had been admitted into the original corporation act.
The attorney-general moved that the commons should not agree to this
amendment, as Mr. Smith's bill would soon pass; and he further moved
that they should not agree to the amendment regarding the election of
mayor and aldermen when the town-council were equally divided, on the
ground, that it left to chance, and not to the voice of the people,
which should be the predominating party in the corporation. This motion
was agreed to; and the reasons of the commons for disagreeing with these
amendments were communicated to the lords in a conference. The lords,
however, still adhered to their amendments, the Duke of Wellington
contending that the rejection of them was a departure from the principle
on which he and his friends had waived all opposition to the decision of
the select committee, and had consented to adopt the amendments as that
committee had framed them. The decision of the lords to adhere to their
amendments took place on the 1st of July, and on the 28th Mr. Smith's
bill for administering the charities by popular election passed the
commons. The second reading was moved in the lords on the 4th of
August, when it was opposed by the Duke of Wellington, who deemed it as
unreasonable in the circumstances and bad in itself. On a division the
second reading of the bill was negatived by a majority of thirty-nine to
twenty-two. The commons still refused to agree to the clause which the
lords had inserted in the bill on this subject, and there seemed to be
no alternative but to drop the bill. The lower house, however,
resolved to adopt the only course open to them, namely, that of a free
conference, at which the matter in dispute might be debated between the
managers _viva voce_. This course was pursued; but the two houses
could not come to any agreement on these clauses, and finally Lord John
Russell moved that the further consideration of the amendments should
be postponed till that day three months, which motion was agreed to.
Certain bills were subsequently brought in and passed, to supply those
parts of the dropped bill, in which both houses were agreed.

BILL TO ALLOW FELONS' COUNSEL TO ADDRESS THE JURY, ETC.

Several attempts had been made to obtain an act for allowing prisoners
on trial for felony the benefit of counsel to address the jury on
their behalf. Hitherto these attempts had been unsuccessful; but
notwithstanding this, the subject was again brough