men to their standard for service in the Crimea, where
the difficulties, which were normal occurrences in India,
so embarrassing to European troops, would have
been easily surmounted by them. He then proceeded
to discuss the expediency of constituting the army of
the East India Company a royal army, contending that
for civil as well as military purposes in India the
amalgamation of the two forces was of great importance,
while the advantages as respected the interests of the two
services would be immense. After a debate, in which
the motion was principally supported by Sir DE LACY
EVANS, and opposed by Sir J. Hogg, it was negatived
by 171 to 62.

On the order for going into committee on the
Education (Scotland) Bill, Mr. Bruce moved that the
committee be instructed to divide the bill into two bills,—
one relating to the parochial schools, the other to the
new schools contemplated by the bill. His object was
to maintain the national system of parochial schools
connected with the church, and which was at present in
a state of great and increasing efficiency.—The Earl of
DALKEITH moved that the debate be adjourned, which
was agreed to.

Lord J. RUSSELL moved for leave to bring in a
bill to enable her Majesty to assent to a bill, as
amended, of the legislature of Victoria, "to Establish
a Constitution for the Colony of Victoria."—Mr. LOWE
objected to the form in which it was proposed to validate
a law which the legislature of Victoria had no power to
pass.—Lord J. RUSSELL justified the course he had
adopted, and leave was given to bring in the bill.

On Friday, May 11, Mr. M. GIBSON gave notice that
on the earliest disposable day he should move an address
to the crown, thanking her Majesty for communicating
to the legislature the papers relating to the Vienna
Conferences; expressing regret that the opportunity of
bringing the negotiations to a pacific issue then offered
had not been improved; and asserting that the interpretation
of the third point conceded by Russia furnished
the elements of renewed conferences, and a good basis
for a just and satisfactory peace.

The adjourned debate on the third reading of the
Newspaper Stamp Duties Bill was resumed by Mr.
PACKE, who entered his protest against the measure,
urging chiefly the unjust distinction which it would
create to the disadvantage of the dwellers in rural
districts.—Mr. MAGUIRE declared that the bill legalised
plunder, and was directed specially against particular
journals.—Mr. Barrow, Mr. M. Chambers, and Mr.
Bentinck having spoken, the house divided—for the
third reading, 138; against, 60; majority 78.—Mr.
NAPIER, in the absence of Mr. Whiteside, moved a
clause admitting to conveyance at a penny postage all
printed sheets that should not exceed six ounces in
weight.—The clause was opposed by the CHANCELLOR
of the EXCHEQUER, and negatived without a division.—
The bill then passed.

On Monday, May 14, Sir B. HALL, in moving that
the house go into committee on the Metropolis Local
Management Bill, entered into an explanation of the
amendments which he desired to introduce into the bill.
—Lord ERRINGTON opposed the further consideration
of the bill until the house had decided upon the principles
of the bill announced by the President of the Board
of Health for the modification of the act commonly
known as Hobhouse's Act, which act was proposed to be
incorporated in the metropolis bill.—After a short
discussion, the amendment was withdrawn, and the house
went into committee upon the bill.—Several verbal
amendments having been agreed to in various clauses,
the bill passed through committee.

On Tuesday, May 15, Captain SCOBELL moved for the
appointment of a select committee to inquire into the
circumstances under which the grant of £20,000, to the
patentees of the Screw Popeller, had been applied. He
stated that the money had been divided by the
Admiralty among parties who had no claim to it, and that
Captain Carpenter, the real patentee, had obtained no
share of it whatever.—Sir F. BARING, as first lord of
the Admiralty at the time, defended his conduct in the
payment of the £20,000. He said the screw now in use
by the Admiralty was a combination of various inventions,
and the money was paid over to Mr. H. Currie,
as agent for all the patentees, who on his part gave the
Admiralty a bond to secure them against all future
claims. At that time Capt. Carpenter had not put in
any claim whatever for a money payment on account of
the infringement of his patent. When he did make
such a claim, the officials at the Admiralty gave their
opinion that his screw was not infringed at all by the
screw used in the navy. In conclusion he reminded the
house that this was not a case for a committee, but was
strictly a question for the decision of the law courts.—
After some discussion, the motion was rejected by a
majority of 69 to 49.

On Wednesday, May 16, Sir W. CLAY moved the
second reading of the Church Rates Abolition Bill. Mr.
PACKE moved the bill be read a second time that day
six months. Mr. Lloyd DAVIS seconded the amendment.
The bill was opposed by Mr. Cowper and Mr.
Lushington. Mr. Labouchere supported the bill, though
he did not approve of its machinery.—Lord PALMERSTON
said that he could not see that this bill would settle
the vexed question of church rates. He did not think
it would receive the sanction of the united branches of
the legislature, nor, if it did, would it ensure, in his
opinion, the fabric of the parish church. The parish
churches, it must be remembered were national property;
and it would not be for the honour of the country, more
than it would be for the advantage of religion, that these
fabrics should go to decay. Now, church rates were
applied to two purposes—one the administration of
divine worship, the other the maintenance of the fabric.
He could understand and respect the aversion of
dissenters to pay for the administration of the church
worship, but he could not equally understand why they
should object to the maintenance of the churches which
were national property. In fact, he knew that in many
parts of the country dissenters did cheerfully contribute
to the maintenance of the churches. It was said that
the government ought to settle this question. He could
only reply that former governments had attempted the
task and failed, and he confessed that he had no proposal
to make on the subject. It was with the more
reluctance, therefore, that he opposed this bill, but, he did
so from the full conviction that it would not effect its
object.—Lord SEYMOUR deeply regretted the speech of
the premier, which, instead of settling this question,
would throw it back for years, agitating and exciting the
country for years to come. The house divided, when
the second reading was carried by a majority of 217 to
189.

On Thursday, May 17, the second reading of the
Public Prosecutors' Bill was moved by Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE,
who contended for the necessity of some change
in the existing administration of the criminal law,
which, he believed favoured the rich at the expense of
the poor, and exercised a mischievous influence over the
moral feeling of the community.—M. EWART, while
approving the principle of the bill, thought that the
arrangement of its details should be left for settlement
by a select committee.—Lord PALMERSTON remarked
that the question at issue was highly important, and
intimated the intention of the Attorney-General to
move for the appointment of a select committee to
investigate the whole subject. In the prospect of such
an inquiry he trusted that the house would suspend its
judgment on the bill now presented. This was agreed
to, and the further consideration of the bill was
postponed for six weeks.

Lord J. RUSSELL moved for leave to bring in a bill
enabling her Majesty to assent to a bill, as amended,
passed by the Legislature of New South Wales,
conferring a constitution on that colony, and granting a
civil list out of the colonial revenues.—Mr. LOWE
declared his intention strenuously to oppose the bill,
being convinced that it was exceedingly unpopular in
the colony, and injurious to its interests. He suggested
that the clauses of the proposed constitution should be
referred to a select committee.—Lord J. RUSSELL
defended the measure, observing that it was intended to
keep faith with the colonists, to whom the act passed in
1850 assigned the power of preparing a constitution for
themselves. The conditions set forth in that statute
having been complied with in the colony, he could not
consent to delay the legislative sanction to the constitution