Hume and Mr. Cobden, and defended by Mr. Aglionby,
Mr. Drummond, and others. Mr. COBDEN objected to
the vote for the consular establishments in China, and
moved an amendment, which was negatived by 166 to
34.—Mr. C. LUSHINGTON objected to the vote of £1,695
to distressed dissenting ministers, which was repugnant
to the dissenting body itself.—Lord John RUSSELL said
this was an extraordinary statement, seeing that the
dissenters had been in the habit of receiving it ever
since 1723. On a division the vote was agreed to by 147
to 72.

The House having resumed, the Ecclesiastical
Commission Bill was read a third time and passed, after
some discussion on certain additional clauses.

On the motion for the third reading of the Attorneys'
Certificates Bill, the CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
moved the third reading that day three months, which
was carried by 113 to 84, and the bill consequently
thrown out.

On Tuesday the 23rd, the Medical Charities (Ireland)
Bill was considered in committee, and several amendments
were agreed to.

Colonel DUNNE moved for leave to bring in a Bill to
amend the Irish Poor Law, explaining, that the principal
design of the measure was to limit the power of
giving out-door relief. Mr. P. Scrope and Major
Blackall opposed the motion, and Mr. French supported
it.—Sir G. GREY consented to the bill being brought in,
guarding himself from being supposed, on the one hand,
to be wholly against the principle of out-door relief, or,
on the other, to recommend the resumption of public
works on a large scale, such as were formerly commenced
during the pressure of famine.—Mr. STAFFORD, in
supporting the motion, expressed his regret that there was
little room to doubt the failure, to a considerable extent,
of the present year's potato crop in Ireland. After some
further observations, leave was given to bring in the bill.

Colonel SIBTHORP moved a resolution that the Income
Tax on Tenant-farmers, should be removed after the
present year.—The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said that the cause of the farmers should not be separated
from that of other industrial classes. The motion
was supported by Mr. Buck, Mr. Newdegate, Mr.
Wodehouse, and Mr. Disraeli.—Mr. BRIGHT adhered to
his general objections to the income tax, but saw no
special grievance in the case of the farmer, and looked
upon the motion as a mere topic for agitation. The
motion was negatived by 50 to 32.

Mr. ADAIR, having moved, on the 24th, the second
reading of the Poor Relief (Cities and Towms) Bill, was
prevailed upon not to press his motion at this period of
the session; it having been stated by Mr. Baines and
Sir G. Grey that the whole subject was under the
consideration of the Poor Law Board, and would undergo
the careful consideration of government during the
recess.

In moving the second reading of the Compound
Householders Bill, Sir W. CLAY explained that its
object was to remove a grievance affecting a numerous
class of householders. At present, if the owner of a
house compounded with the parish officers for the
payment of the parochial rates, the overseers had no power
to return the name of the occupants to the returning
officer as entitled to vote in the election of members to
serve in parliament. The tenants of proprietors who,
under local acts, compounded for their rates, though
they occupied tenements to a higher value than £10,
were not allowed to be placed upon the register only
after payment of the existing rate; consequently after
every rate they were obliged to make a fresh application.
The effect of this system was that great numbers of
persons in the metropolis and other places who, according
to the spirit of the reform bill, were entitled to be upon
the register were disfranchised. This bill would obviate
the necessity of parties so placed making incessant
claims; in short it would place them, in this respect,
upon a par with county voters who, having once
substantiated a claim, were not under the necessity of
renewing it so long as they remained in the occupation
of the same house. They were, however, relieved from
none of the conditions of residence or payment of rates
which were required by the reform act.—Mr. Newdegate,
Mr. Spooner, and Sir H. Willoughby, opposed the
bill as opening a door to fraud.—Sir G. GREY said the
bill came entirely within the spirit of the reform act;
and Sir E. N. Buxton also supported it. The bill was
read a second time, by 80 against 24.

The second reading of the Sunday Trading Prevention
Bill, was moved by Mr. C. PEARSON, who said that the
measure was not intended for the rich or the middle
class, but for the working poor, whose day of rest it
guaranteed from interruption, and saved them from the
hardship of giving seven days' labour for six days' wages.
He admitted that some of the details of the bill were
objectionable, but they could be struck out in
committee. The bill was read a second time.

On the 20th, Mr. BAILLIE went at some length into a
statement respecting certain proclamations alleged to have
been issued by Captain Watson during the disturbances
in Ceylon, the signature to which had been declared by
him to be a forgery; and asked Lord John Russell to
lay on the table a report received from the commissioners
appointed to inquire into this matter, who had
pronounced the signature to be genuine.—Lord John
RUSSELL said that the report of the commissioners was
hurried and incomplete, but was to be followed by a
fuller report accompanied by documents. When this
was received the whole would be produced.

Lord NAAS moved an address, praying Her Majesty to
order measures to be taken to insure immediate Steam
Communication with Australia, and adverted to the
great inconveniences of the present length of the voyage,
generally 120 or 130 days, while by steam it could be
accomplished in 70.—The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
could not consent to the motion, though he
admitted the importance of the object. Government
had been anxious to make an arrangement with the East
India Company, but it had not been accomplished.
The Peninsular and Oriental Company had made a
tender to extend the steam communication to Singapore,
Hong-Kong, and Australia, but the East India Company
who were parties to the existing arrangement, had
declined to ratify the arrangement proposed, which
could not, therefore, be effected till the termination of
the existing contract.—Sir J. HOGG complained that
this statement was unfair to the East India Company.
After some further discussion the motion was negatived.

Mr. HUME called the attention of the House to the
present restrictions on the Admission to St. Paul's
Cathedral, and observed that a more liberal system had
been adopted in Westminster Abbey.—Sir G. GREY said
that this subject was under consideration, with a view
to the removal of these restrictions.

In committee of supply a number of votes were
agreed to.

The third reading of the Charitable Trusts Bill, after
opposition from Mr. Turner and Mr. Goulburn, was
carried by 96 to 53, and the bill, with some amendments,
passed.

On the 26th, in consequence of the general understanding
that it was the intention of Baron Rothschild to
present himself at the table of the House of Commons
and require to be allowed to take his seat as one of the
members of the City of London; long before twelve
o'clock the lobbies of the House of Commons were
crowded to excess by members of the Jewish persuasion,
anxious to witness the arrival of the Baron. This
anxiety was also manifested on the part of the members,
who flocked in crowds to the house in order to be present
at the novel ceremony of one of the Jewish nation
presenting himself at the table of the house as one of its
members, and desiring to be sworn on the Old Testament.
Baron Rothschild appeared in the lobby at twelve
o'clock, and was loudly cheered. The SPEAKER took
the chair at twelve o'clock, when there was an unusually
full attendance of members.—Baron Rothschild
appeared at the bar of the house, introduced by Mr. Page
Wood and Mr. John Abel Smith. As he advanced up
the floor of the house to the table he was loudly cheered
by members on both sides. The clerk at the table
placed the customary oath in his hands and was about
to swear the honourable gentleman upon the New
Testament, when he was interrupted by Baron ROTHSCHILD,
who said in a loud and clear voice, "I desire to
be sworn on the Old Testament."—Sir R. H. INGLIS—
I protest against that. Baron Rothschild was then