mr. Bright came from Mr. WurrEsusz. The Opposition was repre-

sented by Mr. VERNON SMITH, who objected to the number of the Coun- cil and the mode of constituting it. Colonel SYKES made some mild criticisms on the bill. Mr. ROEBUCK declared that it would create an irresponsible government. Mr. THOMAS BARDIG withdrew his opposi-

tion.

The bill was read a second time.

THE OATHS BILL.

The second reading of the two bills afflicting the Jews has been post- poned until next week, because Lord Derby is ill. At the same time a section of the House is strongly of opinion that the reasons for insisting on the Lords' Amendments to the Oaths Bill should still be sent to the Commons. These reasons were to have been considered on Thursday ; but on that day Lord MALMESBURY proposed that the order should be postponed until next Thursday, to gave Lord Derby an opportunity of addressing the House. Lord CAMPBELL said he would not offer any opposition to the course just proposed by the noble earl, but he could not but express his regret that it was still intended to send the bill back to the House of Commons with the reasons why their lordships insisted on their amendments. He had most willingly withdrawn all opposition to that course, in the belief that there was an understanding that a compromise was to be come to. He had had a foreboding, however, that there might be a disappoint- ment, and he would still most earnestly implore those of their lordships. who wished to see a settlement of this long-vexed question to consider whether it would not he much better to retain the bill now in their lordships' hands, instead of sending it back to the House of Commons. Earl DESA.HT said he thought the bill ought to go back to the House of Commons with their lordships' opinions upon it to show them that their lordships were not prepared to adopt what appeared to him to be more of a concession than a compromise. If a compromise was to be made, it would be more desirable that it should come from another place. He looked forward with hope that their lordships would continue to maintain, as they had always maintained, the preeminence of Christianity in the Legislature, and that it was not expedient that the enemies of Christianity should be permitted to assist in the legislation of the country.

THE PAPER DUTY AND EDUCATION.

On the motion for going into Committee of Supply (Civil Service Es- timates) on Monday, Mr. linnEu Gnisom moved the following reso- lution as an amendment- " That this House is of opinion that the maintenance of the excise on paper, as a permanent source of revenue, would be impolitic, and that such financial arrangements ought to be made as will enable Parliament to dis- pense with that tax."

Mr. Gibson said he moved the resolution as an amendment, instead of making it a substantive motion, because the paper duty stands in the way of that education for which the House was about to be asked to supply funds. He described himself as overwhelmed with authorities in favour of the motion—Mr. Disraeli, Mr. Gladstone in fact he had no enemy but Sir George Lewis, and perhaps that is too strong a term to apply even to him. He did not ask them to repeal taxes but to contra- dict by a vote the assertion that the paper duty is in itself a " good " source of taxation. Mr. Gibson then entered into the merits of a ques- tion so often exhausted before, and showed how the exciseman obstructs Inanufficture, and restricts our markets ; and how unequally the tax falls upon the public, by pressing the most heavily upon the cheapest and most extensively circulated publications. Mr. Itroaam seconded the motion in a speech crammed with statistics. It was supported by Mr. SALISBURY, Mr. AYRTON, and Mr. COWAN. rises, to see the tax. erased from our fiscal system. He should be glad Mr. DIql? ART T said he should be glad, when a favourable opportunity in a commercial and moral point of view to propose its remission. But he could not assent to that part of the motion referring to future finan- cial arrangements, and suggested that the resolution should terminate with the word impolitic.' The whole of our Customs and Excise duties require severe revision ; during the recess the Government will take the whole of them into consideration, and when Parliament meets again he trusted that Ministers would be able to " offer some suggestion worthy the acceptance of the House." Public expenditure depends on public policy, and he hinted that the foreign policy of the Government would place more means at their disposal for the reduction of taxation, Mr. Ramer said this was a speech that might be expected from any Chancellor of the Exchequer. He supported the motion, and remarked that nobody had been found to defend the tax. Sir GEORGE LEWIS de- nied that he had ever maintained that the paper duty w as abstractedly a " good" tax. Where is there levied a single " good duty " ? When they had a surplus revenue they might consider what tax should be first reduced or abolished. Mr. DEuststomE said the object of this annual motion is to flatter the newspapers. He should like to -quadruple the burden which some call " knowledge taxes." Lord joux RussELL ad- vised Mr. Gibson to assent to Mr. Disraeli's suggestion. Mr. GIBSON did so, and in that curtailed form the resolution was agreed to.

The House then went into Committee of Supply, and Mr. ADDERLEY moved a vote of 563,435/. to defray the expense of public education in Great Britain. Having explained that he had, with the assistance of Mr. Lingen, codified the by-legislation which bears upon the question, Mr. Adderley made his explanation. The whole amount of the vote for public education in Great Britain for the current year is, in round numbers, 663,000/.; of which sum 157,000/. might be considered as being expended under the head of building and furnishing schools ; 400,000/. in training various classes of schoolmas- ters; and 57,000/. in defraying the expenses connected with the manage- ment of those schools and in the payment of the salaries of inspectors. The 157,0001. might again be subdivided into the two sums of 150,0001. for building and 7000/. for the purchase of maps' diagrams, and scientific ap- paratus ; while the 400,0001. might be looked upon as having for its prin- cipal items 230,000/. for the payment of the annual stipends of pupil teachers, &c.; 67,0004 for grants to training, and 22,000/. for grants to in- dustrial schools ; 16,000/. of the remaining sum of 57,0001. to winch he had alluded, being expended upon the maintenance of the establishment in London, and 40,000/. in defraying the cost of inspection. The increase in the present as compared with the vote for last year amounts to 83,0001., and that suns, he might add, might be spread over the whole of the items of the vote with the exception of two—namely, the vote for building, which was the same as that of last year, and the grant for assistant teachers. With regard to the probable extension of the system, and the limits which might be set to the expense which it entailed, he might be permitted to state very briefly the calculation which he had made. We have laid out upon buildings for educational purposes, in the purchase of furniture, &c., about 1,000,000/. from the period when the first grant had been made. That sum might be looked upon as permanent capital, which, at the rate of 6 per cent, would constitute an annual charge on the Treasury of 60,000/. Now, the current expense for public education is, deducting the cost of building and furniture, 500,000/., which, added to the 60,000/. which he had just mentioned, makes the entire annual charge upon the Treasury in connexion with the subject 560,000/. With that amount of expenditure it is sought to. provide for the education of 800,000 children. Now, taking the population of England, Scotland, and Wales at 24,000,000, one-eighth of that number, or 3,000,000, would come within the range of persons requiring education, from which number if one-third were deducted to make allowance for those who would receive their education at private schools, 2,000,000 of children would still be left dependent for the means of instruction upon the national grant. The present rate of expenditure contemplates, as he had said before, the education of 800,000 children ; and, starting from that fact as a basis of calculation, he had no hesitation in saying that, with the reductions which might be effected in the grant for buildings, in that for the maintenance of normal schools, and in other items of expendi- ture, a sum of about 1,000,000/. per annum will be found sufficient to pro- vide for the educational wants of the people, taking the population at the- anmunt at which it at present stands. he discussion on the estimates was abridged by the announcement that the Report of the Commission appointed at the instance of Sir John Pakington would be presented on the following day. There was, con- sequently, a desultory conversation instead of any debate. After this the vote was agreed to, and the House resumed.

THE Lorrnom CORPORATION.

The morning sitting on Thursday was occupied by a discussion on the motion for going into Committee on the London Corporation Regulation

Bill. Mr. ROLT moved, as an amendment, that the bill should be re- ferred back to the Select Committee, with instructions to hear counsel on behalf of the City, and in defence of its rights of property in the dues abolished by the bill. He argued that these tolls and dues are as much property as the estates of individuals. No one would deny that the would be property in the hands of an individual, and there is no law which makes that which is a property in the hands of an individual, no pro- perty in the hands of a corporation. The gross income of the Corporation, derived from land and money, is 100,0001.; another 100,000/. accrues from these dues and tolls. But the expenses of collection, together with drawbacks, reduce this 100,000/. to. 70,0001. Upon the proper revenues oZ the City, exclusive of the coal-dues, the Corporation have borrowed a million sterling: 500,000/. for streets in the City alone. They pay 50,0001. for interest ;. 50,0001. for the adminis- tration of justice in Middlesex ; 10,0001. in ehantiesi 104000/. in incidental expenses ; they put by 20,000/. Thus only 30,000/. Is left for the civil go- vernment of the City. He held that the money is wisely expended; and that it is neither wise, just, nor expedient to take away these dues.

Mr. CaAwroun seconded the motion.

Sir GEORGE GREY could not assent to the amendment. If the ques- tion were to be reopened it must be done before the whole House. The motion, however, was one for postponing the bill until another session, but if delay did ensue it might well be doubted whether that delay will not produce a better bill—not in the sense the Corporation but in the sense the public attach to the word. Mr. WILLIAms opposed and Mr. WORTLEY supported the motion. Mr. WALPOLE declined to discuss the question of the absolute right of the Corporation to tolls and dues. He seemed to think it has no such right. He hinted at some arrangements for providing compensation. sir BENJAMIN HALL thought the bill should be more stringent. Mr. WARREN contended that the demand of the City to be heard was just. Lord Joinc RUSSELL, though ready to abolish the metage dues, suggested that the clauses relating to them should be omitted, and considered when the coal duties are considered. Mr. LA - BOUCHERE reminded the opponents of the bill that the more they-obstruct legislation, the more stringent will be the terms demanded.

The time fixed for the morning sitting expired before any decission could be taken.

REWARDS TO MnIBERS.

Lord 110THAM brought under the consideration of the House the ques- tion of Parliamentary purity. Disclaiming any intention of throwing imputations upon the legal profession, he pointed out that the House had always shown a determination to maintain its purity. In 1667, Mr. Ashburnham was expelled for receiving a fee of 5001. from a merchant, and in 1694 a Speaker was expelled for receiving 1000 guineas for passing a bill. In 1695 the House made it a high crime and misde- meanour to offer a bribe to a Member. An impression now prevails that the services of Members may now be obtained for money to prose- cute in that House appeals from India. The report of the Committee in Mr. Butt's case corroborates the statement that an opinion prevails in India that the services of Members are procurable by money. Ought that impression to be allowed to remain ? The resolutions previously passed do not meet the case of legal Members who are first retained in a regular manner, and are then asked to bring the case before Parlia- ment. He therefore proposed- " That it is contrary to the usage and derogatory to the dignity of this House that any of its Members should bring forward, promote, or advocate in this House, any proceeding or measure in which he may have acted or been concerned for or in consideration of any pecuniary fee or reward." Mr. Divere seconded the motion. Mr. Bovrvea held that it censured

all the legal Members of the House. Mr. WurrEsthz on the contrary, said it deserved the support of the House, and might be affirmed with- out trenching upon the honour of the legal profession. Mr. BOUVERIE said the resolution was too wide, because it did not meet the case, and too narrow because a crafty man could evade it. So vague a resolution is no security at all. Ile moved the "previous question." Sir JOICq PAKDIGTON repudiated the idea that the legal profession is open to the imputations implied ; but to prevent the misconstructions that might arise were the previous question carried, he suggested that the words, "in which he may have acted or been concerned," words that poiut to the legal profession, should be omitted. Mr. LABOUCHERE deprecated the adoption of this suggestion. Personal corruption is not a charge that can be made against any Members of the House. But, knowing what is said out of doors, he thought something should be done to guard the honour of the House. The bosierrou-Gmc-eues opposed the reso- lution, and disowned all alleged charges insinuated against legal Members. The resolution is too wide. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL op- posed the resolution. He put a case. Indian princes consult Members in their legal capacity. Those Members might give an opinion that the prince has no remedy at law, but had a wrong Parliament could and ought to redress. What wrong would there be in the advocacy of such- a case by a learned Member in Parliament ? Mr. MALINS protested against the motives imputed to the bar. Mr. Boviss, Mr. P. O'BareN, Mr. MELLOR, objected to the resolution. Mr. BENTINCK supported it. Lord Jona RUSSELL said he must vote for the previous question on the ground that a plain and intelligible rule had been adopted long ago to meet these cases. He would rather trust to the honour of the learned profession than to any resolution. In this Mr. ROEBUCK concurred ; but to illustrate the danger he refreshed the House with an anecdote—

It so happened that he was the Governor of a Bank, the manager of

which came to him one day and said, "One of our customers is below ; he wishes to see you ; will you go down and speak to him ? " Thinking the applicant had come upon matters connected with the business of the bank, Mr. Roebuck replied, "Certainly," and down he went. He found a gen- tleman who said he came on the part of the Queen of Oude. Mr. Roebuck was not quite sure that her Majesty was not going to open an account with the bank, and he replied, "Very well, Sir, what have you to say?" The gentleman said, "The Queen certainly has not spoken to me ; I am obliged to speak to her through women ; but she has conveyed to me her desire that you would see the Prince of Qude. Mr. Roebuck replied, "Certainly, I will see the Prince of Oude, though I am not aware I causlo any good by it ; but if her Majesty desires that I should see him I shall only be too happy to obey her wishes." The gentleman then observed, "Sir, her Majesty bade sue say she was very sorry she only approachOd you in this manner." Mr. Roebuck said, "Sir, what the Devil do • ybii mean ?" (Loud laughter.) The gentleman replied, "Sir, she is very poor." Mr. Roebuck replied, "Oh, Sir, now I know what you mean, but you come to me as a Member of Parliament, and I am ashamed that any Englishman should dare to approach me in such a manner." "Oh, Sir," replied the gentleman, "you are very much more particular than a certain gentleman," whom he named, "who, being a Member of Parliament, has received 6001" ("Hear!" and a laugh.)

The House divided twice. It first decided by 161 to 80 that the question should be put ; and then it adopted the resolution by 210 to 27.

THE BANKRUPTCY LAWS.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL obtained leave to bring in a bill relating to Bank- ruptcy and Insolvency. His reason for interfering was that he was chairman of a Committee appointed some time ago at a meeting of com- mercial men, to investigate the subject, and draw up a scheme for amend- ing the law. The Committee had framed a scheme, and at their request he brought it before the House. The bill proposes to abolish the dis- tinction between Bankruptcy and Insolvency, and provides that in future all insolvent persons shall be declared bankrupt. After adjudication the property of the bankrupt is to be vested in an official assignee until the creditors have appointed their own assignee. The whole legal process is to be simplified and cheapened, and in certain cases after an adjudication creditors may resort to a County Court. The krronazr-GENERAL said they were indebted to Lord John Russell for calling attention to the subject. The Government are about to intro- duce a bill in the other House. Lord John's bill, however, does not deal with the most important point—the law relating to insolvent joint-stock companies. The effect of recent legislation has been to prevent justice from being done to shareholders without having recourse to a Chancery suit. Mr. HEADLAM agreed that the Winding-up Acts require improvement ; but it will not be desirable to mix up that subject with the amendment of the bankruptcy law in general. The bill was read a first time. Ty,E REGINA CCELI.

The Earl of MALMSEIDEDY remarked on Thursday, that the stories in circulation respecting the Regina Ccoli had produced great excitement.

and although he had not been asked to do so, he considered that it was a duty he owed the French Government to state the French official ac- count. He then read the account given by the French Minister of Ma- rine to Count Walewski-

In this account Captain Simon', the master of the Regina Cceli is repro.. seined as enlisting the emigrants under the superintendence of the Govern. ment of Liberia. They had tak'en on board 271 negroes out of 400, the total contracted for, when an emigrant cluarrelled with the cook ; the quarrel ex- tended ; it became a fight, and the emigrants slew the second in command

and eleven of the crew. Captain Simon at once hired forty Americana, and

obtained assistance from the local militia; and in two boats cruised about so as to blockade the ship. Mr.Newnham, British and French consular agent at Monrovia, sent for the steamer Ethiope. When she came Simon went on

board and asked Captain Croft on what terms he would give assistance. No answer was returned, the crew of the Ethiope boarded and took the Regina

Cceli, and Captain Simon was forcibly prevented from boarding his own ship. When they arrived at Monrovia Captain Sunewprotested against the capture of his ship. Captain Croft considered-lie had rescued her. The

emigrants were allowed to plunder her cargosind escape scot free. Then two French men-of-war came into the roadstead and took away the Regina Cecil. Captain Croft's account is briefer. Sent by the Consul, he says he found the Regina Cceli drifting about unmanageable. Captain Simon was cruising out of gunshot of "the pirates." He said he had been there several days watching the ship out of gunshot, because" the pirates" fired at him if he went near. The "pirates," after a parley, surrendered ; Croft took her in charge as a prize, and carried her to Monrovia.

Lord Malmesbury said it was clear that the ship was captured not from sympathy with the negroes, but because Croft regarded them as pirates, and hoped to obtain salvage. Captain Simon protested against being saved, and against salvage. As the French captain had never lost sight of his ship, as he claimed her and protested against her seizure, if she had been a regular slaver and full of slaves, by the law of nations no one would have had a right to seize her. Lord BROUGHAM admitted that in the presence of Captain Simon no one had a right to seize his ship, be her cargo ever so contrary to law. He regretted that they had to rely upon these official accounts. Un- official accounts he had received showed that these negroes were not free emigrants but slaves. The official accounts carefully avoided the point at issue. They did not say no force had been used, and no fraud prac- tised to obtain these importations. Earl GREY would rejoice for the honour of the French Government and nation, if it could be proved that the Africans were really put on board by fair means and their own free will. But if not, if the original story proved true, he would still hold that they were justified in nsing and using force to procure their liberty. He regarded the matter with great suspicion. He should like to see the account the President of Liberia would give of the transaction. If he had sanctioned the em- barcation, that would alter the case. But if the original story were true, if the negroes were slaves, and used force to take the ship, the were justified. It would be no longer a French ship, and an English ship would be justified in rendering them assistance. He asked for more information.

Lord MALMESBURY said he did not see how more information could be obtained.

THE Coca.rs TIIADE.—In moving for papers relating to the emigration of Coolies from Hongkong, the Bishop of OXFORD expressed a hope that while we stand forth as the abolishers of slavery, we should not suffer our own people to be drawn into that accursed traffic. The Bccers near Natal are in- stituting slavery, and he feared it would spread to Natal. In supplying-our colonies with labourers, the utmost care should be taken to preventa system of emigration from lapsing into a slave-trade. The experiment of Coolie la- bour has been successful in the Mauriticus bet in other places it was said the exportation of Chinese had resulted in thi slavery of kidnapped Coolies. He brought no definite accusations ; in fact he only referred to rumours; but he desired to be in a position to show that when we oppose the French scheme, France cannot turn round and say we are doing the same thing. The Earl of Caassiretois promised to produce the papers. He showed 'that while the exportation of Chinese labourers to British colonies has been successful because it has been vigilantly watched and controlled, and be- cause the emigrants have been well treated, so that they save large sums and receive large sums on returning home ; on the other hand, the Chi- nese emigrants imported into other than British possessions, such as Cuba,

have been badly treated, and that in their case the provisions of the law have been systematically evaded. The attention of the Government has

been turned to the subject, with a view to devise a remedy. Lord BROUGHAM said there was only one course, to take, that of instantly pro- hibiting the traffic. The Earl of CLARENDON said the drugging, kidnap- ping, and buying of Coolies went on in Ports where we have no agents. Ito suggested that the production of some further papers will show to what extent the influence of this country could be exercised, and the manner in which it has been applied. Lord MaracvsnellY concurred ; and the motion was agreed to.

THE DIVORCE Acr.—On the third reading of the Divorce and Matri- monial Causes Act Amendment Bill, Lord REDESDALE seriously complained of the speed with which unopposed causes are disposed of in the new court. Nine unopposed causes were decided in one day, and one case in eleven nu flutes. If the Court is to obtain public respect, more caution must be exer- cised in cases so likely to lead to collusion. Lord Carareass said it was rash and ill-advised on the part of Lord Redesdale to impeach the conduct of the judges. He had presided in the court, and no cases were ever more de - herately considered than those brought under his notice. The Bishop of- OXFORD took the Chief Justice to task for reading Lord Redezdale &null:- necessary lecture. The feelings he expressed are those of the great mass of -

the religious and thinking persons in the country. Earl GRANVILLE, Lord CRANWORTH, and Lord Sr. LEONARDS vindicated the judges. They have

properly administered justice. The Earl of Wres..Lew took the other side. Lord CAMPBELL attempted to explain, but was called to order. Neverthe- less Lord REDESDALE was allowed to make a second speech and to reiterate his statement. Lord BROUGHAM said that what had just taken place could not fail to convey to their lordships the impression that one degree licence with respect to the privilege of making a second speech was extended to a Chairman of Committees, while a totally different measure was meted out to a Lord Chief Justice. (Laughter.)

The bill was read a third time and passed. REGISTRATION OF PARTNERSIIIPS.—In moving the second reading of the Registration of Partnerships Bill, at the Wednesday sitting, Lord GODE•

wau explained that it was to provide that all persons trading in partnership wider other names than their own, or under the mysterious designation oand Co." should be compelled to enter th4dinames on a register open to every one who wished to obtain such information. Persons trade under other names to obtain credit, and single individuals represent themselves As backed by a "Co." This gives great facilities for fraud. This bill had received the assent of all the Chambers of Commerce in the West Riding ; and other Chambers of Commerce have petitioned in its favour. Mr. CoL- rimi, regarded the bill as a retrograde step. It would chiefly affect the poorer classes, and entail upon them endless annoyance and great expense. Prudent men do not trust the abstract "Co." but the concrete "Jones." Instead of preventing frauds the bill would increase them, for the Montague Tiggs, IA obtain temporary creditolwould, not scruple to register Borings or Rothschilds as their partners. Ile moved, and Mr. MOFFAT seconded an amendment, that the bill should be read a !wend time that day six

months. le

The bill was supported by Mr. BAXTER and Mr. BAINES '' and opposed by Mr. WARREN and Mr. WEGUELLN. Mr. SPOONER suggested an inquiry, and Mr. CARDWELL backed the suggestion. Mr. HENLEY was not prepared to negative or affirm the bill. He promised an inquiry "next session." On the faith of this promise Lord GODERICH withdrew the bill.

CHANCERY LUNATIOS.—In moving for a Select Committee to inquire into the laws relating to lunatics under the care of the Court of Chancery, Mr. TITE stated some startling.facts. There are 29,000 lunatics in England. Of these only MI are under the care of the Lord Chancellor. Their .roperty amounts to 240,000/. : the sum devoted to their support to 160,1111. In some cases enormous sums are paid for the maintenance of thew lunatics, yet they are not well cared for. They are scattered over the country ; only two medical men attend them ; the cures, instead of being 14 per cent as in other cases, are only 2 per cent. This state of things demands inquiry. The answer of the Somorrou-GENERAL was that the law has been much improved, and its operation carefully watched ; that the Government has no objection to an inquiry, but that the proposal is made too late in the session. If made soon enough "next session" the motion will not be opposed. Motion withdrawn.

CottEcruni OF TAXES—Mr. LINDSAY moved a resolution stating that the present mode of collecting income and assessed taxes is attended with great disadvantage and loss, and requires immediate attention. No less than seventy-one parishes have been reassessed to the Income-tax, and have had to pay twice because the collectors were defaulters. He proposed as a remedy for the evil that the local commissioners should appoint collectors and de- mand from them full security. Mr. WILLIAMS seconded the motion. On thp part of the Government, Mr. DISRAELI admitted the hardship, showed that the Commissioners of Inland Revenue are alive to it, promised to con- sider the subject, and begged Mr. Lindsay not to press his motion. To this Mr. LINDSAY assented.