On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    ment of science and art under the control of the President of the Council , and in ^ tarting various schools and seminaries , he was still of op inio n that mu ch mo r e jnight be done , and t h a t the differe n t sepa r ate eff orts might * e systematized . The British Museum being « yeWocked , it might be advisable to remove the Natural History department to the west end of the town . The merits of scientific men are not sufficiently recognized by Government ; and , as he wished to see a greater recognition , he suggested that there should be an order of merit for men of learning , as well as for generals and admirals , and that patents should be granted for less money .

    ....... At this and at three subsequent periods of the discus r sipn , motions were made that the House might be counted ; but , before the glass had run out , suffic i ent members dropped in to secure the requisite forty , and , having stayed during the count , again left the House with about twenty members in it . Mr . Mackxnnojst objected to the proposed plan . Grants of public money would never aid science ; they never had done so ; all the greatest discoveries were made by men of genius , no t b y university men . He believed that mathematical knowledge was far more extensive in France than in this country . —The

    Chancellor ob" the Exchequer observed that the terms of the motion were so vague that he did not think any g ood co uld resu l t f rom it ; and he t h e r e f ore ad vi sed its withdrawal . —Mr . Titb supported the motion , and Lord Stanley suggested that Mr . Heywood should not press his motion then , b ut co n su l t eminent scient i fic m en as to the specific measures which it was desirable for the Government , o r t h e H o u se to adopt fo r t h e fur thera n ce of his object , r—Lord Palmerston concurred with the Chancellor of the Exchequer in thinking that the motion had no practical tendency ; and Mr . Heywood consented to withdraw it .

    BIGHTS OF WOMEN . Sir Erskine Perky called attention to the state of the law of property as it affects married women , and move d the following resolutions : —" That the rules of the common law which give all the personal propert y of a w oma n on marria g e , and all subsequently acquired property and earnings , to the h usband , are unjust in principle and injurious in their operation . That the principles of Courts of Eq uit y wh ic h reco g nise sepa r a t e propert y in a married woman , and invest her , wi t h r espect to s uch jproperty , with all the righ ts of o w ners h i p , are in accordance with the requirements of the age , and in conformity with the opinions and usages of the wealthier and better instructed classes of society . That in the opin ion o f this

    House , the conflict between law arid equity on the subject dugh t to b e term i nated by a ge n e r a l l a w , b ase d on the principles of equity , which should apply to all classes . " By the old English law there could be no doubt that ^ a wife succeeded on equal terms to the common property of her husband ; she took one-third of the' land , arid a third of the personal property ; but , ex-? cdpt in Scotland , no such early dist rib ution e x ists i n t hi s country at the present day . The decrees of the legal -tribunals of the country have abrogated this old English law , arid deprived married women of their rights , while the husband has acquired the right , fro m t h e sa m e source ^ ' of dealing with the property of his wife just as he thinks fit . The law had not been changed b y a n y act of the Leg is l ature , but solely by the decisions of the

    Judges . According to the dictum of the common law , a married woman has no right to personal property ; but the equity courts recognise and act upon the very opposite principle . Equity deals with the personal p r o p erty of a wife as though she were a single woman ; but the common law holds that it belong ^ to the husband . These diametrically opposite views of the law had arisen out of the decisions of different Judg es ; a n d t h e o b ject of his bringing this question now before the House was to elicit an opinion as to which of these two princip les is t h e sou n d o n e to app ly to the case of married women . He thought also that the absurd law should be abrogated by which a husband is made responsible for debts hia ¦ wife may have contracted before her marriage , and of which he may havo been utterly ignorant .

    The Attorney-General admitted the truth of Sir Erskino Perry ' s strictures on the present state of the law , but urged him not to press his motion , as the Government has determined to introduce a measure on the subject next year . —Mr . Malins considered tho altera-• tiona uncalled for , and that they would be contrary to the law of God . The interests of husband and wife should be hold to be perfectly identical ; a n d , if a woman had not full confidence in a man , l et h er re f r a i n from marrying him . Sir Erskine Perry wished to set up a separate establishment for man and wife . As the law stands , however , a wife can protect horuelf b y a p p lying

    to the court of equity . —Mr . Muntz pointed to tho necessity for some better law of divorce . ¦—The Solicitob- » Gbweral , while acknowledging tho grievances co m p l ained of , urgod tho withdrawal of the motion . — Mr . Whitbsidk and Mr . Colukr thought tho discussion showed the necessity that exists for a Minister of Justice —Mr . J . G . Phelumork believed that some amendment was required in the law of divorce , but h o trusted t h a t tho legislature would maintain unbroken tho identity of interest between husband . and wife . Nothing could surely be m o r e fri ghtful than to toacb . wives that thoir interests are on ono side , and those of thoir husband on

    the other . " ( C heers . ') He thought there were many matters in which we might usefully follow the example of forei g n n at i ons ; but , if there was one thing in which foreigners might learn of us , it was the relations which existed in . this country between husband and wife . ( Loud cheers . ")—Mr . Chambers regarded the proposed principle as vicious ; while , on the other hand , Mr . W . J . Fox advocated a change in the existing law- — -Sir Erskxne Perry , in consenting to withdraw his motion , on the faith of the Government promise , remarked that all the ar g u m ents w h ic h h ad b ee n put forward against the resolutions were from the " husband" point of v i e w , but that the House was bound to consider other interests as well .

    MR . ARCHER S PATENT FOR POSTAGE LABELS . M r . Whtteside mo v ed for a se le ct co m mitte e t o inquire into the circumstances of the purchase of the mac h ine and in v e n tio n f o r perforati ng posta g e l a b e l s by the Government , from Mr . Archer , the inventor ; and a l so into t h e circums t ances unde r whi c h t h e e x ist i n g agreements between the Government and the contractors fo r gummin g and printi ng th e posta g e a nd receipt l abe l s were made . Mr . Whiteside complained of the shabbiness , if n o t i n justice , with which Mr . Archer had been t reate d b y the Treasury in their determination to perpetrate a job in favour of other parties . —Mr . Wilson

    made an explanatory statement , with a view to showing that Mr . Archer had nothing to complain of ; and expressed a hope that the House would not consent to unsett l e an arran ge ment made , with the utmost deliberatio n , so long ago as 1853 . —Mr . Grooan and Mr . Muntz supported inquiry ; the Chancellor of the Exchequer opposed it . —Mr . Lloyd Davies did not see that Mr . Archer had any grounds of compl aint , but he would support inquiry into t h e o t her po i n t s . — Mr . Whiteside replied ; and the House divided , when the motion was negatived by 57 to 39 . The House was counted out at midnight .

    Wednesday , June 11 th . THE NAWAB OF SURAT . The House of Commons was on Wednesday morning occup ied for a considerable time in discussing the abstract question i nv o l ved i n t he N a w a b of S urat T reat y Bill , which purported to be a private bill , and which came bef o re t h e H ouse u p on t h e co n sideration of t h e report of the committee . —Mr . Vernon Smith , premising t h at t h e report e xp ress ly declared that the committee had considered themselves precluded from giving any op in i on u po n questions of a const i tutio n a l a n d politica l character con n ected wit h the ca s e , and that the evidence was not before the House , mo v ed t o defer t h e consideration of the report until Wednesday next . —Sir Fitzroy Kelly resisted delay , an d mo v ed , b y wa y of amendme n t , that the bill be read a third time . He entered very fully into the merits of the case , which was

    a c l aim b y M eer Jaffier Al i Kh a n to an an n uity of 150 , 000 r upees , granted under a treaty with the Indian Government to the then Nawab of Surat and his heirs , the essential point in the question being , wh ether t h e grant was made to the heirs natural of the Nawab or to h is h ei r s b e i n g successors i n t h e N awa b s h i p . —Sir James Hogg de f ended t h e E ast I ndia C ompany , and stated that the office of Nawab was not hereditary . If the present claimant had any just righ ts to en force h e should have submitted them to the tribunals of the country , and not to the House of Commons . —After a l engt h e n ed d i scussion , in which Mr . Cardwell , Sir Erskine Perry , Mr . Wigram , Sir James Graham , Sir Charles Wood , and other members , too k part , Sir Fitzroy Kelly withdrew his amendment , on the understanding that tho bill would bo proceeded with on Wednesday next , by which time further papers on the subject would be in the possession of the House .

    of Sardinia , by which England engages to furnish a loan of 1 , 000 , 000 * . sterling . A copy of the ^ convention -was l aid befo r e t h e H ouse ; an d , on t h e m otion of t he Chancellor of the Exchequer , it was ordered that the message be considered next Thursday .

    COUNTY COURTS BILL . Mr . Roebuck asked Sir George Grey whether it -was really the intention to pass the County Courts Bill t h roug h the House of Lords . If the bill was onl y to b e used for the purpose of staving off a very discredita bl e question in that House , he could assure the right hon gentleman that he was not to be got rid of in that way but that he should , if necessar y , bring forward the subject by submitting a resolution . —Sir George Grey said that he had communicated with the Lord Chancellor who expected that the bill referred to would leave the House of Lords in about a week or ten days . -With regard to the other assertions of Mr . Roebuck , h e met them with a direct denial .

    THE UNITED STATES . S ome discuss i o n arose b etween M r . Batt . j-. ttt , an ( j ]^ r Disraeli on t h e one side , and the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the other , with reference to bring ing o n the Army Estimates the following evening . In connexion with that occasion , Mr . Baillie had given notice of a motion on the subject of our relations with the U n i ted S tates , and he alleged that Lord Palmerston had prom i sed to give h im due n otice o f br ing ing on the estimates , in order that he might be prepared with his

    motio n ; b ut , together with Mr . Disraeli , he thought that a breach of engagement had been committed in proceedin g so sudden ly with the estimates . —The Chancellor of the Exchequer , under these circu m stances , postponed the consideration of them , wit h out mentioning any fres h day . —Mr . Baillie then said he thoug ht it right to state that he did not intend to adhere to the motion of whic h h e h ad given notice . In consequence of the important events which had taken pl ace in A merica , he should g ive notice of th e terms of his motion when the time for bringing it on was fixed .

    CIVIL CONTINGENCIES . Th e H ouse h avin g gone into C ommit t ee of S upp l y , considera bl e discussio n ensued on the vote of 1 00 , 000 ? . for civil contingencies , which Sir Francis Bablng moved to reduce to 30 , 000 / . He believed that the Treasury had a bal ance in h and sufficie n tl y large to render it unnecessary that they should now be furnished wit h a greater sum than t h at to wh ic h h e wou l d reduce the vote . Even then , they would have an ample margin to meet any possible chance of excess . —Mr . Wilson , on the part of the Treasury , consented to modify the vote to 90 , 000 / . 60 , 000 / . of previous votes , he stated , -were to be returned to the Exchequer under the h ead of " savings . " —After considerable , but rather unimportant discussion , the motion was withdrawn . —In the course of the desultory conversation connected with this vote , objection was expressed by Mr . Blackbubn and Mr . Lloyd Davies to a sum of 100 / . for drawing up

    the Oxford University Bill , and Mr . Wilson intiroattd that the money was paid to Mr . J . G . Phillimore for his valuable assistance . Subsequently , Mr . Gladstone , who said he had bad a share in advising the payment , explained that it was considered advisable to have tlie assistance of M r . Ph i l limore ' s l earning and e x perience in drawing the bill ; but he admitted that the principle was one which it was not advisable to have established , and that it was right the House should view it with a jealous feeling . —In answer to Mr . Mowbkat , Mr . Wilson said the account for tho fireworks had not been recei v ed , and therefore he could not give informatio n r es pe cting it . Tho expense provided for was that which -was extraneous to the department where tho fireworks -were made ; some of the expense , therefore , wa 3 borne by that department . This explanation , Lord Hotham conceived to be at variance with tho distinct assurance of tho Chancellor of tho Exchequer that the whole expense would be included in the 8 , 000 / .

    " The Spirit Trade ( Ikeland ) Bill was withdrawn , after a short discussion . On tho order for tho reception of the report on the Earl of Perth and Melfort ' s petition for leave to bring in a Compensation Bill for the l oss of estate s confiscated from tho Earl ' s ancestors for thoir adhesion to the cause of t h e S tuar t s , it w as agreed to r eco mm it t h o b i ll to a committee of tho whole House next Monday . Thursday , June 12 th .

    EDUCATION . Sir George Grey proposed a grant of 151 , 231 / . as the balance of tho vote for education , in addition to a sum of 800 , 000 / . already grunted on account . In tnc speech with which lie profaced this motion , Sir George reminded the House that , tunco 1839 , tho year in wlilcli tbo first grant was made for this purpose , two mUJions sterling h avo been p laced by Parliament in the ham s oi tbo Committee of Council on Education , and by tu « n distributed in aid of tho voluntary cflbrts mndo in tno cause of national instruction . For tho first ten years subsequent to 1839 , tho sum annually p laced . at w disposal of tho Committee of Council was 80 , 000 * ., om »_• mJ * *^ fc ^ %% ^ ^^ * fr * M ^^ ^ ta ^ ^^ »™^«™» m — ~* — —» — — _ m ^ been actually

    ex-THE ENCUMBERED ESTATES COURT . Th o presentation in tho Hoube of Lords o f a pet i - tion from Lord Mount-Cushell , com plaining of tho operation of the Irish Encumbered Estates Court , gave rise to so m e co nv ersation , and a statement from the Lord Chancellor that it was intended to bring in a short continuance bill , in tho event o f t h o bi ll no w b efo r e t h o House of Commons , providing for tho transference of tho powers of tho Encumborod Estates Court to the Irish Court of Chancery , being rejected . ¦

    in no ono of tbeso years had that sum pended . Thoro always remained a balance , wlneii , tho courflo of timo , accumulated to a considerable sum . Since then , however , the reverse has boon tho case , tut expenditure exceeding tho grant . The annual grain . during tho last Bix years , beginning with l » w « '" ending with 1 H 05 , were respectively , omitting ° " Hhillingfl , 11 ) 3 , 000 / ., 101 , 000 / ., 188 , 000 / ., 200 , 000 / -, 320 , 000 / ., and 390 , 000 / . Although it would nppwu ; " * tho expenditure lind boon less than tho voto , ho wlsl " :, tho Houho to undoiHtand that tho outlying gra nts wow full y cxlimiflt it . Tho hcIiooIh built in tho uamo y «| wore severally 285 , 205 , 232 , 273 , 312 , and 414 . *" number of pupil teachers in courao of training m "' years woro respectively 4 GG 0 , 5007 , ( U 80 , 7 007 , <<» i

    The Drafts on Bankicus Bill was road a third timo , and passed . Tho committoo on the Reformatory and Industrial Schools Bill was postponed , after some depreciatory observations from tho Earl of IIarijwioiuc , who thought that reformatory nohoola have a dangerous tendency , as offering a premium to tho parents of certain clubbca of children to sot them to commit crimes .

    Tnm SARDINIAN LOAN . In tho IIousio oir C ommo n s , tho Chancellor oi' the Exchequer brought down a mossago from the Crown , informing tho Uouao of tho convention with tho King

    Untitled Article

    g 56 THE X . EADEB . [ No . 325 , Saturday ,

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), June 14, 1856, page 556, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2145/page/4/