The committee on Mr. Feargus O'Connor's Case
reported that he was insane, and recommended his
discharge from the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms, in
order to his being transferred to a lunatic asylum;
a motion in accordance with such recommendation
proposed by Mr. WALPOLE was immediately
carried.

The motion for referring the Corrupt Practices at
Elections (No. 2) Bill to a committee was opposed by
the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, who objected to the whole
machinery of the measure, and especially to the proposal
for taxing the offending districts and for referring
questions of bribery to the decision of the county courts.—
Mr. ANSTEY said a few words in favour of the bill, and
a division was called, which resulted in the loss of the
bill, by 65 votes to 16.

On Thursday the 17th, the morning sitting was taken
up in the discussion of the Metropolitan Water Supply
Bill, the motion for committing which was met by Mr.
MOWATT with an amendment to postpone it for the
session, on the ground that the public interest had not
been considered in the bill, either in regard to the
source of supply, distribution, or price; and he urged
that under proper arrangements, combining the sewage
of the metropolis and the water supply under one
system, the sewage might be made to pay the whole
expense of the water supply, and at the same time
furnish the agriculturists with a more valuable manure
than could be obtained from the South Sea Islands.—
Lord EBRINGTON also objected to the bill, and stated
that the house had no information upon which to
proceed in regard to it.—Mr. T. DUNCOMBE animadverted
on the opposition of the Sanitary Association and the
late head of the Sewers Commission, who had, by
discharging the sewage of the metropolis in the Thames,
polluted the existing source of supply. Government
were entitled to the thanks of the house for pressing
forward this bill.—Mr. W. WILLIAMS complained that
no member representing the metropolis had been placed
on the committee, and expressed his intention of
supporting the amendment.—Sir B. HALL and Mr. GEACH
spoke in favour of the bill, and Mr. MOWATT, having
withdrawn his amendment, the house went into
committee, and passed the first clause, in which an alteration
was made, fixing 1855 as the date for the completion of
the works and commencement of the operation of the
bill.—At the evening sitting, a petition was presented by
Lord NAAS from New South Wales, claiming the
Management of all the Land arrangements of the
Colony, the Governor-General's salary only excepted.—
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER, referring to
some expressions in the petition, as for instance one
describing her Majesty as only the trustee of her colonial
dominions, desired to have an opportunity of examining
it, and suggested that its formal presentation should be
deferred.—The SPEAKER suggested that if any
expression disrespectful to the sovereign were in the petition
the best course would be to withdraw it.—Mr.
GLADSTONE had read the petition and had not observed any
expression disrespectful to her Majesty in it. A similar
statement was made by Lord NAAS, and ultimately the
petition was ordered to lie on the table.

The consideration of the Metropolitan Water Bill was
renewed in committee, and the remaining clauses were
agreed to. Lord J. MANNERS moved the second reading
of the Metropolitan Burials Bill. After detailing
the circumstances attending on the failure of the act of
1850, he explained that the present bill was divided
into four heads:—The first repealed the act of 1850;
the second gave power to the secretary of state to close
burial grounds within the metropolitan districts which
were prejudicial to public health or offensive to public
decency; the third gave power to the parochial authorities
to replace the burial grounds so closed by others
without the metropolis; and the fourth empowered the
use of the cemetery which the government found
themselves in possession of in providing temporary
accommodation to those parishes which, by the sudden closing
of their burial grounds, were deprived of the means of
burying their dead. The principle on which the bill
proceeded was that of local responsibility combined
with government control. It was not proposed to grant
compensation inasmuch as no burial ground would be
closed which was not a public nuisance, and inimical to
the public health.—Lord EBRINGTON objected to dealing
with the question at this period of the session, and
more especially to the repeal of the act of the Board of
Public Health, of which he had been a member.—Mr.
T. DUNCOMBE stated some facts relative to St. Clement's
churchyard in explanation of a previous statement as to
the practice of breaking up coffins and bodies interred
for the purpose of making room for other interments.
He supported the bill, and thanked the government for
introducing it. He suggested that all graveyards within
the metropolis should be closed by a certain day. The
motion for the second reading was agreed to. The
Metropolitan Sewers Bill passed through committee,
after some observations, expressive of approbation from
Lord SEYMORE and Sir B. HALL. On the third reading
of the New Zealand Government Bill, Sir W.
MOLESWORTH moved the omission of the land clauses,
in order that the New Zealand Company's claims might
be considered in another session, which Secretary Sir J.
PAKINGTON opposed and Mr. Gladstone supported.—
Mr. AGLIONBY and Mr. J. A. SMITH spoke in defence of
the New Zealand Company, and on a division, the
clauses were confirmed, and the bill was afterwards
passed. Lord R. GROSVENOR'S bill for limiting the
Polling at County Elections to one Day was thrown out
on a division, 39 voting for and 49 against it.

Mr. HORSMAN, after adverting to the difficulties he
had met with in forming the committee on the Frome
Vicarage Case, and the additional impediment
interposed by Mr. Gladstone, in calling upon him—as he
contended, not in accordance with, but contrary to,
precedent, where an impeachment was not intended—
to prepare heads or articles of the charges he had alleged
against the Bishop of Bath and Wells, stated his intention
of abandoning the subject for the present session.—
Mr. GLADSTONE denied having impeded the nomination
of the committee, and contended that he was fully
justified, by precedent, in demanding that the charges
against the Bishop of Bath and Wells should be reduced
to articles, and laid on the table. He called attention
to the enormous power of accusation possessed by the
house against private individuals, unaccompanied by the
restraints which prevailed in a court of law; the only
check being, that the house would not entertain charges
that were not based on the most unquestionable foundation.
It was no answer that impeachment was not
intended—it was the duty of Mr. Horsman, having
brought such charges against the Bishop of Bath and
Wells, to proceed to impeachment. But the charges
had broken down, and Mr. Horsman had now discovered
that the constitutional restraint which prevailed in the
House of Commons would prevent that assembly being
made the arena of licensed libel and defamation. In
incriminatory proceedings the house only proceeded
upon defined written charges, the one exception that he
remembered being in the case of ship money in the
reign of Charles Normal 0 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} Normal 0 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} II., when the facts were everywhere
notorious.—Sir W. P. WOOD gave some explanations in
support of the opinion given by him on the previous
discussion as to the law of the case.—The CHANCELLOR
OF THE EXCHEQUER intimated, that if Mr. Gladstone
had proceeded with his amendment, the government
would have felt it their duty on principles of justice to
support it. Dismissing the particular case, the unsatisfactory
state of the law remained: it would be the duty
of government to take into their serious consideration
the whole question, with a view to apply a remedy to
those grievances that exist as to the institution of clerks
by bishops.

The motion for the second reading of the Crime
and Outrage Bill was opposed by Mr. V. Scully, who
moved the formal amendment, that it be postponed for
three months, which Mr. Lawless seconded. The
Solicitor-General for Ireland spoke in favour, and
Mr. F. French, Mr. Magan, and Mr. F. Scully against
the bill, which was carried on a division by 118
to 13.

On Monday June 21, the morning sitting was taken
up in discussing the Poor Law Board Continuance Bill
and the Metropolis Water Supply Bill, both of which
were read a third time and passed, and in considering
and affirming the first clause of the Metropolitan