some good specimens of socialists and men of the red-
colour, whose object it will be to ferment the mass; and
how will property be safe without 1000 or 2000 additional
police? and how are they to be trained and disciplined
in time? It is impossible to believe that the beautiful
pillars, the elegant arcades, the magnificent dome, and
the ornamental architecture, will be removed as a whole
when once put up; but even if it be, to put it there for
months, and to cut down groves of elms forty years old,
is too monstrous an interference with the rights of the
public. He referred to Justice Creswell's opinion
(quoted by Lord Campbell) that the proceeding would
be illegal; recommended Battersea fields as a proper
place, and moved that the petition should be referred to
a select committee.—Lord GRANVILLE opposed the
motion; and made a statement of the reasons for choosing
Hyde Park, founded on a letter of the Exhibition
Commissioners to the Treasury. Eventually Lord Brougham
withdrew his motion.

On Friday the 5th, the house went into Committee
on the Parliamentary voters (Ireland) Bill. Lord
STANLEY moved an amendment to the effect that all
persons entitled to claim the franchise should have an
option either to be placed on the register or not. The
Marquis of LANSDOWNE, in opposition, contended that
the franchise was a trust, and that those who were
entrusted with it should use it. After a discussion the
amendment was carried by 53 to 39.

On Monday the 8th, on the question of the commitment
of the General Board of Health Bill, the Earl of
LONSDALE moved that the bill be referred to a select
committee to inquire whether the provisions in the
Public Health act, relative to confirming provisional
orders, had been observed.—The Earl of CARLISLE
opposed this amendment, which was negatived by 47 to
18, and the bill was committed.—In moving the second
reading of the County Courts Extension Bill Lord
BEAUMONT adverted to the success of the County Court
system, and said that he would defer considering the
objections to particular clauses in the new bill till it was
in committee.—Lords BROUGHAM and CAMPBELL
approved generally of the measure, with some qualifications.
The bill was then read a second time.

When the house met on Tuesday the 9th, the Marquis
of LONDONDERRYmoved an adjournment as a mark of
respect to the memory of the Duke of Cambridge.—The
Marquis of LANSDOWNE opposed the motion, as
interfering with the proposal he was about to make, that
addresses of condolence should be presented to Her
Majesty and the Duchess of Cambridge.—The Marquis
of LONDONDERRY withdrew his motion, and the addresses
of condolence were agreed to.

On the 15th, the house went into committee on the
Factories Bill. The Earl of HARROWBY moved the
insertion of a clause limiting the labour of children to
the extent proposed in the case of women and young
persons. It was opposed by Lord Granville and Lord
Stanley, and negatived by 58 to 25.—The Duke of
RICHMOND moved an amendment, to the effect of
limiting the hours of labour, in the case of women and
young persons, to ten hours a day. He denounced the
compromise proposed to be effected by the bill, and
declared his intention of undertaking the charge of the
measure, should it be abandoned by the government, in
consequence of the adoption of his amendment.—The
Bishop of RIPON opposed the bill and supported the
original ten hours act.—Lord FEVERSHAM also opposed
the bill, and called upon Earl Grey to say whether he
was prepared now, as on a former occasion, to support
the Ten Hours bill.—Earl GREY explained the circumstances
under which he had supported the original bill—
circumstances which did not at all prevent him from
giving his adhesion to the present measure.—Lord
Stanley supported the amendment, and the Bishop of
Manchester and the Marquis of Lansdowne opposed it.
It was negatived by 52 to 39.

Lord BROUGHAM gave notice, on the 16th, of a motion
for a return of the amount of Savings in the Civil List,
since 1838. He complained of intended reductions in
diplomatic and judicial salaries whereby, he said, the
ruin of our home service would keep pace with that of
our foreign affairs. He mentioned the case of a lady of
the highest rank who had been reduced to the
necessity of advertising for necessary employment; he
was of opinion that the aristocracy would be degraded.

Lord PORTMAN moved the second reading of the
Landlord and Tenant Bill, and Lord BEAUMONT moved,
as an amendment, the second reading in six months.
The amendment was carried without a division, and the
bill consequently lost.

On the 19th, the Earl of CARLISLE moved the third
reading of the Inspection of Coal Mines Bill.—Lord
BROUGHAM objected to it as interfering with the employment
of capital and labour.—The Earl of CARLISLE said
the measure was justified by the specialties of the case,
its object being to prevent the recurrence of the appalling
accidents which had taken place. The bill was read a
third time and passed.

The Earl of EGLINTON moved that the parties
concerned in affixing fictitious signatures to petitions respecting
the Liverpool Waterworks Bill, should attend at the
bar of the house on Monday.

On the third reading of the Factories Bill the Earl of
HARROWBY moved the insertion of a clause, restricting
the labour of children within the same hours as those
fixed for women and young persons. It was negatived
by 30 to 24, and the bill passed.

On Monday the 22nd, Joseph Byrne, Joseph Hinde,
and Duncan M'Arthur were placed at the bar of the
house charged with Breach of Privilege, in having been
engaged in getting up fictitious signatures to petitions
respecting the Liverpool Waterworks bill. The evidence
taken on this subject before the committee of the house
having been read, the parties were examined and
admitted the facts laid to their charge. The LORD
CHANCELLOR moved that they were guilty of a high
breach of privilege, and that they should be committed
to the custody of the Usher of the Black Rod; which was
ordered. It was then agreed on the motion of Earl
GREY that a select committee be appointed to inquire
whether the parties who got up the petitions were
cognisant of the fraud.—On the following day, the 26th,
the prisoners Byrne, Hinde, and M'Arthur, were brought
to the bar, reprimanded by the Lord Chancellor, and
discharged.

The County Courts Extension Bill having been read
a third time, Lord BEAUMONT moved an amendment to
the effect that certain clerks of county courts who had
given up freehold offices and held their present offices
by a similar tenure, should be irremoveable under the
bill. This amendment was opposed by Lord BROUGHAM,
but the Lord Chancellor was favourable to it; and it
was carried by 19 to 13.—Lord BROUGHAM proposed to
strike out some words which would have the effect of
giving a concurrent jurisdiction in the superior courts
for sums between £20 and £50; which, after some
discussion, was agreed to. The bill then passed.

An address was unanimously voted to Her Majesty, on
Tuesday the 23rd, in reply to the royal message relative
to a provision for the Duke and Princess Mary of
Cambridge.—A number of bills were then read a third
time and passed.—The Marquis of LANSDOWNE, in reply
to a question, intimated that it was not the intention of
government to renew the Alien Act. The present state
of the country did not render it necessary, though he was
far from saying that it might not be necessary hereafter.

On Thursday, the 25th, the Earl of ST. GERMANS
moved that the order of the day for the second reading
of the Marriages Bill should be discharged. He said
that the bill would be withdrawn for the present session,
and that he hoped the members would calmly consider
the subject before they met next year. After some
discussion on what was understood to be the state of public
opinion with respect to this measure, the order of the
day was discharged.—A petition was presented from the
persons committed to Newgate for Breach of Privilege,
expressing contrition; and Lord BEAUMONT gave notice
that he should move next day that the prisoners be
brought to the bar, admonished, and discharged.

On Thursday, the 27th of June, in the HOUSE OF
COMMONS, the adjourned debate on Mr. Roebuck's
resolution expressive of Confidence in the Foreign Policy
of the Government, was resumed by Sir John WALSH,
who regarded Lord Palmerston's speech, though a great