4 AUGUST 1860, Page 2

II data anIf Vrating s in liarlinintut.


Hansa OF Loses. Monday, July 30. Lord Normanby's Motion for Papers on Rome—Coast of Africa, &c., Bill, passed Committee and reported—Crown Debts and Judgment Bill passed Committee—Felony and Misdemeanour Bill passed third reading—Party Emblems (Ireland) Bill passed Committee—County Coroner Bill passed committee—Stipendiary Magistrates Bill lost on second reading.

Tuesday. July 31. Maynooth College Bill in Committee and Amendment added— Local Government Amendment Bill passed Committee—Common Law Procedure (Ireland) Bid, Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill, passed Committee—New Zealand Bill, Felony and Misdemeanour Bill, Party Emblems (Ireland) Bill, read third time awl passed. Thursday. August 2. Mines Regulation and Inspection Bill read a third time— Tenure and Improvement of Land (Ireland) Bill passed Committee—Coast of Africa, Ike., Bill recommitted—Blilitia Bill, Maynooth College Bill, read a third time—Mi- litia Ballot Bill in Committee.

Friday, August 3. Senior Member of Council (India) Bill read a second time— Naval Discipline Bill passed Committee.

Horse OF COMMONS. Monday, July 30. European Forces Amalgamation ;India) Bill passed Committee—Ecclesiastical Commission Bill in Committee and re- ported with Amendments—Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill passed third reading. Tuesday, July 31. Refreshment Houses and Wine Licences (Ireland) Bill in Committee—Volunteer Corps (Ireland), leave to bring in a bill refused—Business of the Mouse; Mr. Ewart's resolutions.

Wednesday, August 1st. Attorneys' Solicitors, 8tc. Bill ; ordered to be reported in a week—Votes for Disqualified Candidates Bill ; withdrawn—Metropolis Local Management Act Amendment Bill ; preamble agreed to, clauses to be considered on

report—East India Stock Transfer Bill passed Committee and reported—Nuisances Removal and Diseases Prevention Rill, Lords' Amendments agreed to. Thursday. August 2d. Private Business' Colonel W. Patten', Resolutions upon standing orders—Business of the House' Lord Palmerston's Resolutions—FortifIca- tions and Works, Lord Palmerston's Resolution passed ; Mr. Monsell's Amend- ment rejected. Friday, August 3. Savings' Banks and Friendly Societies Bill, and East India Stock Transfer Bill read a third time and passed—Fortifications and Works Reso- lutions reported, agreed to, and leave given for bill.


In the House of Commons, on Thursday, Mr. LLNDBAY moved an

amendment, that" as the main defence of Great Britain against aggres- sion depends on an efficient navy it is not now expedient to enter into a large expenditure on permament land fortifications." The House was called upon to vote 2,000,0001., but this was only an instalment of 9,000,0001. - the Royal Commissioners stated that 12,000,000/. will be required ; the adoption of their plans would lead to an outlay of 2,000,0004 or more annually, raising the military expenditure from 15,000,000/. to 17,000,0001.

"lkatkif these 2,000,000k,, at 4 per cent, were ca italizedt the result Beale sta -ments of the noble woniltlkonot 9,000,0001. but 10,000 000&" lowieriotntemn b. Etoperbr of the Fiench to hireminister in this county: yg the vbetantthad been answered' fn a letter said to.have beNe: a clear and distinct answer ,the statements Isadwto the co 'Imittee by the noble viscount the other evening. He said he desired to inaueklte_en era of peace, and to live on the best terms with this country. He deekr. ed that neither his army nor his navy had anything threatening in its dimelirions. The army, he said, was no greater than it had been in the days of Louis Phi- lippe ; the navy was no more than was necessary, looking at the state of his own defences. He used a most remarkable phrase. " In heaven's name," he said, " let statesmen in high places, and at the head of the Government, lay aside petty jealousies and unjust mistrusts." These were the solemn arguments of the Emperor of the French, against whom the country was arming. Some honourable members might i not put faith in the statements of the Emperor. He (Mr. Lindsay) put faith n them. He believed that the Emperor of a great people would not have made statements in the clear and distinct manner he had done unless he meant to carry them out. Had he not given proofs of his sincerity ? Had not his armies cooperated with ours at the Crimea and in China ? Were they not about to act together in putting down the frightful massacres in Syria ? Had we not entered into a commercial treaty with France ? Honourable members might hold what Apisions they pleased as to the value of that treaty, but it was at least an earnest, a pledge that the Emperor desired to maintain friendly relations with this country. The Emperor of the French had been called ambitious ; he had been called not honest ; but no one had yet called him a fool. But he would, indeed, be a fool if he attempted to invade this country. He had more interest than this country had in maintaining peace. The noble viscount asked what was the meaning of this army of 400,000 men, which could easily be increased to 600,000 men ?—and the noble viscount, if he did not say directly, at least meant it to be implied, that these forces were intended some day to be landed on our shores. 'Yet this army was no more than the Emperor of the French had maintained for many years.

France could not invade this country with less than 100,000 men ; she could not gather the requisite materiel without the country becoming aware of it long before that army could embark. But suppose it embarked, what would our fleet be doing ? It would go to meet the enemy in the Channel, and most probably defeat, at least disable, the expedition. Between the Humber and Penzance, there are 300 miles of coast where an enemy can land ; an enemy would not land under the guns of fortifications. An army might land in the Firth of Forth, in the Clyde, in the Mersey; Sunderland and its docks might be shelled ; an army might land at Christchurch and destroy Portsmouth; at Padstow, and crossing Corn- wall destroy Plymouth. What use had been the fortifications of Paris to the Monarch who constructed them? We had a defence in our Navy ; another in a free, united, and contented people. In case of an invasion, our volunteers would soon amount to a million. What could an army of 100,000 men do against a million volunteers. Not one of that army would return to France.

Mr. HMIRY BERKELEY with diffidence supported the amendment, though he does not agree with some of Mr. Lindsay's arguments. When it was proposed to Lyeurgus to defend Sparta by walls, he replied that he preferred walls of men to walls of stone ; and, moreover, that he viewed valour behind walls as he should view pent-up cowards. There was a close analogy between the manly sentiment of Lyeurgus and the manly feeling of the English people. In his opinion no case had been made out for fortifications.

When Napoleon I. stood on the heights of Boulogne he had a most pow- erful army, and every port and every creek in the north of France was filled with a powerful and well-arranged flotilla. Nevertheless, with vessels which we did not now possess, with a number of small 10-gun brigs, we had prevented that force from leaving their ports. Had they landed in this country they would have been met with that voluntary spirit which ani- mated this country at present. He maintained that there was no greater danger to be apprehended now than then. They had heard much about the Channel being bridged over by steam ; but steam was a much more for- midable weapon in the hands of the attacked than of the attacking party. Looking at the way in which this country was encircled by railroads, the celerity of locomotion, and the aid of the electric wires, by which forces might be brought from any part of the country without reference to wind or weather, it was impossible to resist the conclusion that at the present moment this country was more effectively defended than it was when we had simply to depend upon our sailing vessels.

Ridiculing the idea of fortifications, eulogizing our Volunteers as ca- pable of doing what has been achieved by the raw levies of Garibaldi, Mr. Berkeley called upon the House to stand by the navy as we had done in times past."

Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT denied the statement of Mr. Berkeley, that France had got 600 rifled guns in her fleet ; they had a considerable number, but it happened to them as to us, that when tested they failed. The Armstrong gun had been delivered at the rate of 12 per week, size 45, he could not tell the weight; but they would soon have 80-pounders. The honourable gentleman Mr. Lindsay) said that invasion was impossi- ble—that it would be useless or less than 100,000 men to come, if they came at all ; and that if they succeeded in effecting a landing, not one of them would ever return to Ins own country. Now, he was not going to discuss with the honourable gentleman what would be the number of men with which it would be possible; to invade this country, because upon that his opinion would be worth no more than that of any other member who was not an authority on military matters—he would only say that the views of the honourable gentleman were not those more than once expressed by .a great master of the art of invasion, who had long contemplated the possi- bility of an invasion of England. M. Thiers told them that the Emperor Napoleon said, in reference to this subject, "If I made an attack upon England I should have to throw 60,000 men upon the English coast to conquer England, and subject the English people would be a chimerical idea; but with such a force I would make a descent upon her coasts, occasion her great mischief, destroy an enormous mass of property, and strike a panic through a country which depends upon its safety and security as the means of carrying on its industrial pursuits ; and for such an object it might be worth while to make the attempt." What might be the ulti- mate fate of the 60,000 men who..composed the invading army he did not .7 know.

Who doubted that the true defence of England was in her navy ? It was not proposed to abandon that line of defence. Steam, in the opinion '■ of naval officers, was an advantage to the invader. In former times, so long as the wind blew from a particular quarter, we knew we might sleep safe in our beds, for the enemy :a fleet could not come out, while a blockading squadron could always be maintained to keep their ships in port, but now all that was changed. The steam might be got up in the night, and the invading fleet be elf our coasts, and perhaps a landing effected, before the blockading squadron knew that they had sailed.

The Emperor of the French was at this moment, and had been for some time past, strengthening the fortifications of Cherbourg, L'Orient, Rochefort, and Brest. Of that we had no right to complain ; nor had any Power flab right to complain of our erecting defences. A great French authority, whom be saw some years ago when he was here with Louis Philippe, said—" You have the finest fleet in the world, and a large amount of important property in you!. dockyards and arsenals, yet you make no.effort to protect it from attack." Mr. Herbert reminded the House of the usefulness of the fortifications of Silistria and Kara, and of the attempts at invasion made in 1796 by General Roche, and. in 1798 by a French fleet, which was defeated by Admiral Warren ; and the landing at Bristol in 1797, when the French coast was blockaded, and we were flushed with the successes of St. Vin- cent and the Nile. One great means of maintaining peace, no doubt, was a prudent and pacific- policy. We ought, in our foreign relations, to show an appreciation for the rights and feelings of other people. If all nations did that them would be no danger of war ; but at the same time, knowing that we must comport ourselves pacifically to other nations, we must also deprive other nations of the temptation of attacking us.

Mr. BRIGHT had no doubt that if the House voted the scheme, the cost would be twenty millions ; there was not a farthing in the tabular statement for the internal arsenal at Cannock Chase, which is included in the resolution. These works will be useless unless we have some 70,000 men to defend them. ("Hear," front Sir De Lacy Evans.) "Two questions have presented themselves to my mind, and I wish Mem- bers of the House would ask those questions. One is, By whom is all this expenditure earned ?' And the other is, What have we done already ?' I also hope they will ask the gentlemen who sit on this front bench whether they are unanimous in opinion with regard to the necessity of the expendi- ture; whether they come before us with the authority of a united Cabinet ; or whether this is some kind of compromise to enable the Government to avoid the rock, or get over the quicksand, which this question has inter- jected into their midst ? I do not believe that the Government do come be- fore us with that kind of unanimity which I think is necessary in a great question of this nature. But if the Cabinet is not united, are the military authorities united ? And if gentlemen will say, as of course they will say, that I know nothing about these matters, I ask, then, whether they are willing to follow the military authorities, and under what direction they are about to place themselves ? Would they like to take these military au- thorities, with all their recommendations, and shut their eyes and walk blindly into the prodigious and incalculable expense to which they invite them ? I have looked over these papers, and I confess I am perfectly amazed at the absolute stupidity—("Oh!")—yes, stupidity—if you want a word less offensive I will say absolute lunacy—(Laughter)—of the military au- thorities with regard to this question."

Foreign nations were all fortifying; they were doubtless alarmed at the increase in our fleet. Mr. Bright examined in detail all the pro- posals, naval and military, which had been made, particularly the plans of Colonel Jebb, General M'Intosh, Sir Robert Gardiner, and M. Brial- mont, all of which he dissected with merciless sarcasm. Coming to the fortifications already existing, he quoted the report.

The noble lord has spoken in his resolution of the necessity of works to protect the harbours of Dover and Portland. But the commissioners say that the defences of Dover are worth very little, and that if these works had not happened to be there, they do not know that they should recommend any defences at all for Dover. Having therefore get some fortifications at a point where they are declared to be unnecessary, it is proposed to spend 313,000/. more upon them ! They say further, and I call the noble lord's attention to this, because, though I object to his whole scheme, I shall be glad to take out of it any peculiarly absurd proposition—" Now that Dover is to be made a harbour of refuge it becomes the more necessary to have those defences." But why should you defend harbours of refuge as if they were thereby rendered especial objects of attack ? Ships only enter these harbours in ease of storm, and if the weather is not threatening they pass on their course without entering. Surely there can be no object in spend- ing 335,000/. upon Dover. Then there is Portland, at which it is declared that we have no naval establishment, and that it is not intended to have any. Yet the commissioners propose an expenditure of 630,0001. in defence of the roadstead or harbour of Portland.

Colonel Bingham says we shall require 72,000 trained and 108,000 untrained men. Admiral Maitland and Captain Sullivan say that no effort can prevent iron-plated ships coming over. Sir John Burgoyne says it is impossible to protect Portsmouth from the range of long guns without a fortification of thirty or forty miles in extent. Mr. Whit- worth told him he would undertake to throw a 701b. shell filled with molten iron six miles. The whole system of warfare is about to undergo a change as great as that which took place on the invention of gunpowder ; changes which will make war ten times more . destructive "or, what Heaven grant, may render war impossible," Government should therefore be cautious. Mr. Bright then dwelt upon the letter of the Commis- sioners to Lord Overstone.

"Lord Overstone is said to be a man of prodigious wealth, and like a man who is very rich, and especially as he gets older, and more especially if he was never very robust, he has become extremely timid. This is what they ask Lord Overstone—no doubt most Members have read it ; but still I think it cannot be read too often—which is what you cannot say of everything that is written. I think it is clear that if Lord Overstone had not been a Lord, and had not been a millionaire, they would never have asked his opinion ; and yet every man knows perfectly well that the fact of his being a Lord, and of his being a millionaire, does not make him any authority at all upon the great question of national defences. They ask him to state your Lordship's views as to the immediate effect upon the commercial and mone- tary affairs of this country that would follow upon the landing of an in- vading army'; then they become specific= Would such a state of things be compatible with the continuance of the ordinary operation of trade and commerce, or would the wide-spread alarm which would follow from such a state of things become so intolerable that the people would force the Go- vernment to make peace at any cost of honour, or wealth, or future great- ness?' What was the answer of Lord Overstone ? He save, with a sim- plicity that is positively charming, Money would be withdrawn from the savings' banks, from country banks,' and than the shop peeps out most clearly= and from parties holding money at call.' He says further, and here he shows some discretion 'it is useless to discuss what can be done after London has fallen into the hands of an enemy.' I am thankful I am not a Lord nor a millionaire to be asked such a question, and if I could have been tempted to make such an exhibition of myself as Lord Overstone has made of himself by that answer, I am thankful not to be in a sufficiently distinguished position to be askedto give any opinion." Pointing out the gradual but steady increase of warlike expenditure ; noticina the panic of 1851, when 30,000 men were drawn round London by the Duke of Wellington during the Great Exhibition ; quoting the Army awl Xavy Gazette to show that Cherbourg was only a place for de- fensive and not aggressive purposes ; criticizing recent French policy, Mr. Bright finished a speech of great power and eloquence-

" What is the result in every other country ? If somebody had told Louis XIV. that his extravagance would end in disaster to France, he would have answered as I shall be answered= The country is rich enough. The glory of France is worth more than your sordid consideration of pounds, shillings, and pence. France must oceupy a great position in Europe. There is no burden which France will not easily, by its elasticity, raise itself under and support.' But what came of it ? Why, in only a generation his family was-exiled, the aristocracy of his country was overthrown. Another branch of his family has been exiled, and the kingdom which he did so much to ruin has been subjected to sixty years of anarchy and recurring revolution. fhat is the story which history tells us of other countries as well as of France, and if we pursue the same course here the history which will be written in the future of our time will be exactly like that which has been written of France and of other countries. You will have an exiled Royal family., you will have an overthrown aristocracy, you will have a period of recurring revolution ; and there is no path so straight, so downward, so slippery, and so easily travelled to all those misfortunes as the path which we are now following in year after year, adding to these enormous expenses, until the day will come when there will be some cheek throughout the country, and when men will open their eyes and ask who has deceived them, defrauded them, pillaged them. Then you will have to pay the penalty which all men in the upper classes of society in every country have had to pay when they have not maintained the rights of the great body of the peo- ple in this particular, and when they have not discharged the duties which devolved upon them as the governing class in the country. It is because I hate the policy, because I condemn the expenditure, because I bee it will lead to more expenditure, and to the wider prevalence of this evil policy, that I oppose .with all my heart the resolution of the noble lord, and in doing so I feel the utmost conviction in my conscience, not more to the peo- ple, of whom I am one, than to the monarchy under which I live." Mr. NEWDEGATE, Sir F. GOLDSMID, Mr. CORRY', Lord R. MoNTaen, Mr. Warr; Sir CHARLES NAPIER, and Mr. B. OSD3RNE addressed the House ; the latter with smart criticism upon the plan of fortification suggested by the Commission. Mr. Hoitsaia.sr praised the Commission ; and eloquently urged the defence of England— Nothing so much surprises foreigners and those who reside in our colonial possessions as the careless, indifferent, and reckless way in which we exist, as to our security from notorious external dangers. We talk of the a ifety of England, but they ask whether the safety of England has a mere local significance? They say that the safety of England is the preservation of all that is valuable to the peace and progress of England. They know that the commerce of England covers every sea, and that the security of England means the security of the only moderating and tranquilliziug Power that _ exists in Europe. They know that if England should vanish out of exist- ence the whole of the continent of Europe would probably pass under some dark despotism. If England fell, haw long would Belgium or Germany remain ? How long would Italian unity be anything but a dream ? No; the moral influence of England abroad is irresistible in exact proportion to her impregnability at home. Our greatness does not consist merely in our wealth, our commerce, our institutions, or our military renown, but in those tributary elements that constitute a gigantic moral force, of which freedom is the principle and peace the holy mission. There is not a friend to freedom of thought who does not turn to England as its supporter. There is not a friend to peace who does not bless England for the power she wields and the example she sets. Every man who is the friend of his species looks upon England as the great depository of political truth, her safety as their pride, and the peril of England as their despair. Sir F. Salmi and Mr. HERBERT addressed the Committee ; Lord PAL- 3IEHSTON replied ; and, after an ineffectual attempt of Sir M. Prro to address the Committee, a division was taken. For the resolution of Lord Palmerston, 208; against, 39. Majority, 297. On the resolution being put from the chair, Mr. BRIGHT asked for reasons why money should be laid out on Dover and Portland, and also as to Cannock Chase. Lord PALMERSTON said Dover was an important stragetic position ; it was important to have a central arsenal for the collection of the stores now collected at Woolwich. Mr. MONSELL moved that it was not expedient to extend the works to Portsdown Hill. Mr. NEWDEGATE objected to the erection of a central arsenal. Mr. S. HER- BERT said nothing had been done as to Cannock Chase. It was not intended to abandon Woolwich, but only to erect a reserve arsenal re- moved from the coast. Lord PALMERSTON said it was not intended to have a great arsenal in the centre of England. The House divided—For Mr. Monsell's amendment, 37; against, 165. Majority, 128. Mr. BRIGHT pressed for information as to the central arsenal. Lord PALMERSTON said nothing was decided ; several sites had been suggested, the Mersey being one. The question would be submitted to Parliament ; an estimate of the cost of each work would also be submitted. The reso- lution was then put and carried.


The adjourned debate on Sir James Elphinstone's motion, "That it be an instruction to the committee that they have power to make provision for the future regulation, discipline, and patronage of the European forces serving in India" was resumed by Mr. H. D. SEYMOUlt. Indian offi- cials declared that the event which first shook the British power in India was the interference of the home authorities in the Affghan war • next to that the policy. of annexation which was pursued against the weight of Indian experience ; and lastly the financial measures of Sir Charles Wood which, although applauded at home, were condemned in' India. Colonel SICKEi quoted Mr. Willoughby and Lord Elphinstone as authorities in favour of the entire subordination of the army, both Euro- pean and Native, to the Government of India. Military promotions might be left to the Horse Guards, but staff appointments to the Indian Government. Sir Bartle Frere, in his minute, maintained that the local- ized character of the three armies was a main cause why the mutiny was chiefly confined to one of the three. In August, 1858, the Commander- in-Chief had applied to the Indian department for returns to be sent him so that the Horse Guards, already overburdened with work, should have the control and management of 300,000 men. The total number of Bri- tish officers in the Indian Army was no less than 4080: their places as they fell vacant would be filled by the Horse Guards, in addition to its already enormous patronage. Independently there would be the ap- pointment of their commanders-in-Chief, 18 generals of division, with 4000/. a year each, besides quarter-masters, generals, and inspectors-gene- ral of hospitals ; 145 officers of the Line were employed on the staff ap- pointments in India, therefore 146 additions to the Indian service would be made at the expense of India. There would be constant collisions between the home authorities and the Governor-General. He main- tained that the Governor-General should be absolute in India, and that he should govern it as a viceroy under the Secretary of State who is responsible to Parliament. Sir CHARLES WOOD said the divisional and staff appointments were all made by the Indian Government ; formerly the Home Government interfered and ordered certain appointments to be made by the Indian Government, but now they were left to the Gover- nor-General and Commander-in-Chief. If all the appointments were made from officers serving in India the country would be debarred from the services of those who had once served in India, but were at the mo- ment in this country. Lord Clyde, Sir William Mansfield, Sir Hugh Rose, and Sir Hope Grant, now in command of the forces to China, were sent out from home. The proposal would be inoperative. The instruc- tion was then put and negatived without a division.

On the motion " that the Speaker now leave the chair," Sir JAMES FERGUSON moved—" That it was inexpedient to proceed further with legislation respecting European troops in India until the whole plan of the Government for the regulation of the military force of the country shall have been submitted to the consideration of Parliament." The most important question for consideration was—how the authority of the Governor-General was to be maintained. Colonel Durand, in his minute said, that the Governor-General, who had always exercised the supreme civil and military government in India, could not be deprived of au- thority over the army without losing the respect of Asiatics. The cost of Queen's troops was much greater than those of a local army : and an eminent actuary had calculated that a force of 80,000 men would ex- ceed in expense a local force 460,000/. a year : with two-thirds of Queen's troops and one-third local, the additional expense would be 308,000?.; with one-third of Queen's troops the expense would be 180,000/. a year additional. The Government plan will therefore en- tail half a million a year upon the peciple of India. He believed 20,000 men would have to be carried upon the sea every year to keep up a Royal army. The question of health was also an important con- sideration; old soldiers lost their health in India ; others said they became acclimatized ; but those who had resided there some years knew better how to take care of themselves than raw re- cruits. Supposing an European commotion to take place, how was the army of England to be kept up ? Whilst India was left un- guarded, some ambitious politicians abroad might excite sedition there. Quoting the opinions of Sir Bartle Frere, Sir James Outram, and Sir John Lawrence, in favour of a local army, the honourable baronet moved his amendment, which was seconded by Mr. THOMAS BA.RING. The House at once divided—For, 50; against, 88; majority against, 38.

Sir JAMES ELPHINSTONE then moved the adjournment of the House; he had wished to express his sentiments on Sir James Ferguson's amend- ment, but the question had been too rapidly put. Sir HENRY WILLOUGHBY protested against legislation in the dark, or when the House was only half-informed as to the fact. The whole army of India must be the Queen's army, but the question was, might not part of it be localized ? So far as the opinions of great and able men were collected, the arguments were ten to one in favour of a certain proportion of the army being localized. If there were 80,000 troops of the Line in India, and 20,000 recruits in England for that army, it would, at a stroke, double the military force of this country. Did any one know to what extent the Commander-in-Chief would govern the army of India- his own impression after reading the report on the or- ganization of the army was anything but clear. It was absolutely ne- cessary to maintain the authority of the Governor-General of India by a local army—

"There were many ways in which we might lose our empire in India, but that which was most likely to make it not worth having was the adoption of novel schemes of taxation. There was an erroneous impression abroad that India was a very wealthy country ; but within four years its delft had in- creased 37,000,000/., and the army expenditure had risen from 8,000,0001. to 20,000,000/. The difference in the cost of a partially localized army and of one consisting entirely of troops of the line was most material. In one year we had paid 2,180,000/. for the transport of troops to India ; officers of the line cost 388,000/. ; the officers of a single regiment cost 11,000/. ; the transport of a whole regiment, 46,000/. If we had an army of 80,000 men in India we should have to keep 29,000 at sea. Between 700,000/. and 800,000/. had been spent in sending the wives and children of soldiers to India."

He could quote two cases in which two subalterns had cost the country 4301. in seven months for passage-money. He hoped the House would reject the bill. Lord PlaMERSTON complaining of the attempt to delay the bill, went to the question of precedence-

" I put it upon the ground stated by the honourable baronet the Member for Portsmouth. He has boldly and frankly avowed that he joins in these attempts at delay for the purpose of stopping the progress of the bill. I say that strikes at the root of constitutional institutions. If there is one principle more thin another upon which constitutional institutions are founded, it is the pnneiple that after full discussion, after every opportunity given to indivi- duals to express their opinions, the majority ought to prevail over the mine- nty. If the decision a the majority is not allowed to prevail, there is an end of constitutional institutions. In countries where the people are not accustomed to work such institutions, the minority have recourse to open violence. We are now witnessing proceedings similar in principle, though Meanie& out in a different way, because here the minority, conscious, as I r must assume them to be, that their arguments will not avail to overthrow the conclusion of the majority, are resorting to every device which the forms of the House enable them to take advantage of, for the purpose of defeating by delay a measure which they are unable to induce the House to reject by reason. Upon that proceeding, boldly, manfully, and frankly avowed by the honourable baronet the Member for Portsmouth, I leave the country to decide ; but I venture to say it is impossible for Parliament to work out its constitutional functions if that system is to be pursued upon every occasion on which a minority may feel itself unable to effect its object by argument. We ll not submit to be coerced in that manner. We will go on as long as

wi health and strength enable the majority to contend against what I must call the factious proceedings of the minority.

.Appealing to Sir James Elphinstone to withdraw his motion, he re- minded the House that, upon the question of adjournment, Members should not give reasons against the bill. Sir JAMES ELPHINSTONE with- drew his motion. Mr. Mer.rxs, Lord Cr.eun HAMILTON, Colonel Sms, and Mr. VA:came= offered objections to the bill in principle or detail. Sir CHARLES Woon explained that the highest estimate forwarded to Government of men required for Indian service was 95,000; the lowest,

79,000. In his opinion, 80,000 ought to be maintain

htcrest destruction p r e s e n t

at some future day, he hoped to reduce the number.

h Colonel HERBERT asked, did the bill really provide to?, the contrary, it the three armies of Bengal, Madras, and Bombay ? 0t he it dealt with only a small portion. Out of the regiments a.c,t1',feeleay, only 3 were affected, and 29 were untouched. In Madras, tlaZre were 3 regiments of infantry affected, whilst 55 of infantry and 4,1'ere1 regiments of cavalry, were untouched. The Bengal army was composer, of 144 regiments, including the Punjaub, Gwalior, and other forces. Many of them had disappeared, but the officers remained, and the regi- ments would be raised again ; 70 or 90 regiments would be retained for the Native army of Bengal. liras there were 9 regiments of infantry affected by this bill, and about 160 regiments not at all affected. It was said that the patronage would be transferred to the House Guards, but there was nothing in the bill to do that ; there were 9 regiments to be transferred to the Horse Guards, so that the country would not be flooded with the patronage of corruption. Sir Henry Willoughby, when he stated that the expenditure of India had been 37 millions in excess of the revenue, forgot that that sum included the outlay during the mutiny. Defending the so-called European mutineers by reference to the exact terms of their oath, Colonel Herbert concluded—

The Bill, instead of being a source of weakness, would, he was convinced, confer additional strength on the Indian Administration by enabling it to rely on the European force. He should be the last person to diminish in any way the prestige, credit, or glory of that Administration, or to lessen influence nfluence of the Governor-Geheml, for in no country in the world was it more essential that the power of the sword should be combined with the majesty of the sceptre. (Cheers.) Major W. PARKER and Mr. TORRENS having addressed the House, it went into Committee. On.clause 1, Mr. HENL1EY moved an amend- ment intended to preserve the advantages of pay, pensions, allowances, privileges, and promotions secured by previous Acts. Sir CHARLES WOOD accepted the amendment, and the bill was ordered to be reported to the House amid some cheering.


In the House of Lords, on Monday, the Marquis of NORMANEY moved for copies or extracts of despatches on the subject of the administration of the Roman States. The motion does not originate with him ; a Mem- ber of the other House had moved for certain despatches which had been addressed to him when he was her Majesty's Minister at Florence by the Secretary of Legation, who was at the time unofficially residing in Rome. His object was to ascertain what was the effect of Ministerial deulara- lions, and what was the actual government of Rome- " In 1856 Mr. Lyons had been charged with a somewhat delicate mission —namely, to communicate from his noble friend opposite to Cardinal Anto- nelli his impressions as to what had passed at the Congress of Paris. That mission Mr. Lyons, as would be seen by his despatches, had executed with great tact, and whatever representations he had made to Cardinal Antonelli at the interview of the 24th of May had been received with the most cour- teous attention, neither having been aware at the time of the declaration to which he had already alluded—that Rome had never been better governed than during the absence of the Pope. Now, it could hardly be supposed that in making such a declaration some allusion would not be made to the peculiar circumstances under which that absence took place. That absence was caused by the murder of his Minister on the steps of the National As- sembly. The state of feeling existing at the time in Rome was evidenced by the circumstance which was mentioned in the despatch of the French Ambassador announcing the assassination, that the National Assembly pro- ceeded with the orders of the day without taking any notice of the incident. Mr. Lyons did not again see Cardinal Antonelli until the 30th of May, and in the meantime the excitement had been much increased by what passed in the British Parliament. Cardinal Antonelli was always courteous to Mr. Lyons, but he found his tone completely altered, and when he endeavoured to bring to something like a definite issue the question whether the Papal Government, within a reasonable time, would or would not undertake to adopt any reforms at all, the Cardinal became almost entirely silent. At that very time he himself was also endeavouring to obtain from the Roman Government concessions of a similar character. For this purpose he had several interviews with a gentleman possessing influence at the Court of Rome, and strove to influence his mind favourably towards the_project of a deliberative council. But the reply which he received was, "How can you expect we should consider these reforms when the head of your Government holds up as a model for our imitation a system which we believe to be incon- sistent with security to life and property ?" He asked for copies of his protest and despatches, that he might show that Lord Palmerston had acted injudiciously in declaring that Rome was never better governed than when the Popes were away from it, and the Marquis also gave his version as to the state of Rome during the revolu- tion, with quotations from M. do Montalembert- On this particular subject M. de Montalembert, it might be said, had strong opinions; but no such objections would be urged against M. de Tocqueville, who was efisentially liberal in his opinions. He was in the habit of seeing M. de Tocqueville almost every day at the time of the French expedition to Rome, and he had often repeated to him his wonder at the manner in which Lord Palmerston chose to disbelieve the mass of facts which were laid before him, and still continued to think the Roman Re- public worthy of his support—a Government which M. de Tocqueville said he held to be wanting in all the first duties of every government. He based the motion with which he meant to conclude, on the ground that the papers already presented would not give an aCcurate impression of the truth without these despatches. They would give an impression unjust to Mr. Lyons and himself, and, to a certain extent, to the Roman Government, inasmuch as there would then remain no trace of the fact that it was in consequence of a natural feeling of irritation at what they considered an in- sult, that they were leas disposed to listen to our suggestions to give a fa- vourable consideration to plans of administrative reform. Lord WODEHOUSE assented to the motion ; but whilst the events to which the Marquis referred had occurred in 1849, the speech of Lord Palmerston was not delivered until 1856. The statements of that speech were founded on the evidence of the British Consular agent at Rome : as the latter was in Rome and the noble Marquis in Paris, the Consul had the best means of knowing what was going on.

Coincxy Coturrs.

Lord BROUGHAM, in moving for returns connected with the County Courts, took occasion to state some interesting facts; no less than 738,000 suits were commenced in those courts in one year. The amount of money claimed in those suits was 1,900,0001., and the sum recovered, 970,0001. These figures alone indicated the vast importance of this lwAt jurisdiction. The number of actions commenced in the superior coxes

last year was 86,277. He found that in the County Courts there were, in one year, 3631 suits for sums between 201. and 501., while in the superior courts there were only 378 cases. The great importance of the County Court jurisdiction could not therefore, be overrated. Lord Brougham drew attention to a matter of still greater importance con- nected with these courts ; the promotion of the judges.

And in connection with this subject he would call his noble and learned friend's attention to a suggestion which he made many years ago in that place— he meant the expediency from time to time of promoting County Court judges. In the first place, it would give them access to the highest ability and the i

greatest learning n the profession—to much greater learning and much higher ability than they were likely to obtain if these County Court judges had no prospect whatever of further advancement. But there was another argu- ment in favour of the suggestion he had made. No one who knew West- minster Hall would deny that there was always very great difficulty in determining whether those promoted to the bench were suited by judicial qualities for that position. The only test they had was generally a very fallacious one as to judicial fitness—namely, success at the bar. A man, as every day's experience showed, might be very eminent as an advocate with- out being equally distinguished as a judge. Many a person most dis- tinguished at the bar had disappointed expectations on the bench. But in a County Court they saw men displaying judicial qualities of great splendour and distinction, and if they found that a judge was greatly preferred by suitors because he gave satisfaction in that important office, they had an ex- cellent test whereby to determine his capacity for judicial duty.


In the Commons, on Tuesday, Colonel FRENCH moved for leave to bring in a bill to extend to Ireland all rules and regulations for the emolument and organization of Volunteer corps now by law applicable to Great Britain. The Government had announced their intention of op- posing the extension of Volunteer Corps to Ireland. Would Lord Pal- merston be justified in refusing the aid of 50,000 Irish volunteers as efficient for her Majesty's service as any of the volunteers embodied in this country or Scotland ? If Government would put confidence in the people of Ireland, they would find it answer. Mr. CARDWELL could not accede to the motion; if the law were altered as it had existed since the Peace of Amiens, the inference would be that the Government proposed to act at once, and such legislation would amount to an engagement to do so. There was no doubt a large body of men could be had, devoted to their Sovereign and their country, and the members of both Churches alike would present themselves with that object—

Experience justified such an expectation. It was true that at the close of the last century a demonstration of this kind had, in its result, proved in some respects unsatisfactory, yet it was gratifying to find, ftom the his- torians of the time, that the moment there was any real apprehension of invasion all party animosities ceased, and, though the Catholics were then prevented from bearing arms, they Caine forward with their subscriptions in order to raise a national force for the defence of Ireland. If that was the case, then the same feeling might, with far more confidence, be expected now. But, though no one need distrust the loyalty of Ireland, it could not be denied that there were other important considerations which it was ne- cessary to bear in mind. What would be the consequence in a domestic point of view of arming large numbers of people in the sister country ? The honourable gentleman said it would bring together Catholic and Protestant. But would it bring them together in such a way as to promote harmony, or the opposite of harmony ? In former times it had been found that great danger attended the possession of arms by those who, not being animated by the beat feelings towards each other, perhaps, at any time, were carried away by some momentary excitement, and, as we had recently seen, were then liable so become enemies instead of friends.

Belfast was, at this moment, under the Peace Preservation Act, be- cause party strife had unhappily arisen, and the rival parties had begun to form themselves into rival gun-clubs. The number of applications to form Volunteer corps from Ireland was very small. In an emergency, Ireland would display conspicuous devotion to the throne. If invasion appeared imminent, Irishmen would come forward in such a way as to make it unnecessary to take these steps in advance.

Mr. MAGUIRE was not satisfied with Mr. Cardwell's speech ; "anything so shallow, so barefaced, so bordering upon humbug," he had never heard.

The Chief Secretary had stated that, at the close of the last century, when there was an alarm of invasion, Irishmen rallied round their Sovereign. That was so, and Englishmen who had the faculty of blushing ought to blush when they remembered in what a condition Ireland was left at that time. In 1782, the whole defence of Ireland against invasion was a com- pany of invalids. No doubt, as gallant an army afterwards was raised as any country could boast of. But the right honourable gentleman knew what happened then, and perhaps was afraid that the same thing would happen now.

If England were menaced, Ireland was in danger as well. Ships pro- pelled by steam might be directed to any part of Ireland. It was mere " bounce " to say that 60,000 men would make short work of any hostile force.

He knew the country well, and he knew the feelings of his countrymen. Should he tell the House the real truth? He believed that after the state- ments of the noble lord and the right honourable gentleman, if the French were to land on the shores of Ireland tomorrow, the vast bulk of the popula- tion whether armed or unarmed, would not meet them as foes. Was that a feeling to encourage ? The noble lord who represented the Sovereign in Ireland attended cattle shows, where he met a number of persons, from whom he heard loyal speeches, and with whom he drank loyal wine ; and he thought that was a true representation of the feeling of Ireland. But if the noble lord declared that he would not grant arms to the Irish people be- cause they were not loyal, he could not be surprised if that declaration excited a feeling of disaffection in the minds of the great mass of the Irish people.

Lord PA.LMERSTON did not think Colonel French and Mr. Maguire had held out any great encouragement to induce him to depart from the line of policy declared by Mr. Cardwell-

" My honourable and gallant friend, wishing to convince the House that there is no possible chance of danger of any hostile collision between various sections in Ireland, gave its an anecdote by way of illustration. He said that two Irish gentlemen were travelling together for three weeks upon the most agreeable and confidential footing, but one of them happened one fine morning to make the discovery that the other was an Orangeman upon which he said, You an Orangeman ! I should never have guessed it. I always thought Orangeman were ready to cut our throats.' 'But,' said the other, that is only because we think you are ready to cut our throats.' Now, if the two great classes of Irishmen had lived together for three weeks on the same agreeable terms of companionship as did the individuals re- ferred to by my honourable and gallant friend, and thus had got their minds disabused of the notion that the other class wanted metaphorically to cut their throats, then the policy of my right honourable friend might be open to question."

Colonel French admits a feeling of mutual distrust between two classes; and Mr. Maguire says that if the French were to land tomorrow, the majority of the Irish nation would meet them not as foes. His imagina- tion led him further, for he said that the bulk of the Irish people were disaffected towards the British Government. These are strange assertions to make, with a view to induce the Government to put arms into the hands of Irishmen. But Lord Palmerston denied the truth of these as- sertions.

" The honourable gentleman has also very much misrepresented the state

of things in Ireland. He paid a very great compliment to the powers of speech of myself and my right honourable friend when he ascribed the sup- posed disaffection of the great mass of the population of Ireland to a speech I made about a week ago' and to a speech which my right honourable friend has made this evening. He says that these speeches have had the wonderful effect of converting a loyal into a disloyal population, and rendering the bulk of the people of Ireland disaffected. The way in which, according to the honourable gentleman, this feeling has been infused into the minds of Irishmen is, that it was proved by what I said that in the event of an inva- sion they were to be left defenceless and unprotected, and that they would be left, therefore, to the choice either of submitting to the inconvenience of a hopeless resistance, or of bowing their necks to the invader. But is Ire- land in that state ? In the first place, in time of peace there are 30,000 re- gular troops there. So far from showing any distrust of Ireland, there is an organized Militia of 30,000 more. There are, therefore, 60,000 armed and trained men in Ireland at the outset of a war to oppose to any enemythat may invade our shores. I think that, with 60,000 good troops in Ireland, it is rather a stretch of fancy on the part of the honourable gentleman to

say that Ireland is totally unprotected and incapable of resistance. There would also be 80,000 Militia in England and 20,000 Militia in Scotland, and if there were any prospect of Ireland being the object of attack, a con- siderable portion of them might be sent across the Channel. A force of re- gular troops might also be sent from England. I think, therefore, the honourable gentleman is as much mistaken as to the amount of defensive force applicable to Ireland in the event of invasion as I am confident he is in his description of the feelings of the Irish people. I can only say that the reasons alleged by my right honourable friend for declining at present to accede to the powers which the honourable and gallant gentleman is dis- posed to give are, in my opinion, perfectly sufficient, and I am content to rest upon the arguments he has used as to the decision we should come to on the motion of honourable and gallant friend."

Mr. POLLARD 'URQUHART, Colonel DUNNE, and Mr. HADFIELD ad- dressed the House, the latter amid cries of " Oh, oh !" and " Divide ! " but he touched a chord which found a response- " The present prosperity of Ireland was a very good guarantee for her loyalty and attachment to this country. It was admitted that this pros- perity was almost unprecedented, and he believed that the time had come when the people of Ireland might be trusted. Irishmen might look all round the world and not find a monarch so worthy of their loyalty and at- tachment as the Sovereign of this country. (Cheers.) Lord ASHLEY humourously supported Colonel French ; if you wanted to make a man worthy of your confidence, put confidence in him- " If a husband were uncomfortably jealous a wife sometimes gave him cause for it, and that was the case in the present instance. He believed that the formation of volunteer corps would have the effect of modifying and removing the animosity of party feeling in Ireland. He had the honour to hold a commission in the London Irish Volunteer Corps. It contained men of every shade of political and religious opinion, but the effect of wearing the Queen's livery was to banish sectarian jealousy and enable the members of the corps to live in harmony together. Since the Government, however, with their means of information declined to encourage the volunteer system in Ireland, he would advise his honourable and gallant friend not to divide the House. Before next session the Government would have ample time to reconsider their decision. Let Irish members tell their countrymen to be

good boys' until Parliament met again, and then if they behaved them- selves they would be more worthy of confidence by the time Parliament again assembled."

The House divided, when the numbers were—Ayes, 30; Noes, 86; Majority, 56. Leave to introduce ths bill was therefore refused. THE Busissess OF ran lousy..

On Monday, when the Speaker called upon the Clerk to read the first order of the day—the Indian Army Bill—Mr. HORSMAN rose to put a question in the absence of Lord Palmerston, but the SPEAKER declared Mr. Horsman out of order, and on the right honourable gentleman persisting, the Speaker expounded one of the rules of the House; that when he rose any honourable Member must resume his seat. Mr. HORS3IAN then said, amid cries of "Order," that he had written to Lord Palmerston with notice of an intention to ask a question as to the busi- ness of the House. The SPEAKER held that the question before the House was the European Forces (India) Bill, and it was out of order to discuss any other subject. Hr. HORSMAN, to put himself in order, moved the adjournment of the House ; he was entitled, according to his ex- perience, to ask his question, when Lord Palmerston appeared in his place. On Friday evening the House was under the impression that the first question for Monday was that of Fortifications ; he wished to make an amicable arrangement as the debate upon that measure. He desired to put it to Lord Palmerston whether, having regard to the public in- terests, the statement already made should not be followed up by such a course of action as the public safety imperatively demanded. There was a general feeling that the business had been conducted in a manner not satisfactory; there was a. still more general feeling that this in- definite postponement of the question of national defences was treating the question "with carelessness and levity." He was in the position of being against the European Forces India Bill, but in favour of the na- tional defences: twelve months ago he had submitted a resolution, but then he was left in a "very woful minority ;" the present result was encouraging to those who undertook the "thankless task of independent action.' The "sacred soil of this country" is in great danger; the arsenals may be destroyed, the shipping burnt, and all that was valuable; a more alarming statement could not be made. The SPEAKER here in- terrupted the right honourable gentleman, and pointed out the ir- regularity now being practised. The question had been asked, and re- plied to in the absence of Lord Palmerston by the Secretary for War. Lord Palmerston afterwards entered the House and remained some minutes before the Clerk was directed to proceed to the orders of the day. Then Mr. Horsman rose to put himself in order by moving the adjourn- ment of the House; but he never recollected such a course before pursued in his experience. The question of.fortifications stands tenth on the orders of the day, and it is not competent on a motion for adjournment to discuss an order of the day. Lord Patiannsrox was as anxious as Mr. Horsman to get to the question of fortifications, and he entreated his influence with his friends to procure a discontinuance of an abuse of the rules of the House. Sir Du LACY EVANS called Lord Palmerston to order ; he had no right to discuss the conduct of Members. Mr. HOUSMAN was under the impression that the orders of the day had not been read when he rose to move the adjournment. The subject dropped.

When the European Forces (India) Bill was about to be reported on Monday and Lord Palmerston had fixed Thursday for the third reading, Mr. HORSSI&N.again rose, and started the question of the state of public business : he maintained- " That nothing could be clearer or more distinct than the statement of the noble lord the other day, that after they had gone through committee on this bill the question of fortifications was to be taken. It was thought to be rather a serious matter that that question should be indefinitely post- oned ; and the appointment of the third reading of the Indian Army Bill rev Thursday was certainly a wide departure from the general understand- ing. He thought that after what had occurred that evening, the Govern- ment ought not to he quite so sure that the reading would pass without dis- cussion. He must say he never remembered an instance of such an occur- rence as they had witnessed that night. It was understood that a discussion was to take place on the motion of the honourable baronet the Member for Ayrshire (Sir J. Fergusson). By common consent the various instructions to be moved on going into committee were all withdrawn ; and there were, he was certain, not less than from a dozen to a score of Members who were ready to have taken part in what was deemed the real discussion on this subject. He could see Menabers in different parts of the House who had re- served themselves for that discussion. To the amazement of everybody, as soonthe honourable Member for Ayrshire sat down, the question was put }ep the chair. In all his experience he never knew an instance of a ques- r being put so quickly ; nor could he recollect any occasion on which, in the division lobby, so much surprise and dissatisfaction were expressed. Not once only, but twice, had the same thing happened that night. It was kzkown that he was going to make a motion before the orders of the day were one into. He was now somewhat experienced in the business of the House, and, inuring carefully watched his opportunity, he rose at what he believed was the proper moment. He was told he was too late. Twice, therefore, it had occurred in the course of the evening that an amendment had been suppressed." Sir G. GREY rose to order. It was, he believed, out of order for the right honourable gentleman, with the Chairman of Committee presiding, to im- pugn the conduct of the Speaker, who should be present to hear any charges made against him. Even if the right honourable gentleman were not out of order, it would be at least more becoming in him to postpone his statement until the Speaker had taken his seat. The CHAIRMAN—It is certainly not regular in a committee upon a bill to advert to any topic except its clauses. The committee has closed the dis- cussion of the clauses of this bill. The question is that I now leave the chair, and it is not desirable that any discussion foreign to the clauses of the bill should be opened.

But Mr llonsma.N was not to be so silenced—

As ti.:3 was a question which probably would, and which ought to, occur very seldom, he might b.: permitted in the general interest of members of the House to Bar he entirely differed from what had just been said by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and that he thought that when these discussions had been curtailed, it was better that it should be remarked upon when it could be done without impugning the conduct of the Speaker at the time that he was in the chair. He did not wish to impugn that conduct, but still he did say that on two occasions that day their discussion had been stopped when Members were anxious to go on with it. The noble lord ought, therefore, to feel that when the third reading of the bill came on, there might be a desire to revive the discussion which had been curtailed that evening. He would only in conclusion repeat an opinion which had been expressed in various quarters of the House, that the shortening their discussions by the strange mode of putting questions more rapidly than Members could intercept them by their speeches, would conduce neither to the progress of public business, nor to the dignity and good order of the House.

After some remarks from Mr. B. OSBORNE, a remonstrance from Sir JOHN PAKINGTON' and a notice from Mr. Honsmax, that he would move Forti- fications betaken first on the order, on Thursday, the subject was allowed to drop and the House resumed.

Mr. W. EWART moved resolutions on Tuesday, with reference to the mode of conducting the business of the House. Ile would confine him- self to the suggestion of a few practical reforms ; if he could choose he would "revert to the simplicity of former times." Why should the House not sit in the daytime ? Six or seven hours a day steadily de- voted to the business of the country, would give more satisfactory results than do their present protracted hours. The present system was one of prodigality, not of economy. He moved- " 1. That the discussion on the principle of a bill be confined to the time of its introduction and second or third reading, and that the Speaker or Chairman in Committee do enforce such rule. 2. That when, on a motion that the Speaker leave the chair for going into a Committee of Supply, any discussion or debate arise, such discussion or debate be not continued be- yond eight of the clock, and that the Speaker do then put the question without further debate. 3. That public bills which have been proceeded with in a previous Session may be resumed at the stage which theyleft off at in the next Session. 4. That bills introduced by the Government be, as far as is practicable, brought on and proceeded with early in the Session. 5. That it is expedient that the best means of improving and expediting the business of the House be considered by the Government in the interval be- tween the Sessions, with a view to submitting the subject to the delibera- tion of a Select Committee in the ensuing Session,of Parliament." Sir GEORGE CORNEWALL LEWIS said tho manner of conducting business was not a question for the Government ; it was the common interest of the whole House. It would be a matter of curious calculation how much time is lost in discussions as to when a measure is to be brought on- " It is quite impossible that we should lay down, as courts of justice lay down, an inflexible rule that when a case is called on it shall be proceeded with. We cannot impose an equally e rule upon the Members of this House ,• but I think we must all see that the very essence of the de- cisions of this assembly is that the voice of the majority should prevail ; - that, while we establish safeguards against coercing a d mg a IIIIROTI y an pro- ceeding too precipitately to a decision, it is absolutely necessary, in order to maintain the freedom of our discussions, that the voice of the majority should ultimately prevail over the minority. It would be advisable that from time to time a Committee should be appointed to consider whether any improvements could be made in our rules with respect .to the transaction of business. A considerable period has elapsed sines su Ik committee sat' The last time there was such a committee, various w 1,18,ahmeeblemgiPnras; meets were suggested and acted u n, and I think that of next Session, a Committee of t sort might be eppou ated with great advantage:" Mr. EWART contaminated allowing only one discussion on of a measure; it would be difficult to lay down an inflexible suggested the appointment of a Committee next session. Mr. DEGATE, Mr. WLLLIAM s, and Lord Hamm having - dressed the House an ineffectual attempt was made to " count out' Mr. EWART withdrew his resolutions, being satisfied with the statement of the Government The House was counted again ; only thirty-three Members were present, so the House rose at half-past eight o'clock.

In the House of Commons on Thursday, Lord PALMERSTON, supporting a resolution of Colonel Wilson Patten's as to the private 'business of the House, took the occasion to mention in eulogistic terms the services ren- dered by Mr. Adair, Mr. George Ridley, Mr. Ingham, Lord March, Mr. Scholefield, Mr. Mowbray, and Mr. Hardy, who had acted as chairmen of private committees ; Colonel Patten and Mr. Forster, also.

Lord PALMERSTON, on Thursday, moved the repeal of theetanding order of 24th June 1852, and moved—"That unless the House shall other- wise direct, all orders of the day set down in the order-book for Mondays, Wednesdays, and Thursday, shall be disposed of before the House will proceed upon any motions of which notices shall have been given : that the said resolution be a standing order of this House." Agreed to.

Nzw ZEALAND Bum. e princhile e. He

SW- In the Lords, on Tuesday, Lord Lrrrwroai, on the question that this bill be read a third time, moved that it be read that day three months. After a careful study of the papers laid on the table, le had arrived at the conclusion that it was not desirable to press this bill during the pre- sent session. The bill was founded on the recommendation of the Go- vernor, but there was a serious difference of opinion between the Go- vernor and his Ministers on the subject. He had presented petitions against the bill, signed by two members of the Executive Council of the colony, two of the Administrative Council, and five of the Representative Assembly : there was a want of cordiality between these parties. The Governor was supported by the Bishop, the late Chief Justice, the late Attorney-General, and several of the missionary clergy ; 'but, in the opin- ion of the members of the Council, the proposal could not be made to the Colonial Legislature with any chance of success, nor could it work in harmony with representative institutions: The bill ought not to be passed into law until it had received the consideration of the colonists, and its provisions had been adequately discussed. It was contended that the Home Government were bound to keep the affairs of the natives in their own hands; but, however much we might be interested in the native population, the interest of the colonists was greater. He regretted that the colonists gave some validity to the argument ; as when the late out- break took place they had, instead of relying on their own strength and skill in the emergency, looked for assistance from home. In the northern parts of New Zealand the colonists were nearly equal to the Natives,. or according to the census taken three years ago, the English population was 33,000, and that of the natives 52,000. The condition of the native tribes was not satisfactory. One of the subjects pointed out in the des- patches was the enabling of the natives to individualize their title to land - another was the question whether the Natives in future should continue to deal respecting their lands with the Crown, or directly with the settlers ? The rule on this point would have to be relaxed; the present system might be continued for a little -time, although the dis- putes of the Natives had commenced, almost without exception with the Government or its agents. This measure proposed to effect a division of labour, not on the old well-known colonial system, but on the bad modern principle of nomination. Lord LYVEDEN said legislation was not urgently -required, and their House would be better prepared to legislate if it were in possession of the opinion of the Duke of Newcastle, which was not contained in the papers produced. Why had this bill not been carried through the Colonial As- sembly? Earl GRANVILLE had heard nothing to induce him to post- pone the bill. There was a feeling of prejudice on the part of the natives which prevented their receiving the measures of theDolonial Legislation in a favourable manner. The Earl of DERBY thought the bill contained "elements of inconvenience and even danger." The colonist had inter- ests distinct from those of the Natives, and the Legislature did not repre- sent the Natives. As the Government thought the bill absolutely neces- sary, he could not advise its rejection. The bill was then read a third time and passed.


On Wednesday, in the House of Commons, on the motion for going into Committee, 'Mr. BRADY moved that the bill be read this day three months. The Bill would inflict serious injustice upon large and import- ant districts : 200,0001. was borrowed from the Rock Insurance Company by the late Commissioners of Sewers for purpose of drainage, Which had been for the greater part expended upon parishes bordering on the river : in Camberwell no more than 3501. was laid, out on drainage, and not a single farthing in Wandsworth. Yet the outlying districts were asked to pay a large sum of the money borrowed from the Rook office. Colonel FRENCH seconded the amendment. Mr. HENLEY, Mr. WILLIAM Wile tisms, and Mr. EVANS all urged the withdrawal of the bill for this session; Sir G. C. LEWIS reminded the House that this bill had been fourteen days before a Select Committee, and that great expense had been incurred by promotions and appoiintments. The House "may now be asked to post- pone everything, but he doubted whetherthey would have more time to discuss the bill next session than they had now." Mr. TrrE had intro- duced this bill at the end of the last session, with the distinct purpose that it should be referred to every vestry in the metropolitan district. It was so referred; the vestries, amounting to thirty-seven, forwarded to the Board of Works their objections, amendments, and suggestions, and that body after a long discussion, agreed to the bill in the shape in which it was sent to the Select Committee. It was before the Committee four- teen days, and thirty counsel were employed upon it The matter pressed extremely. Parliament had empowed the Board of Works 'to make seventy miles of sewers, and to raise and spend 3,000,000/. The Board was raising 300,0001. a year; it was under contracts to the amount of 1,000,000/., and with the assistance of the legislature, it would soon be able to complete the whole of the great work intrustil to it. But -there were some minute difficulties in the way, which the present bill proposed to remove.

Mr. LIDDELL suggested the postponement. Mr. Jorrav LOCKE and Mr. EDWIN Luise urged the commitment of the bill. The House divided. For the original motion, 71; against, 18; majority, 68. The House -then went into Committee and proceeded to discuss the clauses. Twice the House was divided upon motions for re- porting progress. The third division was taken upon the first clause, when there voted for the clause, 26; against, 110, majority, 84. A clause proposed by Mr. 11ommain, as to the mode of assessment and arrangements of rating disputes was rejected by a majority of 106. The preamble was agreed to and the bill was ordered to be reported.

In the Lords, on Tuesday, Lord Bnouonem brought in a bill relating to debtors in the Queen's Prison, who complained that an Act for the arrangement of claims of creditors upon debtors had been construed so as not to apply to debtors actually in custody. The bill Lord Brougham brought in would declare, explain, and, if necessary, amend the Act in question, and he asked that the standing orders might be suspended to allow it to be passed this session. The bill was laid on the table.

The standing orders were also suspended in order to allow the Militia Ballot Bill to be read a second time, which was done. The ballot for the Militia would have come into operation had this bill not been passed, and Earl DE GREY and RIPON moved a resolution affirming the propriety of not resorting to the ballot at the present time.

In the House of Lords, on Thursday, Lord BROUGHAM moved to lay on the table of the House a copy of the report of the Judicial Section of the International Statistical Congress. Agreed to. On the third reading of the Mines Regulation and Inspection Bill, Lord Secormitn, after a short discussion, withdrew his amendments. On motion for going into Committee upon the Militia Ballot Bill, the Earl of DERBY objected to the reduction of the ages from eighteen to thirty-five to eighteen to thirty, as it limited the area, and made it more oppressive to the class included. The Earl DE GREY and RrroN said that from eighteen to thirty, persons could more conveniently perform the duties. The bill passed through Committee.

In Committee, the 42d clause of the Refreshment House and Wine Licences (Ireland) Bill was negatived. The remaining clause, and a new clause regulating Sunday hours, were agreed to.