11thatto nub Vrouthingo .in Varlianaut.

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF TEE WEER.

Horse of Loans. Monday, March 15. The Irish Magistracy ; Lord Derby's Answer to Lord Londonderry—District Courts of Bankruptcy Abolition; Lord Brougham's amended Bill—East India Loan Bill read a first time. Tuesday, March 16. The Regis Scheme; Petition of the Anti-Slavery Society— Trustees Relief Bill committed—Transfer of Estates; Lord St. Leonards's Bill com- mitted—East India Loan Bill read a second time—Vote of Thanks to Mr. Halliday. Thursday, March 18. The Cagliari; Lord Malmesbury's Answer to Lord Lynd- hurst—Examination of Defendants in Criminal Actions ; Lord Brougham's Bill read a first time.

.Friday, March 19. Church of England Special Services Bill reported—Educa- tion in Ireland ; Lord Derby's Answer to Lord Clanricarde—Trustees Relief Bill re- ported—East India Loan Bill read a third time and passed.

Horse OF COMMONS. Monday, March 15. The Cagliari ; Mr. Disraeli's State- ment—The Policy of the Government debated—Supply ; Votes on account—Mu- tiny Bills read a first time.

Tuesday, March 16. Case of Mr. Hodge ; Mr. Disraeli's Statement—Vote of Thanks to Mr. Halliday—Indian Colonization ; Mr. Ewart's Motion. Wednesday, March 17. Oaths ; Lord John Russell's Bill committed. Thursday. March 18. The French Question ; Mr. Disraeli's Answer to Mr. Cran- ford—The Working Classes ; Mr. Slaney's Motion—Indian Mutineers; Mr. Rich's Motion—The Galway Freemen Disfranchisement ; Mr. Clive's Bill read a first time —Mutiny Bills committed. .Friday, March 19. British Law in the Colonies ; Mr. Rol-doll's Question—Com- missions in the Army ; Mr. Bagwell's Complaint—Encumbered Estates Court (Ire- land); Mr. De Vere's Question—Marine Mutiny Bill read a third time and passed— Cambridge University Matriculation and Degrees Bill committed.

TIME-TABLE.

Sittings this Week, 4; Time, 6h ubm Sittings this Week, 5; Time, Mb lOm this Session. 26; — 47h 20m -this Session 30; — 1413h em

POLICY OF THE GOVERNMENT.

When the report of Supply was brought up on Monday, Mr. Bmusst OSBORNE raised the question of the policy which the Government.in- tend to pursue. When asked for a sketch of the principles and policy of the Government, Mr. Disraeli had referred the House to a statement made in another place, and Sir John Pakington had referred to hustings- speeches in Buckinghamshire and elsewhere. That was an unprece- dented and unparliamentary, course. The statement made in another place was obscure in itself; it has not been made clearer by what was said at Droituich, it became more ambiguous in Bucks, evasive in North Leicestershire, contrary in King's Lynn, and unintelligible in Suffolk. Lord Derby constructed an Administration which as far as personal cha- racters and respectability are concerned is equal to any Administration he had seen ; but the question is not about their abilities or respectability, but their principles and policy. The position of the Administration is that of one which numbers a considerable minority among its supporters. It called upon the House for time, forbearance, and money. What claim has the Government to make such demands ? What has been their past conduct? In opposition they systematically opposed and thwarted the measures of the late Administration. In office, they are ransacking the pigeon-holes of their predecessors for measures which have not their confidence. Mr. Disraeli had over and over again asserted that a Minis- ter should have principles and a policy, and denounced the hand-to- month system of the Whigs. Mr. Osborne described the circumstances under which the Conspiracy Bill was introduced, how it had been sup- ported by Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Napier, and how the first reading was carried. Then came the amendment of Mr. Gibson.

" He had always been the eloquent and able advocate of principles which are supposed to be symbolized by the lamb ; but on the occasion to which I refer he mounted tne lion. (Loud laughter.) The opportunity was too tempting to the right honourable gentleman opposite and his party. He lost no time in getting up behind the right honourable Member for Ashton --(A laugh)—and by good management and considerable address—aided, I am sorry to say, by the somewhat careless conduct of the noble lord lately at the head of the Government—(Loud laughter and cheering)—he deceived, I was almost going to say jockeyed, the noble lord. (Laughter and cheering.) Now, I don't charge the honourable gentleman who did this with intrigue, but I do say that it was a manoeuvre discreditable to a party, and will not add to their reputation." (Cheers and laughter.) As to the Walewski deipatch, there have been several readings, and no two gentlemen agree about it, Mr. Disraeli called it an "unfortunate lucubration" ; Mr. Whiteside, an "insulting despatch " ; Sir John Pa- kington said it had not been well translated, and that it meant no offence. Mr. Osborne thought that more had been made of it than it deserved. In this strain Mr. Osborne showed up.ffie inconsistent conduct of the Government with regard to the Jniiii,BU; quoting speeches in support et

The Lords.

Hour of Moor of

Meeting. Adjournment. Monday bh bb 65m Tuesday 5h 71i Ibm Wednesday No sitting. Thursday a 6h Min

Friday 5h .... 6h 55m

The amnions.

Hour of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment. Monday 4h Oh Om Tuesday 4h .... Sh 4bm Wednesday Noon .... lh 45m Thursday 411 .(m)1111 30m

Friday 4h .... 6h 50m his views till called to order by the SitsAriunt,atikl him that he must not quote speeches made insthis House in thin 'on.

seam

Mr. Osnosass bowed tothe Speakems—th ikwas the first time he n had heard that doctrine enunciated' He on Church-rates, Education, and Parliamentary Reform. Lard Statuary was for abolishing !church-rates. On education Mr. Henley answered Sir John Pakington. There are three gentlemen in the Cabinet who support the Jew Bill. What does the Government mean to do with regard to the Orange So- ciety in Ireland, with Irish National Education, with Mr. Spoonerhi me- )tion on the Maynooth Grant ? Lord Derby has promised, but he has no great opinion of a Reform Bill. But what was said on the hustings ? Lord John Manners said he was true to " rational Toryism." Sir John Pakington would give no pledge. Mr. Disraeli said thelatelieform Bill was a gross Whig job,—forgetting that Lord Derby, one of its makers said that it adequately represented the property, intelligence, and feelings of the country. " I wish to know what are the principles on which the Reform Bill into be founded—whether on the principle of rational Toryism, as expressed by the noble Lord, (John Manners,) or on the extreme Chartist principles enunciated by the Attorney-General ? It is true that we have had the speech of the noble Member for King's Lynn, (Lord Stanley,) who is, I be- hevel a true and rational reformer. But he occupies a very peculiar posi- tion in the Cabinet—a position which I think we should all honour; but at the same time, I very much doubt whether this Reforming /Eneas will be able to carry the Conservative Anchises. (Great laughter.) No Sir, I much fear that he will find some Dido of Conservatism to obstruct 'him in carrying out his good principles." (Renewed laughter.) Mr. Osborne reminded the House how Sir Robert Peel had been treated by Mr. Disraeli because he had adopted measures originally in,- Woduced by his opponents ; and how he had been hurled from power, to the regret of all well-thinking men in England. Mr. DISRAELI said that one of the advantages of the change of Go- vernment was that "some voices" again sounded within those walls which for a long time had been silent. Now that he had heard those " remarkable notes," he must observe that "the weapon " which Mr. Osborne was wont to wield so effectively had become a little rusty, and that it is only in opposition he will find those opportunities which will enable him to regain that cunning of fence for which he was celebrated. Mr. Disraeli did not make any explanation, but replied to Mr. Osborne in his own style. He denied that the course the Government had pur- sued had been unparliamentary ; and he cited, as cases in point, the con- duct of Lord Palmerston in 1865, and that of Lord John Russell in 1853, who referred the House of Commons to a statement made by Lord Aber- deen in another place. Mr. Disraeli had voted for the firstsreadinF of the Conspiracy Bill, ' to show a faithful ally that we sympathized with him in the difficult position in which he was placed " ; buthe had reserved to himself a free and unfettered course with regard to the second reading. Mr. Osborne had asked, "What about church-rates ? " Mr. Disraeli res plied, " What did you do about church-rates ? " When the late Go- vernment was beaten on that subject, an Under-Secretary and a noble lord holding an office in the Household voted against Ministers, and Mr. Osborne staid away. " What are you going to do about the Jew Bill ?" inquired Mr. Osborne. " What did your Government do ?" was the answer. A member of the Government in the House of lords voted against the measure. "This, therefore, is not the only Cabinet in which differences exist even upon the Jew Bill." There was also a division with regard to the Ballot on which the members of the late Government took different sides. With regard to the India- Bill, there had been no inconsistency. The course taken by the Government was not taken in deference to the majority of the House, but because the vote affected the position of the East India Company, and a question thus touched ought no longer to be tampered with. [It is the present intention of the Go- vernment, he said, to introduce the-India Bill before Easter.] As to the Orange Society, Mr. Disraeli made a statement similar to that made by Lord Derby in the House of Lords : he does not belong to it, he regret- ted its institution; but it is legal, and it ought to be no peremptory dis- qualification for the Magistracy. As regards National education, he said, Ministers would endeavour to combine the present system with " a just relief to those Church schools that now receive no assistance from the State, in a manner satisfactory to all parties. His explanation with regard to Parliamentary Reform was given in terms almost similar to those in his hustings-speech last week. But he said that the bill will not be devised to prop up a political party or to uphold the interests of a particular class. "It will be founded upon principles of general justice, and will, I hope, give universal satisfaction. But it was said the Go- vernment had not a majority in the House. Who has—Lord Palmerston, or Lord john Russell ? If they do not, "it does not follow that I am to suppose we do not possess it; and until the fatal truth is proved by facts which I do not anticipate, I shall believe that we possess the constitu- tional confidence of the House of Commons." (Loud cheers.) Mr. Honsmew said he differed from Mr. Osborne, who had charged a large section of his own party with helping to place the present Govern- ment in,power by a discreditable manoeuvre. He differed from Mr. Os- borne not only on that ground, but as to the character and position of the ,Government and the duty of the Opposition. They had three courses before them—to place the Government in a minority at once, to attack them day after day and obstruct public business, or to wait for a convenient occasion to strike a decisive blow. They would not be jus- tified in adopting the first, because when in Opposition the Government fiad conducted themselves with moderation and forbearance. To the se- cond course, of which Mr. Osborne had set an example, he objected. The last course was perfectly legitimate. After showing that gentlemen opposite had not evinced any great avidity for office, that Lord Derby had made good appointments, and that the country exhibited no alarm, he turned to ask what had become of the majority returned last year to sus- tain the most powerful Minister seen in modern times ?

Now, he would speak of the gentlemen who sat on the front Opposition-

bench with the feelings that he could not but entertain for those with whom he had for so many years been associated in the intercourse of public life and private friendship ; and of the noble lord the Member for Tiverton he Could only speak in the =tuner in which every man must feel and speak of him who had ever stood to him in a position of official subordination—ex- pressing the highest sense of his unvarying courtesy and kindness, and of that generous consideration and protection which superaddcd feelings of personal obligation to those of admiration and esteem. But standing there as one of the majority by whose votes the late Government had been dis- plaosd, by what Mr. Osborne had described as a discreditable menceuvre, and accepting all the consequences of that vote, he was saying nothing in- consistent with the feelings he had expressed when he reasserted out of office what he had respectAilly but pertinaciously urged in office, that the downfall of the Government and the disorganization of the party arose from that fatal and inveterate habit of the noble lord lately at the head of the Government, of always looking to the opposite benches for sympathy and support, and turning the cold shoulder to his friends; always more Intent upon neutralizing and conciliating his foes than on confirming his friends ; relying too much upon his own adroitness and dexterity. for that permanent strength which could only arise from solid fidelity, to principles ; and above all, imagining that the powerful, earnest, and high-nettled majority which was so triumphantly given him last April, had no other mission to fulfil than to support the personal position of the Minister, instead of the principles of a party. This fatal confidence, carelessness, and false security, had led to so fatal and rapid a change, haat whereas in August last they had left the Rouse a united party, under the most powerful Minister that had been seen since the Reform Bill, they had reassembled in February a disunited and disbanded party, under a Minister who, they knew, could not long remain in office. When, therefore, Mr. Osborne asked the present Government what their principles were, the right honourable gentleman opposite, vith perfect truth, replied, "Tell us what were the principles which you as a Government maintained three weeks ago.' Why, that was a question which some of those who sat near him had asked themselves in vain. Was it the principle of Parliamentary Reform ? That was indefinitely postponed. Was it religious freedom ? Upon that point the answer was moat complete. The conduct of three members of the present Cabinet on this subject did them great honour, and that of Mr. Disraeli in particular had been of a character which would make it impossible to speak of him otherwise than with respect. But what was the position of the Liberal party on this question ? For the first time in the history of the Liberal party, to its disgrace and shame, that question of religious freedom upon which their most glorious victories had been obtained was made an open question in a Liberal Cabinet. That was done last year. This year the question had been abandoned by the Cabinet, and intrusted to more vigorous and liberal hands. On the question of church-rates, again, what were their principles ? Every one had heard, either from his constituents or from honourable Members who were present, that when a large and important deputation waited upon the late Premier upon the subject of church-rates, they were stung with indignation because their reception had not been such as they had'a right to expect. Was it again the principle of administrative reform and the pure dispensation of patronage? How was that illustrated in what he could not otherwise characterize than as the shabby nepotism which in the county of Sent and at Manchester filched from their legitimate claimants those professional appointments that, con- trary to all precedent, had been misappropriated to the aristocratic con- nexions of the Cabinet? (Loud cries of " Hear hear !") Was it, then, last of all, the maintenance of the independence and honour of the coun- try ? The vote which displaced the noble lord had given the reply to this question. He thought it right to bring all these facts to the remembrance of the noble Lord [Palmerstonj in order that they might be well pondered ever before he returned to office. ("Hear hear ! and a laugh.) It was suite evident that the season of adversity was favourable to truth, while in the sunshine of prosperity there was nothing but adulation. The assiduity and eloquence of lir. Osborne were so great that they seemed likely to realize a speedy return to office, and to give but a short time to penitence and good resolves. Mr. Horsman pointed out that power is de- posited with the Opposition ; that they can dictate every measure ; and that the interests of truth and progress will be more surely promoted by real liberality in opposition than by sham liberality in office. The Govern- ment has already made two concessions. It has given up the Conspiracy Bill, and has determined to give more effect to that competitive examina- tion for commissions in the Artillery and Engineers which was abandoned by Lord Panmure. The Opposition had better remain quiet until it can make a move with advantage, and shall have found itself under leadership which will enable it to move to the other side and maintain a position there with honour to itself and advantage to the country. Lord JOHN Russmn also declared against embarrassing the Ministry in the outset The party opposite had followed a policy they deemed Conservative, he had followed a policy he deemed Reforming. If they followed out their principles, questions would arise on which he should still be found differing from them. After some warning comments on Mr. Disraeli's statements respecting the Orangemen and National Educa- tion in Ireland, Lord John entered upon an elaborate refutation of Mr. Disraeli's description of the Reform Bill ; reminding him that it was framed by Lord Grey, Lord Althorp, Sir James Graham, Lord Derby, and himself, persons not to be lightly accused of a series of Whig jobs. Neither Sir Robert Peel, nor Mr. Goulburn, nor Lord Hardinge, ever brought charges against these men like that preferred by Mr. Disraeli. With regard to the future, he should look with great suspicion upon any Reform Bill of which Mr. Disraeli was to be the conceder, or in any part the framer.

In the course of his speech, Lord John paid a very high compliment to Lord Palmerston for his great exertions during the war, and for the op- portune moment at which he signed the treaty of peace. " I think that nothing can efface those obligations from the memory of Englishmen." Lord John also said that Lord Malmesbury would carry on the affairs of his office "with great regard for the dignity and interests of England, combined with a conciliatory spirit toward other states." But while we maintain the alliance with France, he hoped we should not consider that i power as the only friendly power in Europe, and that we should place our relations with other states on a cordial and permanent footing.

Mr. DRUMMOND interpolated a few words, to say that he agreed with Mr. Disraeli's view of the Reform Bill, and that the proofs of his allega- tions should be shown to Lord John hereafter.

Lord Pararvaurrox took a share in the debate, called up by the remarks of Mr. Horsman. Mr. Disraeli asked where the majority of the House is to be found ? Mr. Horsman seemed to know where it is, and to be conscious that he could wield it on a proper occasion. Those who sat with Lord Palmerston would offer no factious opposition, nor anticipate the period at which the majority should be manifested. When his Government lost the assistance of Mr. Horsman, he was not aware that that loss was oc- casioned by a want of political confidence. In pursuing a course he thought best for the country, he had been glad to receive support from any quarter ; and if he were again intrusted with the conduct of affairs, he should not think any measure the worse because it had the support of those who might sit opposite to him. Mr. Horsman seemed to imply that Lord Palmerston was not a Liberal but a Tory. Now he had concurred in carrying the great measures of domestic policy upon which Lord John Russell so justly prided himself. After exonerating the present Govern- ment from blame in the course they had pursued on Mr. Gibson's motion, he finished by a summary of the deeds of his Administration. " With regard to the course which we pursued during the three years that we held office, that I am willing to leave to the impartial judgment of history. We carried a great and difficult war to a successful termination. I was called to office, not by any effort of my own, not by any Parlia- mentary proceeding in which I was a mover; I was Called to office because two other combinations which had been attempted had failed, and I felt it my duty under such circumstances to do all that I could to promote the interests of the country. We carried that war to a successful termination. In conjunction with our great ally the Sovereign of the French empire, we obtained a peace which I believe every one admits sufficiently accomplished the objects for which the war was undertaken, and we persevered in re- quiring the complete execution of that treaty, although great difficulties were interposed in the way of the fulfilment of some important conditions of the compact. We had to encounter other foreign difficulties of lees magnitude, which we overcame ; and when that great event occurred which convulsed our Indian empire from one end to the other, we spared no exertion to put an early termination to the struggle. With regard to our internal legm- laden I maintain that during those three years we have succeeded in per- suading Parliament to pass several measures of great importance—measures connected with the industry of the country, and measures abolishing systems which had endured for ages—and making arrangements which had long been desired, but which had previously been wished for in vain. It was owing to our perseverance that, although the last session of Parlia- ment was shortened by the dissolution, and although we were told by the right honourable gentleman the Member for Buckinghamshire we intended to waste a session, we carried through Parliament three measures of great importance—the two measures concerning Divorce and Testamentary Ju- risdiction, and the Criminal Breaches of Trust Act. We carried those measures, which were of great importance and effected great improvements, by the perseverance with which we urged the House not to separate until they had been passed into law. I merely mention these things ; but, as 1 said before, we are willing to leave our administration to the verdict of im- partial history; and I feel perfectly satisfied that when the results of that administration shall be impartially regarded, we shall be found not to haw abused the trust which our Sovereign, our Country, and Parliament placed in us." (Ohtxre.) The report of supply was agreed to.

THE FRE-NCH QUESTION.

Mr. CRANFORD asked whether Lord Malmesbury's despatch to Count Walewski had been submitted formally or in substance to the French au- thorities before it was officially presented?

Mr. Disnszu put it to the House whether questions of this kind ought to be sanctioned. It implied that there had been some surreptitious com- munication with a foreign Government. Had Mr. Craufurd inquired, he might have found valid reasons for the apparent delay in the transmission of the despatch. It had to be submitted to the Cabinet,, and thou to the Queen ; and then occurred such weather that for forty-eight hours no one could cross the Channel. Having noticed these circumstances, which he hoped would be satisfactory to the House, Mr. Disraeli again protested against a class of questions of no advantage to the public.

THE OATHS BILL.

The Wednesday sitting was occupied by a Wei' discussion on the Oaths Bill. In moving that the House should go into Committee, Lied JOHN RUSSELL explained that he had been asked to poikosie proesedinge. because many members of the Government were absent in attendance on her Majesty. He thought postponement unadvisable. But Members would have another opportunity on the bringing up of the report, as he should then propose some alterations. One is to provide that the act shall not affect the oath taken by the Roman Catholics; another, to in- troduce words into the preamble making it clear that the declaration against foreign potentates is not a declaration against influence over the mind.

Mr. WALPOLE and Mr. NnWDEOATE thanked Lord John Russell for taking a course fair towards the opponents of the bill and not disadvan- tageous to its supporters. Mr. THOMAS BUNCOMBE asked whether Lord John Russell expected a majority in the House of Peers; and if not, whether he would proceed to seat Baron Rothschild by a resolution of the House of Commons ? To enable Lord John to reply, Mr. Driawni moved the adjournment of the debate.

Lord Joine RussELL said, it was doubtful where the majority of that House- was, and it would be presumptuous in him to say where is the majority in the House of Lords. As to the second question, he thought it desirable that, decisions made by that House should if possible be made by general consent of Parliament. The Stockdale case was so settled. It would be inconvenient to raise a discussion as to the privi- leges of the House, and he thought it his duty to finally settle the Jew question by the authority of Parliament. There are two other modes of admitting Baron Rothschild, but it would be inexpedient to discuss either at present.

Mr. BUNCOMBE was not satisfied : he declared himself in favour of pro- ceeding by a resolution, predicted that the bill would be rejected by the

Lords, and promised, it; after the rejection of the bill, Lord deka Russell or Mr. Dillwyn did not move a resolution to admit Baron Roth- schild, he would move it himself.

The bill passed through Committee, and the report was ordered to be brought op on Monday.

THE SEPOY MUTDIY.

Mr. RICH called the attention of the House to the treatment of muti- nous Sepoys and other insurgents in India, and moved for papers. The drift of a long speech in which, amid repeated cries of " Divide !" he nar- rated the origin and progress of the outbreak, was to show that the stories of Sepoy atrocities have been exaggerated, and that our officers and sol- diers had retaliated upon life and property ; and to urge upon the House the necessity of tempering justice with mercy. He applauded the con- duct of Lord Canning, and condemned the Wholesale execution of rebels. In Oude especially, he contended, we have no right to carry on a war of extermination. Many landowners now in rebellion—Mann Singh for ex- ample—had sheltered English fugitives. If Mann Singh were taken and hanged, that would be murder.

General THOMPSON seconded the motion.

Mr. EMILIE promised some of the papers asked for • and expressed a general reliance on the exertions and instructions of Lord Canning and Sir Colin Campbell to prevent unnecessary severity, and to distinguish between mutinous Sepoys and rebels. Mr. VANSITPART hoped the House would not be carried away by the morbid sensibility shown by Mr. Rick on behalf of mutinous Sepoys, and expatiated on the treachery and blood- thirstiness of the Natives. Mr. Buxton grew eloquent in defence of

the character of the Natives ; warmly approved of the policy of Lord Canning ; and accused the British army and its commander-m-chief of cruelties that revived the bloody and terrible memories of Taunton and Culloden. At the same time, he admitted that death would be the righteous penalty of every Sepoy present at the murder of his officers, or who butchered our countrymen and women. Mr. MANOLM said that Mr. Rich had sought to palliate the conduct of the Sepoys more than they deserved, but he did not believe the Sepoys had been guilty of the mutilation of women and children. He noticed that the stones told here of atrocities committed at Delhi were not confirmed in Delhi ; but at Delhi they had stories about Cawnpore, which equally vanished at Cawnpore itself. The inscriptions discovered on walls at Cawnpore were not seen on the first visit of the relieving force : they seem to have been written subsequently. He approved of the policy of Lord Can- ning. Captain Scorr and Mr. ADAMS vindicated the character of British officers and men from unjust imputations. Sir Hazier RAWLINSON would not impute wanton cruelty to the officers, but he stated as a signi- ficant fact, that, after ten months' fighting, we had not in our hands a single prisoner of war. Our policy should be one that would leave open a door to reconciliation. It may not be the time for an amnesty ; but to pave the way for one, a stop should be put to the system of not granting quarter.

Motion withdrawn.

THE COLONIZATION OP INDIA.

Mr. WILLIAM Ewa= moved for the appointment of a Select Com-

mittee to inquire into the progress and prospects and the best means to be adopted for the promotion of European colonization and settlement in India, and the formation of military stations, espgcially in the hill dis- tricts and healthier climates of that country, as well as for the extension of our commerce with Central Asia. Many parts of India are favourable to the European constitution ; notably, Sylheti Sikhim, Assam, Nepaul, Simla, Mount Aboo, the Vindaya range, the Eastern and Western Ghauts. In these districts we might establish centres of civilization, schools, colleges, stations, and not only benefit the material interests of the Natives by stimulating agriculture and introducing municipal insti- tutions, but promote Christianity.

Mr. BAIIIIE looked with no favour on the proposal, and said it was inopportune ; but he did not oppose inquiry. He insisted that of late years the East India Company had offered every facility for colonization, but he represented their power, especially as regards grants of land, as limited. No one opposed the motion ; but Colonel SYKES, Sir J. Eumricsross,

and Mr. MANGLES, set forth views opposed to the practicability of the project, on the ground that the climate is unhealthy in the plains, and that where it is healthy, in the mountains, the rough character of the country is altogether unfavourable to cultivation. On the other hand, Mr. DARBY Say-moue and Mr. Tuatien. supported the motion, and the view of its proposer.

The motion was agreed to with the omission of the words " and the formation of military stations."

THE CASE OF THE CAGLIARI.

On the motion for the third reading of the India Loan Bill, Mr. Ma- mma began to make a statement respecting the Cagliari ; but as he was out of order, he was stopped by the SPEAKER, and did not resume it until the bill was read a third time and passed. Mr. DISRAELI then re- sumed his statement.

The case of the Cagliari was one of the first that engaged the atten-

tion of the new Government. After the greatest deliberation, they ar- rived at the conclusion that, as the late Government had acknowledged the jurisdiction of the King of Naples even after the new circumstances had come under their notice, their successors could not contravene that decision. But on Friday last Lord Palmerston stated that the late Government, at the time of their retirement, had the case under consider- ation. For that statement the Government was unprepared, as the do- cuments afforded no clue whatever to that information. However, the Government accepted the declaration of the late Prime Minister without hesitation, and the responsibility that followed as an inevitable conse- quence. Under the new circumstances, the Government have determined to submit the case to the present Law-advisers of the Crown, and, having obtained their opinion, to do what may be best for the interest of law, right, and justice. All the papers connected with the case will be laid before Parliament, including the legal opinions.

Lord PALMERSTON showed a desire to speak, but was stopped by the SPEAKER as there was no question before the House. To give the re- quired opportunity, Mr. DESRA.ELI instantly moved the adjournment of the House ; and Lord PALMERSTON reaxplained his position. At first the late Government had no ground to dispute the competency of the Nea- politan courts. After some time documents arrived from Naples, and a little sketch, showing that the Cagliari was captured beyond the terri- torial jurisdiction of Naples. The Law-officers were again ponsulted, but there was nothing in the opinion they gave that led the late Govern- ment to think themselves entitled to dispute the jurisdiction of the Nea- politan courts. The question was, whether the Cagliari had been forci- bly seized or whether the captain had willingly surrendered. The Go- vernment were advised that there was not that clear case of forcible capture which entitled them to demand the surrender of the engineers and to support the demand by force. When he said the claim was under consideration, he meant that the late Government were expecting further documents from Sardinia and Naples, with respect to the Sardinian.de- mend for the restitution of the vessel, because if that demand were ac- ceded to, the British Government would have a clear right to demand the surrender of the engineers.

The motion for the adjournment was withdrawn. Mr. Kinglake had a notice on the paper relating to the Cagliari ; but when he was called on by the SPEAKER to move it, he did not answer to his name. It was explained that the promise of Mr. Disraeli to produce the papers had rendered the motion unnecessary.

In the House of Peers, Lord LYNDHURST made inquiries respecting the case of the Cagliari ; which elicited a similar statement from the Earl of MALMESBURY.

THE IRISH MAGISTRACY.

In answer to the Marquis of LONDONDERRY, the Earl of DERBY ex- plained the views of the Government with regard to Orangemen. Lord Eglinton is not connected with Orange societies, and he holds that what- ever may have been the advantages of the Orange organization in former

times, it has on the whole been rather an injury than a good to Ireland. But the letter of the late Lord Chancellor, laying it down that Orangeism

is a disqualification for the office of magistrate, was not required by law, and will not be acted upon in future. The Orange Society is legal, and its members ought not to be subjected to any peculiar disqualifi- cation. Lord Derby would not say whether it is desirable or not that members of that Society should be appointed magistrates, but he thought it undesirable that the office should be held by clergymen. The recommendation of persons to hold the office of magistrate must be left to the unfettered discretion of the Lords-Lieutenant of counties, and the adoption of those recommendations to the unfettered discretion of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland.

The Earl of CARLISLE said he did not know that the question would have been put. Had the question been mooted while he was Lord- Lieutenant, he should have been prepared to vindicate Lord Chancellor Brady's letter. He concurred with Lord Derby as regards the Orange organization, and held himself prepared to question the propriety of future appointments.

Ties GALWAY FREEMEN.

Mr. Crave moved for leave to bring in a bill to disfranchise the free- men of Galway. The Royal Commission appointed to inquire into elections at Galway had stated specifically that very corrupt practices prevailed there. At the election in 1857, out of 660 freemen 260 were proved to have received bribes. When one of the candidates, Mr. Blake, was told that twenty-one butchers wanted 2101., and twenty-three shoemakers 1151., he withdrew, saying that the Bank of Ireland could not stand such a contest. Mr. Clive cited the case of Great Yarmouth, the freemen of which were disfranchised although only fourteen cases of bribery were proved. Sir THOMAS BURKE seconded the motion. He greatly amused the House, by confessing that, as the friend of Lord Dunkellin, he had given 2501. in order to obtain from his opponents 100 split votes. Lord Clan- ricarde had undertaken to pay for Lord Dunkellin whatever money was required in the town of Galway. Lord LOVAINE, Mr. KER SEYMER, and Mr. J. D. Frrzomutim sup- ported the bill. Colonel FRENCH opposed it. Mr. MAGUIRE and Mr. AYRTON called for less onesided measures.

Mr. WALPOLE advised the House to agree to the introduction of the bill ; but, having great doubts whether the course proposed was the proper course, he reserved his right to act as he pleased on the future stages of the bill. He especially alluded to the share in the election of 1867 taken by Sir Thomas Burke as a matter demanding.some expla- nation.

The bill was read a first time.

Earlier in the evening, Mr. ROEBUCK and Mr. Ktouraz had presented petitions from the freemen, naming Lord Clanricarde, Sir Thomas Burke, Professor Brown, and others, as parties to the bribery ; and praying that the House would punish the great as well as the small.

THE BANKRUPTCY LAW.

When, on Monday, Lord Bacmonem moved the second reading of his

District Courts of Bankruptcy Abolition Bill, he said he had peat hopes that a considerable portion of the bill would be embodied in the forth- coming Government measure. The LORD CHANCELLOR objected to pro- ceeding with the bill pro forma, in order to introduce amendments. It will be necessary to revise the whole of the law and introduce material improvements. The Attorney-General will shortly introduce into the other House a bill of a very comprehensive and extensive description, in- cluding all those matters to which Lord Brougham has particularly di- rected his attention. The bill before the House only dealt with a part of the subject, and piecemeal legislation will be inconvenient. Lord BROUGHAM consented that the order should be discharged ; but he laid on the table a new bill containing the very amendments which he de- sired to introduce ; and that bill was read a that time.

Pnosreers OF THE INDIAN CAMPAIGN.—In moving the second reading of the East India Loan Bill, Lord ELLENBOROVGH ventured upon anticipa- tions with regard to the state of India and the future of the revolt. Ile said—" The state of India is this. No doubt in the course of the last year, in consequence of the mutiny, there has been a very great loss of property belonging to the Company, and a great diminution of revenue ; but let it be recollected that all the revenue of Madras, Bombay, Scinde, the Pun- jaub, the country near Delhi, and the lower provinces, remains in the possession of the English Government. It is, besides, a great cause of sa- tisfaction that the price of opium is so high, for a very considerable in- crease of revenue may be expected under that head. There is no doubt, therefore, that even at present the state of the revenue of India is such as to justify hope. It may be necessary when I am asking for money to state what I conceive to be the present posture of affairs in India. I should dis- tinctly say that what I expect is this—that by the end of this month the Commander-in-chief will have destroyed Lucknow. I think the bodies of rebels who have congregated in that place will have been driven out of it by a fire under which no man can hope to live. I expect, therefore, there will not be in India after the commencement of the month of April any con- siderable rebel force remaining in a body. There will be no doubt, desul- tory and predatory movements made in various parts of the country, and a number of men will be required, and great exertions will be necessary to prevent these movements or to keep them in check. Some time will, there- fore, probably elapse before the country is reduced to a state of complete tranquillity ; but I trust that by the beginning of April our troops will he housed for the hot weather in the palaces of Lucknow. I do not state this from any information I have received since I have been in office. I am now only repeating precisely what I stated in conversation two months ago."

VOTES OF Tnamcs.—On Tuesday the thanks of Parliament, voted in February, were read again in both Housed, in order that the namc of Frederick James Halliday, Esq., Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, might be inserted. He has performed good and meritorious services, especially in making admirable arrangements for the passage of troops along the great Trunk Road.

In the House of Peers, Lord ELLENBOROUGH stated that the Queen has conferred a baronetcy on the son of Sir Henry Lawrence, and that the Court of Directors will propose to the Proprietors that he shall receive 1000/. a year. THE MILITIA VOTE.—In Committee of Supply, on Monday, General PEEL moved a vote of 500,0001. to defray the expense of the embodied Militia ; that sum having been expended in excess of the sum voted. Sir GEORGE LEWIS asked why the sum could not be taken, under the Appro- priation Act, from the 800,000/. saved on the Army Estimates in coLse- quence of the large number of men transferred to India. Mr. Duntettu and Mr. HAMILTON said the sum could not be taken without a vote of the House, because the 800,0001. bad been " declared" a saving. On the report of Supply the next day, Sir GEORGE LEWIS returned to the charge,. and Mr. DISRAELI further stated that even if the power under the Appropriation Aot to supply a deficiency on one vote from other votes applied in this case, he should have preferred to come to Parliament for a direct vote to meet a clear deficiency. In this course the House concurred.

Titamirmi or ESTATES.—On the motion for going into Committee on the Transfer of Estate Simplification Bill, Lord ST. LBONARDS explained that its object is to simplify the purchase and transfer of titles to real property. Ile proposes that twenty years from the time of purchase shall be a common bar against all the world. Persons under a disability are to be allowed five years from the time the disability ceased. Within twenty years any person having a right in remainder, or on behalf of a lunatic, infant, or child un- born, may get a decree in Chancery reserving to them power to establish their rights. Vendors or their agents concealing deeds or falsifying a pedi- gree, to be liable to fine and imprisonment with or without hard labour. Children born after twenty years are to be excluded. With some objections from Lord Cittarwoarn affecting the proposed limitation, the bill passed through the Committee pro form&.

EXAMINATION OP DEFENDANTs.—Lord BROUGHAM presented a bill on Thursday to complete and improve the change in the law effected by his act of 1851, enabling persons to be examined in all civil suits. After showing that the act of 1851 had not increased perjury, the great objection made against it when proposed, he stated that he proposed to enable defendants, if they pleased, to be examined in all criminal proceedings ; subject, of course, to cross-examination. At present, the prosecutor is heard on oath, the defendant never, however willing he may be; yet in bankruptcy and insolvency the defendant is examined, whether he will or not, and he is forced to answer all questions relating to his own frauds and even felonies. The bill was read a first time.

CASE OF Ma. HODGE.—In reply to Mr. HORSMAN, Mr. DISRA.ELI stated the case of Mr. Hodge. He was arrested at Genoa upon some allegation connected with the attempt on the life of the Emperor of the French, and the French Government demanded that he should be surrendered to them. But by the extradition treaty between Sardinia and France, Sardinia could not comply with the request without the consent of the English Govern- ment. Mr. Hodge's papers, were sent to England ; and the Government hiving examined those papers, and having found that they were not suffi- cient to warrant the committal of Mr. Hodge by a magistrate in England, declined to accede to the demand. Mr. Hodge is suffering from a pulmonary complaint; and Sir James Hudson, anticipating the instructions of the Government, had taken care that every becoming comfort should be at his command, and had demanded from the Sardinian Government that his im- prisonment should cease as soon as the forms of law should permit. Tar Ekon; Saunda.—Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the Anti-Slavery Society respecting the so-called free emigration scheme. The petition stated that in the island of Guadeloupe there existed a vagrant law the immediate tendency of which was to reduce free Negroes to slavery. It was passed after the abolition of slavery in 1848 and, as Lord Brougham be- lieves, without the knowledge of the home government. A law similar in principle had been passed in Jamaica without the sanction of the British Government. The petition gave an instance of the sufferings of the free Negroes. The Stella, a ship of 380 tons burden, picked up 950 Negroes on the coast of Africa. 'Of these 340 died on the voyage. No preparation had been made to receive them at Guadeloupe, and they had to be sent to other places. Eighty were placed in the hold ; the ship struck on a rock, and the whole eightyperished. The Earl of MALMESBURY said he had received no information on the sub- ject since he had been in office.

CoNnrriox or THE Woniaaro CLASSES.—Mr. Si...sxmc made his annual motion for an unpaid commission to consider practical suggestions for the promotion of the welfare of the working classes. Mr. EsTCOURT, giving Mr. Slaney credit for good intentions, was at a loss to see what he aimed at, and suggested that Mr. Slaney himself should act as a com- missioner on his own account. The motion was withdrawn.

Loan CLANRICARDE.—Some time since, Lord CLANRICA.RDE gave notice that he should call attention to some matters personal to himself. He has this week withdrawn the notice, because he had been informed that the state- ment he proposed to make would be at variance with Parliamentary usage and practice.