POSTSCRIPT.
IN the House of Lords, Earl GRANVILLE stated' the alterations in the Revised Code : 48. a year was to be given on the average yearly attendance of each pupil ; 8e. to be given for reading, writing, and arithmetic to every pupil who attended 200 times, subject to a deduction of ls. 3d. in case of failure in attendance.. As to grouping it would be effected in the way the managers might eon.. cider most reasonable; and with respect to pupil teachers there would be a lien on the education grant to make up any deficiency in their stipends. The Government did not entirely approve of these alterations, they were- concessions to the House of Commons ; but any further concessions would render the scheme utterly worthless.
In answer to a question from Lord VIVIAN, as to the intention of the Government with respect to the fortifications at Spitbead, Earl BE GREY stated the question had been again referred to the Royal Commission, and in order to obtain an opinion which would command public confidence, they had added to the Commission men of the highest professional and scientific attainments. The Government, on the receipt of their report, would, upon their own responsibility, adopt the course they deemed best calculated to secure the safety of the country. There was no surplus of the funds voted for fortification in hand at present.
The Duke of CAMBRIDGE said the opinion of the late Admiral Dundas, that the construction of ships and forts should go on simultaneously had been proved accurate by the recent experiments at Shoeburyness. He thought the construction of land forts should be proceeded with, and vessels like the Monitor congregated for coast defence.
In the House of Commons,
Sir G. BOWYER drew attention to the affairs of Italy, of the state of which, especially in Naples and Sicily, he drew a very gloomy picture, and. charged our Government with the whole responsibility. By the moral influence they had exerted in favour of the revolutionary party they had put down our old and safe ally, Austria—set up France as the preponderat: ing power in Italy, made Victor Emmanuel a French viceroy, and M. Ratazzi as much minister of the Emperor at Turin as M. Persigny was at Paris.
Mr. LAYARD defended the course which had been pursued both by the Italian and the British Government. He denied the accuracy of the alle- gations as to the state of the South, and quoted official returns to show that under the Government of Victor Emmanuel Italy was progressing in material prosperity, in constitutional freedom, and in civil and religions toleration in a most satisfactory manner.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER defended the coarse pursued by the Government with reference to Italy. He deplored the fact that France should, by remaining at Rome, inflict such injury upon that country, and hoped that, in the interests of Europe, that occupation would shortly cease. So far as our Government were responsible for the changes which had taken place, he, as an individual member of that Government, wished its responsibility had been exaggerated instead of attenuated, and he believed that the possession of Rome as the capital of Italy, and the abolition of the temporal sovereignty of the Pope, would be an advantage to the cause of freedom, the cause of order, and the maintenance of the peace of Europe.
A great number of members spoke in the course of an animated discus- sion, which was continued till long past midnight.
The Standard says : "On the numbers being taken on the division on the motion to read the Courts of Justice Bill a second time last night, it appeared that the ayes and noes were equal. The speaker was in the act of stating that, as the House had given its assent to the introduction of the measure, he should record his voice with the ayes, when Mr. T. G. Baring, the Under Secretary for India, rushed to the chair in an excited state, and stammered out that an hon. member had not passed through the lobby. A cry of "Order " was raised, and Mr. Brand, the ministerial whip, advanced to the clerk's desk and formally reported that the delinquent was the hon. member for Rochester, Mn Wykeham Martin. That hon. member being- summoned to the table, in reply to the questions of the Speaker, stated. that he was in the house and had heard the question put, and that it was his intention to have voted with the ayes. His vote was then recorded, and the numbers were declared to be : Ayes, 82 ' • Noes, 81; being a ma- jority of one for Ministers. The amendment of Mr. Selwyn, that the bill should be read a second time that day six months was, therefore, lost. Upon the original motion, " that the bill be now read," being put, a second division was called from the Conservative benches. The sand- glass was turned, and the division bells rang out their three minutes, when the doors were again dosed and the house once more divided. In the inte- rim an English county member and an hen. member from Ireland, who having entered the house before the first division, had gone into the lobby with the Government under a misapprehension of the question, discovered their error and refrained from taking part in the second division, and the member for the new constituency of Birkenhead, who was absent from the first division, arrived to swell the ranks of the noes. With the assistance, therefore, of Colonel Gilpin, member for Bedfordshire ; Mr. Blake, the member for the city of Waterford ; and Mr. Laird, the member for the new borough of Birkenhead, the aspect of affairs was totally altered. The voting paper changed hands, and, amidst several rounds of cheering and the greatest excitement, Mr. Selwyn had the satisfaction of announcing the defeat of the ministerial job by a majority of two."
Previous page
