Vtkatto nut rntrthings in 3ltxliumtut.

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.

Horse or Loans. Monday, June 21. Law of Marriage with a deceased Wife's Sister ; Petitions against—County Comte Further Extension Bill—The Mather Correspondence, brought under notice by Lord Beaumont, on a motion for papers. ntesday, June 22. New Zealand Government Bill, read a second time. Thursday, June 24. Suitors in Chancery Relief Bill, passed through Committee —Hereditary Casual Revenues in the Colonies Bill, read a third time and passed — Poor-law Continuance Bill, Metropolis Water Supply Bill, and Thames Embankment Bill, read a second time. Friday, June 25. Surrender of Criminals to France ; Statement and discussion— New Zealand Government Bill, passed through Committee.

HOUSE or COMMONS. Monday, June 21. Morning sitting. Poor-law Board Con- tinuance Bill, read a third time ; Amendments rejected, and bill passed—Metro- politan Burials Bill, considered in Committee, and progress reported. Evening sit- ting. Business of the House—Minute of Council on Education, brought under notice by Lord John Russell—Crime and Outrage (Ireland) Bill, passed through Committee—Encumbered Estates (Ireland) Bill, passed through Committee. Tuesday, June 22. Morning sitting. Militia Pay Bill, read a third time and passed—Metropolitan Burials Bill, considered in Committee to clause 37th. Even- ing sitting. Valuation (Ireland) Bill, considered in Committee—Common Law Pro- cedure Bill, read a third time and passed. Wednesday, June 23. Colonial Church ; Mr. Gladstone's Resolution authorizing a new Bill agreed to—Metropolitan Burials Bill, passed through Committee—Patent Law Amendment Bill, and Encumbered Estates (Ireland) Bill, and Metropolitan Sewers Bill, read a third time and passed—Ameers of Upper Sande; Policy of the Government reviewed by Lord Jocelyn, on a motion for Papers; debate adjourned. Thursday, June 24. Morning sitting. Metropolitan Burials; Motion on Compen- sations, negatived—Ameers of Scinde; Lord Joeelyn's Motion agreed to—Business of the day being dieposed of before two o'clock, House adjourned. FrWay, Jane 25. Episcopal Titles in Scotland ; Mr. Gladstone's Amendment in a Scotch Bill carried by 64 to 15—Eeciesiastical Precedence in New South Wales ; Statement by Sir John Pakington—Access to St. James's Park, the Chicory Trea- sury Minute, the Cape of Good Hope ; Statements—Metropolitan Burials Bill, passes out of Committee—Corrupt Practices at Elections Bill; the Lords' Amendments de- bated and agreed to—House adjourned at seven o'clock, till next Tuesday.

TIME-TABLE,

The Commons.

How of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment. Monday Noon .... 4h Om Gh (m) 2h 30m

Tuesday Noon 311 50m

6h .(m) lh 15m Wednesday Noon 8h em Thursday Nam lh 45m

Friday 2h .... 7h Om

Sittings this Week, 7; Time, 36k 20m this Session. 88; -- 488h 18m

Trim'' EDUCATION Mm-trra. d angement made hid. •eek with the Government, on the motion b Consolidated Fund. ppropriation) Bill, as amended, be con- Lord Joux Ressmi, called attention to the alteration lately

made in 'the management-clauses by the Committee of Council on Edu- catiorla el The Lords.

Hour of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment.

Monday .0.0 12h ion Tuesday Thu 6t-1."1.n6qis 15m wean

Pride ' 511 h 45m 8 'Weer, 4 , 55m Session. 64; 1 6 Urn bh .... 10h 35in

th aid

Lord bum said, he would accept the statement made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that nothing underhand was intended by the course which had been pursued, in first obtaining the Education vote and then altering the ppovisi®s for its distribution. He then sketched the history of the Education grant from 1832 to the present time, with the view of thawing how the management-clauses originated. The first arrangements for dia. tributing the funds granted by Parliament for education were made in 1839, when, under Lord Lansdowne, the Committee of the Privy Council on Edu- cation was organized. 'These arrangements were accepted by Sir Robert Peel in 1841. But in 1847 some permanent arrangements were called for by circumstances, and these when made were called the manage- ment-clauses. Among other things, it was provided that the clergyman of the parish should not have absolute power ; and this arrangement it was which so many efforts had been made to overturn by a portion of the clergy, small in point of numbers, but great in point of activity, Archdeacon Denison and other clergymen at different times proposed alter- ations, which would have given all power to the clergyman ; they were re- jected, and the Committee of the National Society remained on amicable terms with the Committee of Council. But as soon as the present Govern- ment came in the whole aspect of things changed ; and on the 12th instant they came to 'the important resolution that has been made public in the Gazette. Hitherto the main feature of the arrangements for settling differ- ences between the local committee of a school and the clergyman was this-- that in cases of difference, where the schoolmaster gave " defective or un- sound instruction to the children in religion," the bishop was the sole arbi- ter ; but in cases of difference other than the above the President of the Council chose an inspector of schools, (who is generally a clergyman,) and the bishop chose a clergyman, and these two arbitrators chose a lay magis- trate of the county for their umpire, whose decision was final. Thus, in matters of religion the bishop was final judge • but in matters not of religion the final adjudication rested with a lay tribunal. The new Minute of Coun- cil has immensely widened the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical tribunal and narrowed that of the lay tribunal, by inserting in the description of the former the words " or on other moral or religious grounds "; for this word " moral" includes every possible objection that could be taken against a schoolmaster. And.Lord John contended that this subjection of the school- master to the clergyman would socially degrade him, at a time when en- lightened opinion is in favour of raising his social statue. But in addition to this, the new regulations would so weaken the influence of the lay mem- bers of the local committees, that they would have hardly any motive for continuing in the management of the schools, and this would seriously di- minish their interest in the schools. On this point-Lord John was empha- tic. "Sir, the Church of England has its elements of strength, and it has also its elements of danger. I am of opinion that its elements of strength are very much greater than its elements of danger. Its elements of strength are, when it carries with it the cooperation, the confidence and the affection of the lay members of the Church,- and its element of danger is, the being separated from the laity of the Church, seeking other means of gaining power and authority, and not resting its power and influence upon that ge- neral concurrence of sentiment on the part of the laity that has hitherto proved its best strength. The effect of the alteration in the minute is, in my opinion, to diminish the strength and increase the danger of the Church.' He did not think this would be very pernicious for some time to come; but he looked to the spirit and future tendeney of the change. "I have heard it said, that in six or seven years, by the force of this minute, the laity will be excluded from the management of these schools. I doubt whether so great an effect will be produced. ("Hear, hear ."' from the Ministerial benches.) But it is a beginning on the part of a Government which has newly come to power—which owns itself not strong as regards the present Parliament—who acknowledged that their position dictated this session measures which were humble and useful, but who have begun with a measure of education which has neither humility nor utility for its characteristic." (Cheers and laugh- ter.) But if this is the ease now, what will Government do supposing them to obtain greater power ? They will totally destroy the system of popular education as it now exists, and place it on another basis. Already those members of the National Society who last year defeated Archdeacon Denison were alarmed by this giving in to him ; and among other things, it had been stated that an appeal must be made to the Crown not to issue the Queen's letter, and that if it were issued, those who distrusted the present opera- tions of the Society must refrain from contributing to its funds. It had been argued in support of the minute, that it only gave the local committees an alternative to choose either the old arrangement or the new one : but that statement is deceptive; for by means of the permanent trust-deed the terms are imposed on all subscribers hereafter ; so that if the subscribers hereafter wish to alter the arrangement, they have no power to do so. It is also invalid to argue from the fact that the bishops and priests of the Roman Catholic schools are allowed this provision: the principles of the Roman Catholic Church are very different from those of the Established Church ; for the Established Church consists not of the clergy alone, but of the clergy and laity ; and Lord John believed many Members opposite thought with him, that the strength of the Church of England consists in having the support of the laity as well as the clergy. "But, if that is the case, 1 say that the Government of this country ought to be most careful in making any alteration in the mode in which these grants have been distributed, or in suffering the impression to go forth that hereafter the schoolmaster in all Church of England schools is to depend upon the will of the minister of the parish and the bishop, without any interference on the part of the laity." However, Lord Derby's assurance that the grant would not be distributed under the new minute till a new vote shall have been passed, was, so far, a security for the present. Lord John hoped that in the interval the matter will be considered by the Government and by the people of this country, and that they will see how important it is not to disturb a system which has been working harmoniously, and which is working great good, but rather to maintain that system than to seek to overturn it. ' Mr. WA.LPOLE sketched the history of the Education grants from his point of view, in order to deduce conclusions from that history very dif- ferent from those brought out by Lord John Russell. From 1840 to 1846, that is to say, as long as the Conservative Govern- ment remained in power, the grant was subject to no further control than was necessary for the inspection and examination of the schools ; a distinct rule was laid down not to exercise any control over internal management or discipline. Then the great change of the management-clauses was brought about, not openly by announcing it to Parliament, but by announcement in private letters, which told the parties concerned that this most important change had been unostentatiously effected, but gave them to understand that not a shilling would be distributed except on the new conditions. The National Society continually strove against the new arrangement ; and the relaxation now made, instead of increasing differences, must restore har- mony. He treated as an extraordinary illusion the notion that this new relaxation is the imposing of new management-clauses ; he insisted that only an option of adopting the new arrangement has been offered to promoters of schools ; and he justified the principle of this concession, on the ground that the liberty of free action ought not to be restrained ex- cept in the event of the funds granted by Parliament being applied to pur- poses detrimental to the public good. The principle on which they had proceeded was simply this, that the promoter of a school should be at liberty to constitute it as he likes, and be entitled to receive a portion of the public money in the same way as other persons who have precisely the same free- dom of action as himself. "If my own opinion were to be consulted with respect to these schools, I should wish the lay element to constitute a great part of the controlling power : but because that is my opinion, I must not be so un- just as to deprive another person who thinks he can constitute a school in a 'better way, from coming to Parliament and saying, 'If you grant money for thepurpose of carrying on the great work of education, I am entitled to a portion of it: Should you take this course, you would take away from many persons the inducement which exists to found schools." Mr. Walpole made this reply to Lord John ResselPs reference to the weak- ness and strength of the Church—" I am of opinion with the noble Lord, that the Church of England has her elements of weakness as well as of strength. Her weakness has unfortunately appeared too much of Late years when heavy blows and great discouragement ' have been inflicted on her by the Govern- ment. (Loud cheers.) The elements of strength will still remain to the Church if her members agree together to allow each other perfect freedom of action to manage the schools they formed in their own way, without interference on the part of the Government. That object will, I believe, be promoted by the Minutes in Council. All parties will now find themselves, for the first time, placed on a fair footing of equality ; and henceforth we may anticipate that there will be no rivalry among them except with the desire of ex- celling in promoting the common cause of education. Believing the re- laxation announced by the minute to be wise iii itself, and that it will be at- tended with most beneficial consequences by closing the differences heretofore existing in the Church, I feel confident that a greater boon could not have been conferred on the Church and on the country to which it belongs." Sir HARRY VERNEY thought that the honour of Parliament was pledged to the Minutes as they stood before the present alteration. Mr. GLADSTONE spoke in criticism of what fell from both parties.

He held it to be impossible to agree with Mr. Walpole in the doctrine that unlimited freedom is to be given to the founders of schools as to what is to be taught in the schools. He went on to speak of the main subject-matter as overrated in importance. " I was certainly surprised, after all I had heard of satisfaction ou the one hand and of alarm on the other, to find that the case is not unlike that with which we are all familiar, of the mountain and the mouse, when we come to compare the considerable fears of one aide and the sanguine hopes of another with the very small results as brought before us in the marginal notes of the paper now in our hands." However, though he thought the magnitude of the changes made altogether secondary, he could not deny that they appeared to him to be far from unreasonable. The difficulties of Lord John Russell about defining the field of morals was more surprising to him than the ease which he felt in defining the field of religion. " If the noble Lord had been against granting the clergyman power on religious grounds, I could very well understand why he said that what one clergyman takes to be religion another takes to be superstition, and that you might have persons dismissed on the ground of being supersti- tious; but I was not aware that the divisions of the Church extended to moral grounds ; and I think the noble Lord will recollect this when he says that anything may be called a moral ground, that the minute does not give to clergymen the power to determine what is a moral and what is a religious ground. In the beginning of these controversies, this question was raised —` You sze going to give the power to dismiss on religioua grounds ; but who is to decide what is religious and what is not ? ' That question was answered in this way—that it must rest with the Committee of the Privy Council to lay down the limits within which the term was to apply. That applies to moral questions also; and therefore there is no ground to say that the decision of what is moral and what is not will be with the clergyman ; for if grounds are held to be moral that are not moral, the remedy will lie with the Committee of the Privy Council. The discretion hitherto exercised as to the teaching of the schoolmaster, and to his teaching only, you have now extended to his moral conduct. And I must say, I am a good deal alarmed and apprehensive lest, cases may occur where the school- master may be perfectly orthodox and correct on the dry abstract matter of his teaching, and yet bin life be in scandalous contradiction to that teaching. This is a possible case, and surely it is not one over which it is unreasonable to give to clergymen a controL" In some agricultural districts, where hi addition to the clergyman you could not find above three or four men above the class of labourers, it would scarcely be safe to rely on a committee. The i standard of morality is very various in those classes, and therefore it would not be safe to make the dismissal of a schoolmaster on grounds of morality depend on the majority of a committee in such places. He could not agree that the honour of Parliament is pledged to the Minutes. "Why, there has not been a year in which there has not been some alteration of these minutes. A very wise and judicious alteration was made by the noble Lord's own Government when they introduced clause I), by way of provision for committees of communing. I think we are by these minutes feeling our way gradually to the details of our system; and when what is developed and matured, and tested by experience, shall come before Parliament in all their details and particulars, that will be' the time when we may hope to give security to the position of the schoolmaster."

Mr. RUM; Mr. J. A. Sierra, Mr. P. Senor; Mr. BLANEY, and Mr. Evens, expressed their disapprobation of the, changes in the minute ; Mr. MILES defended the changes.

The subject then dropped.

Coreaner, Bectrafasnesr. LAW.

When the second reading of Mr. Gladstone's Colonial Bishops Bill came before the House of Commons on the 19th of May, Sir JOUST PARINGTON moved, as the most courteous mode of opposing the measure, which earlier in the session he had seemed to sanction, that the House pass to the other orders of the day • and the House agreed. The bill was practically shelved ; but formally it ;till awaited, this week, the stage of second reading. Early in the present month, Mr. Gladstone gave notice of a fresh motion on the subject of the Colonial Church. Subsequently he got it made an order of the day that the House should go into Committee on the sub- ject ; and gave notice that he would move in Committee a resolution which was the same verbatim as the one passed by the House on the 20th of February, under which the Colonial Bishops Bill was introduced. Under this order of the day, Mr. GLADSTONE proceeded in the morning sitting of Wednesday. He first, on a question by the Colonial Secretary, gave some explanations as to his intended course. He would not proceed with his original bill. Bat when the House adopted his resolution authorizing the introduction of a new hill, be would again bring hi, his old bill under a new title, amended to the beat form he hie been able to give it after consideration of the objection* and the sum. gestions for improvement made in the past debate. The amended bill might be printed and sent forth to the Colonies in its most correct final shape -for the consideration of those most concerned in it.

He then went into the general question. There were but two wave of proceeding : one was by positive Parliament: are enactment of a working system of ecclesiastical machinery in the. Colo- nies; the other, by a permissive law, removing the doubts and probable dis- abilities which at present hinder the parties interested from making suitable provisions for themselves. The first course was practically as much out of the question as if it did not lie within the limits of the speculative omnipo- tence of Parliament ; no such thing could be seriously entertained. There therefore remained only the other mode, of a relieving and permissive legis- lation; and he was perfectly convinced that this is the mode which the House, in a future and very early session, would inevitably pumue. The words used by Sir John Pakington, or quoted by him from the Arch- bishop of Canterbury—that, " after due consideration and correspondence with the colony, it would not be difficult to frame a measure [in the Impe- rial Parliament] after the model or upon the basis of the Church Discipline Act passed for England ten years ago"—bore an ominous sound : Mr. Glad- stone wished at the earliest moment to enter his protest against any attempt

at such legislation ; he viassionvinced that no British House of Commons will

ever carry into effect any such principles of interference with the domestic legislation of the Colonies as is there suggested. The alterations he would make in his measure were not alterations of principle, but of expression and de- tail. The question was only, what particular restraints should be retained. That question he deemed to be wholly one of policy. If they were apprehensive about the connexion of the Episcopal Church in the Colonies with the Church of England, he would not object to their insertion of restrictions ; but, on the other hand, he insisted on the elementary principle which he desired to proceed by in all Colonial affairs, whether civil or ecclesiastical, that re- traint should be reduced to a minimum, and that every question in which you cannot show an Imperial interest imperilled shall be left to be dealt with and managed by the Colonies themselves. As the bill was never in- tended to give anew any positive legislative power, but only to remove re- straint, he willingly altered the phrases which bad an enabling effect—"it shall be lawful," &e., to words that will aiciply remove the hinderanee felt —" no statute, &c., shall prevent," &c. As to the veto of the Crown on sy- nods, &c., he had intentionally omitted any express reservation of it,for these reasons. "I think the introduction of such a provision would be held in the judgment of the Colonies themselves, first of all to be attended with a good deal of practical incon.venieuee, like that experienced in the reference home of civil acts for the veto of the Crown ; and secondly, it might cause some dissatisfaction in colonies like Canada, where the principle of religious equal- ity is strongly rooted, because it would seem to give a preference to the re- lation between the Church of England and the Crown in the Colonies. That is a question which the House ought to take into view when we proceed to regulate the duties of the subject. I have already stated mropinien upon it. I think the bill would be better without such a provision, especially because it would be in point of fact calling into existence a function on the part of the Crown which does not now exist. On the other band, I fully admit that such a provision, if it should be thought fit, is perfectly consistent with the principle of the rule I have laid down, and which I have not the least doubt will be fully recognized by the colonists. It appears to me, that the real and practical relation between the Crown and the Colonies is a relation of patronage, sometimes through the medium of the Government, but princi- pally through the medium of the Secretary of State ; that the prerogative of the Crown is the real bar. That being so, I propose to preserve it, and that no bill shall be held to authorize any such regulation unless with the con- sent of the Crown." Mr. Gladstone concluded by moving the resolution of which he had given notice.

Throughout his speech Mr. Gladstone was chiefly bent on answering- the objeetions lately urged, by Sir John Pakin' gton, that the destruction

of the Royal supremacy was a main object and necessary result of the measure. His manner showed very strongly that he felt this to be a grievously unfair representation both of his personal opinions and his measure.

Sir 7ome Panneerrox commenced with a marked endeavour to re- move Mr. Gladstone's feeling of annoyance; going over what he had done, to show that he had exhausted courtesy in his proceedings, and as-

serting that even now he wished to make his objections in the kindest terms. His overtures, however, were not received well ; and the speech

which he proceeded to deliver in support of his former objections to the measure, was frequently interrupted by peremptory corrections, and con- tradictions from Mr. Gladstone. Sir John concluded by stating, that he

had not the slightest objection to the reintroduction of the bill in an amended form; but he suggested that such a form of proceeding might not be correct.

The Chairman of Committees, Mr. Banwse, had doubts whether a re- solution precisely similar to one already agreed to, and since practically

disposed of by the House, could be again brought forward. Ultimately the opinion of the SPEAKER was taken, and he decided that the Chairman was right. The resolution was withdrawn, and one differently worded was put into the hands of the Chairman.

Speeches were made by Mr. Honsuser, Sir PAGE WOOD, and Mr. Burr. Mr. Hoesatart declared that the real object of the measure was to carry

out in the Colonies the schemes, of the newfangled party of which Mr. Gladstone is the organ, in order, when it has taken root there, the better to bring it in and establish it here at home. Sir PASS Wolin reproved Mr. Ilorsman's too frequent resort to the imputation of sinister motives. Ile also vindicated the measure on its own merits.

The resolution was affirmed, and it was ordered that a bill to amend the laws relating to the Church in the Colonies be brought in.

When the debate was over, Mr. GRADSTONE rose and accepted the amende offered by Sir John Pakington-

" I must confess, that for the first time during twenty years of public life, during which I have had to conduct various measures through this House, I did feel very greatly aggrieved by the tone which the right honourable gen- tleman adopted, as I thought, in his speech on the second reading of this bill. The language which he has used today, however, convinces me that I ought entirely to waive that feeling. His motives I have never doubted or questioned ; and I confess that I ought to regard his language as lying within the fair latitude and licence of debate. That being so, and not being

fond of quarrel, either in this House or elsewhere, I wish spontaneously to aay, that I entirely withdraw any words that I may have used that were in any degree painful to the right honourable gentleman. I regret having used them ; and I trust that in discussing either this or any other measure in this House, I may never give cause of offence to any honourable Member." (Cheers.)

Sir June Pexueoroti expressed his satisfaction.

NEW ZEALAND CONSTTIVTION.

The second reading of the New Zealand Bill, moved in the House of Lords by the Earl of DEBAR; was unopposed ; but drew forth a number of speeches, which, while they embodied detailed objections, conveyed a generally favourable opinion of the bill. Lord LYSTELTON recalled his- torically the liberal principles on which our first American colonial settle- ments were originally made ; contrasted them with the exclusive prin- ciples which for some generations displaced them ; and congratulated the House on the increasing tendency to recur to the old ways of colonial foundation and rule. He regretted the adherence to the nomination sys- tem; but, considering the period of the session, he should be glad to let the bill pass without any material alteration. Lord WODEHOUSE marked an absence of any leading principle in the bill; and the disproportionate amount of government for so small a community, &c. ; but said he thought the colonists might rely on the very large powers of self-adjust- ment left to them under the bill. The Duke of Nawcssme spoke from the same point of view, with abundant illustrative argument : he especially combated the delusive principle of adhering to nomineeism. All of these speakers concurred in expressing their grave impression that the present is a critical period in our Colonial history ; many of our colonies having now grown up to manhood, and demanding to be treated with a gene- rous statesmanship. Earl Game made a controversial speech of great length on the measure before the House, on the general and particular questions involved in it, and on the speeches of the Peers who preceded him. He concluded with the observation that he would not oppose the bill, and that indeed he thought it would on the whole have a very bene- ficial effect.

The special clauses of the bill which relate to the charge on the land- sales in favour of the New Zealand Company were objected to by the Duke of NEWCASTLE, not because he had determined in his own mind against the Company, but because, while charges were made against the Company, it was not seemly to grant them a more advantageous arrange- ment than that at present existing. The clauses should be omitted till inquiry have been made. On this point Earl GREY strongly supported the Government. He denied the charges of dishonourable transactions made against the directors of the Company ; though he charged them with folly in being led by a projector, no doubt very clever, but not possessing other requisites for trustworthiness.

The bill was read a second time.

THE MATHER NEGOTIATIONS.

The negotiations and correspondence with Tuscany and Austria on the case of Mr. Mather were reviewed in the House of Lords, on a motion made by Lord BEAUMONT for the production of the last instructions sent to Sir Henry Bulwer stating the reparation we now demand. Lord Beaumont criticized the conduct of all _parties; but his chief object was to bring out saliently the question of the independence of Tuscany, and the position in which our own relations with that country are placed by the Austrian occupation. He maintained that as long as the absolute occupation continues so long shall we be subjected to cases like the present. "Unfor- tunately, it had been the policy of Austria to encourage every kind of mis- government in the Roman and Tuscan States. She had urged upon the Dukes of Parma, Modena, and Tuscany, as well as upon the Pope, to adopt a system hostile to all social improvement, and destructive of everything like civil and religious liberty. Nay, Austria had gone so far as to encourage those powers to abandon what little good yet remained in their countries; and Tuscany, which under the laws of Leopold the Second had been happy, was now threatened to have those laws abrogated, and to be driven back into that state of barbarism in which the delegations of Bologna, Ferrara, Fedi, Ravenna, and the other ecclesiastical States are at this moment. In that at- tempt Austria had been well supported, and had found a ready instrument in what was called ' the clerical party' in those States. In consequence of the proceedings of that party, a state of affairs now exists in all those parts of Central Italy which would almost justify a general rising of the people, both against their sovereigns and the foreign allies of their sovereigns who at pre- sent occupy their territories ; and such a rising might, perhaps, before long become inevitable. Under these circumstances, it is the duty of the Great Powers of Europe, and of England in particular, to urge upon the Sovereigns of those countries such social ameliorations, such improvements in their go- vernment, as might at least reconcile to them the people they govern. If that were done, the necessity for the presence Of Austrian troops to assist in enforcing these police regulations would no longer exist ; the troops would be obliged to withdraw ; and our relation with those countries would be placed in its natural and original position." The Earl of MALMESBURY defended his negotiations. He insisted on the distinction between the personal and the national of-

fence: it was an outrageous and brutal personal assault, but not an outrage on the honour of Great Britain at all. "Reflect what would be the consequences to this country were it to be laid down by us as a rule, that every English- man abroad, receiving an affront or a personal assault from a foreigner, re- sident or native of the country in which he was staying, were to be deemed so identified with the national honour, that when he is so insulted or struck the national honour is insulted or struck also ; and that we were forthwith bound to avenge the insult or the outrage, or even the death—supposing death to ensue—with all the dignity and all the strength of the empire.' Being of opinion that the offence was purely personal, he thought Lord Granville had acted erroneously in introducing the case to diplomacy before Mr. Mather had applied to and been rejected from the legal courts of the country. Thirty years ago, a person in Mr. Mather's situation would have sought an entirely personal satisfaction from the officer who had so grossly insulted him. Lord Malmesbury had not consulted the Queen's Advocate on the question of damages, simply because there was no Queen's Advocate to Bend for—the funeral-day of Sir Herbert Jenner Fust having been also the funeral day of the late Administration, and Sir John Dodson having been raised to the judicial office. On one point he admitted himself blame- worthy—for sending off a despatch on the 27th May, before he had read another despatch received on the 25th. He excused himself by saying that he bad fully supposed the despatch he answered to be a final one ; and by reference to the enormous multitude of despatches (33,000, not including en- closures) which pass through the Foreign Office yearly.

Lord Cesteimm. elaborately defended Mr. Scarlett ; especially insisting n the points, that his instructions were vague ; and that, after all, he did not surrender but expressly asserted the principle of Tuscan responsi- bility.

The Earl of Arre.B.DEEN thought that the distinction between the per- sonal offence and the national one was sound ; and he was of opinion that after the expressions of regret on the part of Prince Schwarzenberg and Prince Lichtenstein a national affront was out of the question. But the personal injury remained, and for that he thought compensation should have been sought from Austria ; for, whether we withdrew our Minister from Tuscany or not, we should not succeed in making her say she was responsible for that over which she had, under her treaty with Austria, no power. He thought that if application had been made to Austria first, the matter ought to have been and would have been settled speedily and satisfactorily. He hoped that the final instructions to Sir Henry Bulwer did not ask Tuscany for impossibilities. Earl GRANVILLE justified the application in the first instance to Tus- cany, both on the ground of international courtesy and international right.

It would have been insulting to ignore Tuscany, and it would have been a wrongful negation of her national sovereignty. The introduction of diplo- macy in the case of personal injury was justified by the number of cases of injury to British subjects without much redress being obtained from the Tuscan Government. Lord Granville showed that Lord Malmesbury might have easily obtained the opinion of Sir John Dodson, by stating that he has himself obtained that opinion since Sir John was no longer a Government officer, but had become a judge. He has that judge's authority that the late Government was right in applying first to the Tuscan Government, and not to that of Austria ; and was also right in holding Austria responsible ulti- mately. Lord Granville concluded with an acknowledgment of the evident desire of the Austrian authorities to bring the matter to a satisfactory con. elusion ; and a tribute to the late Prince Schwarzenberg, who certainly pos. sensed some great and amiable qualities, and whose last communication to this Government was in a singularly conciliatory and temperate tone. The Earl of DERBY at considerable length justified the whole of the negotiations : he had himself been cognizant of every step taken, and claimed the fullest responsibility for all that had been done. The greatest stress laid by him was upon the essential policy of insisting that a power which, like Tuscany, claims the rank and privilege of an independent and sovereign power, should be held responsible as a sovereign power; and secondarily, he took great pains to establish that Mr. Scarlett had in fact expressly yielded up this point in his negotiations. Mr. Scarlett in so many words "proposed to his Excellency the [Tuscan] Minister of Foreign Affairs, that the principle of responsibility involved should not be raised, and all discussion with reference to it entirely avoided." Now that was express divergence from his instructions : indeed, he has sub- sequently referred to it as such ; and it was that step which has been dis- avowed. In conclusion, Lord Derby said—" In as far as lay in our power, we have endeavoured to obtain pecuniary reparation for The injury inflicted on the individual, and an acknowledgment on the part of Tuscany of that obligation of which we shall never cease to demand the enforcement, namely, the protection by their tribunals, or, if not by their tribunals, at least by their Executive, of British subjects passing through or residing in the Tuscan ter- ritories, from whatever quarter they may be assaulted. Unquestionably, if the Tuscan Government persist in refusing to fulfil this plain and palpable obligation, it will be impossible for her Majesty's Government to continue to treat with them as an independent nation entitled to the rights of diplomatic intercourse. Consequently, although it is impossible that, consistently with public duty, we can lay before the House any instructions which may have been given to Sir Henry Bulwer, your Lordships will find from one despatch in the papers on your Lordships' table, that in the event of this plain duty not being recognized by Tuscany, with whatever pain on our part, we shall be compelled to suspend all diplomatic relations with that country."

Lord BEAUMONT withdrew his motion for the despatch.

THE AMEERS OF SCINDE.

The case of the Ameers of Scinde, which was taken up in the House of Lords by the Earl of Ellenborough some time since, was brought be- fore the Commons on Wednesday, by Viscount JOCELYN, on a motion for papers. The adversity of the Ameers was described as deep but unde- served ; they were pictured as the innocent dupes of their wicked younger brother, All Moored, whom we lately deposed from the government of Ithyrpoor for his manifold crimes in government and treasons to the British rule. Passages were read from books of modern travel, which movingly portrayed their social virtues, and the dignity of their life even in a sordid captivity. The motion for papers seemed to be opposed by the Government on Wednesday ; when Mr H. Beruse had only time to make a few opening observations before the usual hour arrived for adjourn- ing the morning sitting. The debate was adjourned to Thursday. But on that day Mr. Bemis contented himself with a general defence of the policy which the Government has pursued towards the Ameers; and with some small abatement of the too interesting and attrac- tive picture of the case of the Ameers which had been presented by Lord Jocelyn. There were two stories about the case : the House must not think because one of the Ameers had been condemned as a scoundrel that all the others must needs be honest and virtuous men. However, Mr. Baillie intimated, as was intimated some weeks ago by Lord Derby in the House of Peers, that the case of the Ameers has already received a more favourable consideration, under newly-discovered circumstances, than it had been felt justifiable to give it before. A recommendation of Mr. Commissioner Fiore to grant, not the restoration of the Ameers to their lands, but a money payment, has been sanctioned ; and an ameliora- tion of the state of the captives, some of whom were almost without the necessaries of life, has been made. Mr. Baillie thought the production of the papers would serve no good purpose ; but if it were pressed for, he would not altogether oppose it. The motion was acceded to with refer- ence to the chief portion of the papers asked for.

COMMON-LAW PROCEDURE REFORM.

On the motion that the Common-Law Procedure Bill do pass, Mr. Siva= WORTLEY observed, that it was confined to the Superior Courts at Westminster, but might be advantageously extended to other courts of record. On his motion, a clause was inserted to give the Queen in Coun- cil power to extend the bill to other courts of record in the kingdom. COUNTY COURT JURISDICTION EXTENDED.

The amendment made by the House of Commons on the County Court Further Extension Bill, for repealing that clause in the existing County Court Act which made it illegal for a barrister to practise in the County Courts unless when instructed by an attorney, received the assent of the House of Peers. Lord BROUGHAM moved the adoption of the amendment ; the Lord CHANCELLOR agreed to that course ; and Lord CAMPBELL and Lord Casaworra said they would not press their objections. POOR-LAW BOARD CONTINUANCE.

The opposition to the Poor-law Board Continuance Bill was maintained to the last stage by Sir DE LACY EVANS, Lord DUDLEY STUART, and other Members, by the moving of an amending clause which would have limited the powers of the Poor-law Board in the dismissal of parochial officers. The amendment was negatived, by a vote of 98 to 29. The bill was read a third time, and passed.

IRISH POOR-LAW VALUATION.

The Valuation (Ireland) Bill was opposed in Committee by Mr. Flux- cis SCULLY, Sir DENHAM NonnzYa, and Mr. VINCENT SCULLY ; but the Government was supported by Sir Wriatissa SOMERVILLE and Mr. Moir- sa/.1. ; and the bill passed through Committee.

ARTILLERY MILITIA.

On the third reading of the Militia Pay Bill, Mr. BERESFORD stated that it is intended by Government to train 3000 of the Militiamen to ar- tillery practice, and to give them a trifle extra pay for their services. METROPOLITAN SEWERS.

On the third reading of the Metropolitan Sewers Bill, Mr. Pirro stated, that he, Mr. Stephenson, Mr. Bendel], and Sir William Cubitt, have felt it their duty to resign their places in the Commission, on the ground that the late Government had not kept good faith with them. The Commis- sion had reorganized its working establishment, and had prepared plans of the great works which they had decided upon for the drainage of London ; but the necessary powers for carrying on those works had not been given. They regretted that they had not been able to carry out the works ; but the responsibility was not with them. At the same time that they had felt it their duty to resign, the Government might at all times command their services. Mr. WALPOLE said, he was sure the House would hear with regret the determination to which the gentlemen had come, of resigning their offices ; for, he must say, they had performed their duties in such a manner as would give satisfaction to the country. The bill was read a third time, and passed.

PARLIAMENTARY FREIGHT THROWN OVERBOARD.

The Cuerrczmon of the Excimatrza begged of independent Members, on Monday, that they would allow the Government to proceed on Tues- day afternoon, as well as in the morning, with Government measures. Members seemed rather taken aback, but one after another they yielded. Mr. HUME set the example : he had a motion, but being very anxious for the sessional consummation, he would give it up. Mr. RICH had a mo- tion, which he said would not take him five minutes ; but if the House wished it he would surrender his claim for that time. Mr. JAMES WI:L.- 6mq had a motion involving a grave subject, respecting the British Sugar Colonies ; he was reluctant to give up his demonstration, and made a re- quest for "another opportunity " in exchange for the one to be surren- dered. The CHANCELLOR of the Excirzeiumt said that was impossible ; and he hoped Mr. Wilson would "follow the example of the others," and allow the Government to proceed. If the business of the House were got through as he had chalked it out, there was a prospect of conclud- ing it by the end of the week. Mr. WILSON said no more, and silence gave consent. Mr. HARDCABTLE also had a motion, about Church- rates ; but Mr. BRIGHT promised Mr. Disraeli that he would urge him not to proceed with it.

Mr. VINCENT SCULLY made an interposition in order still further to "facilitate the progress of public business." There was the Irish Valua- tion Bill : upon that bill there were sixty-nine amendments to be moved, and debated ; he himself proposed to move some few amendments, and to make some short observations. If they withdrew that bill at once, it might save at least two or three days of the session. The CHANCELLOR of the ExcHNWER said, he must certainly pause after such a menacing observation : if two days were to be lost he should not press the bill. Sir JAMBS GRAHAM noticed the Grand Juries (Metropolitan District) Bill; one of great importance, on which he had great doubts, and should feel bound to raise discussion. The ArroitzEr-GENIAL reluctantly con- sented to withdraw the bill for the present session.