The newest news from abroad once more directs attention to

"Grey's folly," the illustrious "kingdom of Mosquitia"; for the newest events on the European Continent belong to a familiar series. Louis Napoleon is " warning " the ingenious journalists who manage to discuss him in metaphors. Paris and Vienna are gossiping over the sturdy English articles in the Times declaring that political refugees will not be given up. The Emperor Francis Joseph is getting better and his wound is healing; yet anxiety for his health evidently increases, and an "alter ego" is allotted to him to perform some of his autocratic functions. At Milan, Ra- detzky is following up punishment and fines, with wholesale con- fiscations. And the Turks are fighting while negotiations pro- ceed. But there is no decided turn in the course of affairs save that already noted in Parliament. General Cathcart has achieved another damaging victory over the border Blacks of the Cape ; and a revolution in Ma has secured General Godwin a holyday. The true variety for the season is this new question about the empire of the Midge Monarch in the swamps of Central America. England proposes to the United States to abandon the British pro-

head officers, he said that the three clerks, who in 1849 enjoyed an income of 8331., were only paid, in 1850, 55/. each. Yet these were the men who did all the business. He described the shameful state of the wills ; how they were kept in damp places, and also liable to be consumed by fire; how the rich man has to pay large sums to find a will, while the poor man cannot find it at all. Then these courts are destitute of perfect jurisdiction, and a will may be contested in three courts at once. Mr. Collier proceeded to suggest remedies; consisting mainly in the aboli- tion of the condemned courts, and the transfer of their jurisdiction, subject to certain conditions, to the County Courts. The Ecclesiastical C,ourte are the " vulnus immedicabile " of our Judicial system, the only remedy for which is the knife.

With regard to the Court of Admiralty, it certainly is more useful than the Ecclesiastical Courts, and its jurisdiction is often valuable ; but the in- habitants of sea-port towns desire that its jurisdiction may be locally exer- cised; and it might be intrusted to the County Courts. There was a prece- dent for this : a similar course was followed in Scotland, where the jurisdic- tion of the Courts of the Commissioners and of the Admiralty was transferred to the Sheriff-Courts.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said he could not resist the truth of the vivid representations of Mr. Collier's speech ; which, unhappily, only set forth

unquestionable facts. But after all, the question really was as to the remedy; and this would be found to require a far more extensive measure than the mover contemplated. The remedy involved the removal of that reproach of our law the exist- ence of antagonistic jurisdictions. It is extraordinary that in such a country as this there should exist such a system—one court being allowed to proceed ma course of injustice, with the chance of its being arrested in its course of wrong byanother court ; that courts should exist proceeding upon 'different principles opposed to the established principles of justice. He repeated, the remedy must go further than to our Ecclesiastical Courts; and could not be effectual unless one common jurisdiction were constituted, proceeding upon common principle; originating in a

common source, and directed to a common purpose by one uniform and sim- oele system. He hoped this principle would-be acknowledged and acted upon. Undoubtedly it is desirable, in prosecuting these reforms, to proceed in a

comprehensive and not in a piecemeal manner. And although he felt re- luctant to interpose any delay, or to suggest any course which could in the least appear to savour of a desire to put off investigation of the subject, it -should nevertheless be remembered, that at present there are three inquiries -pending into three of the most important subjects. First of all, a Commis- sion is now sitting, which, he trusted, would devise an effectual if not a corn- .plete reform of the evils complained of in the Court of Chancery. The la- -hours of that Commission have reference to the consolidation of the jurisdic- tion of Law and Equity. In the report of that Commission are enumerated -the evils attending the anomalous state of the Ecclesiastical Courts. To the same Commission was referred the subject of the testamentary jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts ; not for the purpose of inquiring into the evils of that Jurisdiction, but to devise a means by which that jurisdiction could be transferred to some other tribunal, so that relief might be administered. Now he felt impressed with an apprehension that the progress of this great reform

might be retarded if the matter were referred to a Committee of the House of Commons ; for the Commissions are prosecuting their inquiries, and the

result of another Commission would be to create discord and to evolve the suggestions of remedies inconsistent with each other. Therefore he trusted. that Mr. Collier, to whom the House was so greatly indebted—and whomight be hailed as an addition to their ranks, from whom they might expect most important services in the great cause of legal reform—would rest contented. with the assurance given by the Lord Chancellor at the commencement of the session, that if the report of the Commissioners sitting on the state of the law were not presented, or were found ineffectual for the purpose, the Chancellor would pledge himself to bring forward a measure adapted to the existing state of the evil, and intended as a complete remedy for it.

Sir BENJAMIN HALL supported Mr. Collier; thanking him for relieving himself of a duty he intended to perform. Mr. Meounte represented these courts as far more odious in Ireland than even in England: a more perfect system of extortion and robbery did not exist. Dr. PHILL/MOEE professed great anxiety for the reformation of the courts in question-. at the same time, he endeavoured to show that they are less expensive than the Courts of Chancery or Common Law. He de- nied that the Ecclesiastical Courts themselves had resisted, indeed they had suggested reform. Ile trusted the House would be satisfied that their reform is impossible before they abolish the courts. There are abuses in them which he detested, but they were coeval with if not antecedent to Westminster Hall; and it is impossible for them not to have roots intertwined with many valuable interests which do not at first sight pre- sent themselves. The Arrow:um-GP...Tenet said, we all agree that the abuses of the Ec-

clesiastical Courts are intolerable, and can no longer be endured. The Imife must be applied—but used with discretion. He hoped ere long to see all out: courts acting according to one common procedure; but Par- liament must wait to sec how they could improve the machinery before they dealt rashly with the jurisdiction.

hm reply to an appeal from Mr. FITZGERALD, Lord PALMERSTON said— "I trust that what was stated by the Lord Chancellor the other !might, and what the House has heard from my two honourable friends tonight,. must

satisfy them and the public that the Government are earnest in their Intel).- "lion to sweep away—to clear out, I may say—this Augean stable. And I think that the House, if they place confidence in the intentions of the Go- vernment to make those legislative improvements which have been shadowed - out, would not suppose that that Government which was about to reform the - legislative arrangements of England would leave the legislative arrangements 'of Ireland unreformed and unimproved." Mr. Coerree, after all they had heard, expressed his perfect willing- :less to leave he matter in the hands of Government So the motion was 'withdrawn.

TRANSPORTATION AS PUNISHMENT.

In reply to a question from the Bishop of MANCHESTER, the Duke of NEWCASTLE stated that there is no intention of making any change in re- gard to the convicts at Bermuda and Gibraltar. The convicts at Bermuda will shortly be placed on the same footing as those now imprisoned on the improved system at Portland. This led to a conversation, set on foot by Lord CAMPBELL; who said he was going on circuit, and he wished to know whether, when he passed a sentence of transportation, it would be a mere mockery ? The Duke of Neweasne said, it was an inconvenient question to put. Great altera- tions in secondary punishments and prison-accommodation must be made before any final arrangement ; but transportation must shortly be brought to a close. Lord CAMPBELL then entered into a pleading in favour of continuing transportation ; and other Peers joined in the discussion ; but it came to nothing.

ORDNANCE ESTIMATES.

In the Committee of Supply, on Monday, Mr. Mowsma moved the Ordnance Estimates.

He explained the various items, specifying the amount of increase and de- crease in each ease. The two great items of increase are for clothing for the Militia, and for fortifications. The vote for works and buildings is 699,6551., an excess of 246,627/. over the vote of last year. This expenditure is chiefly devoted to fortifications: it is intended to expend 60,000/. in improving the defences of the harbour of Alderney; 12,00W. for the protection of Milford Haven ; 50001: for Portland harbour ; 50,000/. for Portsmouth and the Isle of Wight ; 23,000/, in closing the lines of Devonport ; 10,0001. in erecting a new battery at Liverpool; 50001: in protecting the ohamiel of the Thames; while 30,000L will be applied to the defences of Dover and the coast of Kent The number of officers and men this year is 17,598—an increase of 2000 : but at the same time the estimate for pay, &o. is 807,5071:, or 12,642/. less than last year. The Artillery corps was never more efficient than now. The health of the force had greatly improved ; the deaths, which were at the rate of 17 in every 1000 in 1850, were in 1852 at the rate of 12 in every 1000. Corporal punishment had diminished from 23 in a force of lo,oar in 1849, to Sin a force of 12,000 in 1852. The total of the Ordnance Estimates is 3,053,000/.

The Estimates were voted with comparatively little comment. In the course of the evening, the Citerrematon of the Exenmatleff, re- plying to a question, stated that in future no more money would be spent on the Rideau Canal in Canada ; and that the scattered Ordnance etas- blishments in the smaller settlements of the West Indies would be with- drawn, and the force concentrated in the principal Wands. •

THE COLONELCIES OP THE Gesans.

When the Committee of Supply was moved, Mr. Home called atten- tion to two instances of abuse in the administration of Army allowances.

It would be recollected that the Committee of 1833, with the view of stilling the outcry against the tailor Colonels, came to a resolution that in lieu of the clothing perquisites, Colonels should have a uniform allowance of 10001. a year ; but that, ni consideration of the distinguished services of the Duke of Wellington, the emoluments of his regiment, the Grew:slier Guards, be left untouched during his lifetime. The change was carried out in every regiment; but the Committee, considering that there might be meritorious officers entitled to extra rewards, left two regimentarthe Grenadier and First Coldstream Guards, at allowances of 30001. and 2000/. a year respectively. It was expressly intended that these regiments should be reserved as rewards for distinguished military services- and and on that understanding Mr. Hume had consented to vote for them. He was sorry to find, however' that those regiments had been given to Prince Albert and the Duke of Cambridge, neither otrwhom had any skim to distinction in the military service of the country. Re thought he had a strong right to coroplhin of the conduct. of he Government, which bad' thug defeated the intentions of the Committee. He admitted- the merits of hinge Albert, and the efficiency and ability with which he fulfilled the duties of his exalted station but still he thought that these appointments, which the Committee had reserved for military services, should not have been so disposed of.. If any members of that Chin- mittee were present, they could bear him out- in the assertion that these regiments ware expressly reserved as rewards for distinguished military services.

Mr. Miran:here testimony to the statement of Mr. Hume.

He explained, that the Committee was appointed at his request, when he was Secretary. at- War. He had asked the Committee not to interfere with the Duke of Wellington's emoluments as-Colonel of the- Geenadier Guard; and the Committee consented. The emoluments of the-late Duke were-be- tween 4000/. and 45001. a years. and he enjoyed them during his life. Mr. Ellice proposed to fix the allowances ire future at 39001; for the Grenadier Guards and 20001:. for the other two regiments of Foot Guards, upon the understanding that these two.reginientswere to be regarded. as the highest. rewards for distinguished military services. Upon thiaground the Committee adopted his. recommendation. With respect to the disposal of these.regie- menta he had.nothing to say.; he had not the appointment ta these regiments. But he must express his great regret at the" statementhe had'just heard. On the next evening, in reply to a- question from- Colonel' LINDSAY' Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT made a- short. stahement which he thought was-due to Prince Albert.

He saw that in some of the morning newspapers Mr. Hume had been made to say that Primes-Albert receised the same emoluments as the late Duke of Wellington : but Mr. Herbert believed that was an inamairaey in the report. Mr. Hume had complsined that the Colonelcy of the-Grenadier Guards should not have been owned, as the Committee recommended, as a reward for veterans who had. seen long service. Now, what really were the recommendations of the Committee? So far as regarded emolument, they had been strictly carried out,. But the Committee did not retommend that the Colonelcies of the Guards should be retained for- distinguished officers : they simply recommended the zeduction of the emoluments of the Grenadier Guards from 40001. to 30001, and of the other two regiments' to 20001.; and that an exception should be made in the case of the Duke of Wellington, out of consideration for his long and glorious services. That was the whole or the recommendation. There was no Mention as, to the way in which the Crown should dispose of those regiments. It had been a practice from tine. immemorial to give the Colonelcies of these regiments to the members of the Royal Family. There had been ten vacancies since 1805, and only four had not been bestowed on members of the Royal Family. Had there been any snob understanding as that alluded to, it would have been carried out at an earlier period, ten years ago' when Prince Albert was first appointed to the command of the Fusileer Guards. Instead of this, twenty years had elapsed since the report of the Committee ; and to the first appointment made after the publication of that report, which would have been the time to call attention to the circumstance, no objection was taken, nor was there any expression of opinion on the part of the members of the Committee. Prince Albert was the senior Colonel of the Guards when the Duke of Wel-

lington died, and it was natural therefore that he should succeed to the va- cant Colonelcy of the Grenadier Guards. The House would permit him to say this with regard to his Royal Highness—that during the time he held the appointment of Colonel of the Fuaileer Guards, he never drew to the full amount of the 20001. which it had been intended by the Committee should be the emolument of the post; and his Royal Highness, who took a very great interest in the comforts of the men, had always 'behaved per- sonally with great liberality with regard to that regiment. . . . . The Duke of Cambridge stood upon the same ground with his Royal Highness, and had proved himself a most active, zealous, and efficient officer.

Mr. HUME said, that when the Committee of 1833 agreed that a change should take place in the emoluments at the death of the Duke of Welling- ton, the point arose—and a recommendation to that effect waa proposed by an officer connected with the Navy—would it not be fair to reserve the appointments of the Guards regiments for men of long service e and of the

highest professional character ? - • .

Although the div:eions which took place in the Committee were not given

in the report, it was on that ground, and on that ground alone—and the honourable Member for Coventry (Mr. Ellice) would confirm the statement —that the report of the Committee was made ; and therefore he repeated, that the intention of the Committee at that time had been violated by allow- ing Prince Albert and the Duke of Cambridge to fill these appointments. In making these observations, he had not intended to throw any reflections upon either of their Royal Highnesses ; on the contrary, he had stated his belief that Prince Albert had done honour to the situation he filled : still that was not enough to warrant him in being placed over the heads of others whose services had been of longer duration ; and he blamed the Government of the day [Lord Derby's] and the parties who ought to have carried out the intentions of the Committee.

Mr. HERBERT said, the intentions of the Committee were only to be judged by their recommendations.

LEGACY AND PROBATE DUTIES.

Mr. WILLisom WiLidems called attention to the injustice of exempting real property from the payment of Probate and Legacy duties, while those duties are levied on personal property. Going back to the time when Mr. Pitt imposed the probate and legacy duties, and was not permitted to carry a similar measure affecting landed property, Mr. Williams proceeded to detail some special cases of injustice. Leases on land for a term of years, including outlay for improvements, must be valued, and both probate and legacy duty pay on the full valuation ; while leases of land for lives and the land itself pay nothing. Houses built on building leases pay both duties on their full value ; but the ground land- lord pays no duty ; neither are those taxes paid on the value of the same houses when they fall into the hands of the landlord after the expiration of the leases. Houses built by landlords on their own land are exempted from paying both of these taxes. Lands sold on a lease of a thousand years for a peppercorn rent, although as good as freehold, pay both duties on their full value. Take the case of a farmer's lease : the value of a farmer's lease, in- cluding outlay on improvements of his stock, crop, implements of husbandry, furniture, and even his wearing-apparel, must pay both probate and legacy duty, while the owner of the land pays nothing. Then the evasions of the tax exceed credibility. The probate duty favours the rich and weighs heavily on the poor. For instance, probate on 20/. pays 2:1 per cent; which is re-

duced to l on 10001 i ., and s limited to 1,000,000/. l'slow the value of the property left by 17,602 out of 26,463 testators in 1848 ranged from 20/. to 250/. It may be said that land pays stamp-duty on conveyances ; but it pays no more than the transfer of shares or stock. Mr. Williams estimated the annual amount of the tax if levied on real and personal property alike at 5,253,000!.; but from this must be deducted the amount of duties paid by some portions of real property estimated at 452,000/. He moved, "That, in the opinion of this House, real property should be made to pay the same pro- bate and legacy duties as are now payable on personal property." Mr. GLinsroNE could not help pointing out something like an attempt to escape the rules of the House in discussions of this nature ; for it was after all nothing more than a call on the MEM to depart from the course of legislation and practical business, to express an abstract opinion. It was deluding the country. He would not take advantage of the informal- ity to escape from the discussion of the question; but he thought it right to protest and point out the practical inconvenience. With this introduc- tion, Mr. Gladstone at once entered on a consideration of the subject. Neither on one aide of the House nor the other is there a party which contended for exclusive privileges in matters of taxation for any description of property. Such privileges need only to be named to meet with univer- sal reprobation. The principle on which all parties act is that of equal- ity in the taxation of property ; he would not say perfect equality, because, unfortunately, the necessary defects of human legislation in these matters render it impossible to obtain perfect equality in practice. Equality of taxation is the object of their legislation; but then, equality must of necessity be the result not of one tax alone, but of the entire system. It is impossible to levy each tax so as to cause it to operate equally. It is necessary to consider each tax in reference to every other part of the fis- cal system; for thereby we obtain the general result, which fulfils the great end of public justice, by laying the burden of taxation equally on men's shoulders according to their strength to bear it. This great principle he would endeavour to apply to the consideration of this and every other ques- tion connected with our system of taxation. He showed how inaccurate Mr. Williams had been in describing this ques- tion as one of class interests. The fact is, that the law is unfavourable to the great and favourable to the small holders of real property. The mode of escaping the legacy and probate duties, to put land or personal property under settlement, is as much in the power of the holder of personal as the holder of real property. Settlements of landed property are made bona fide, but settlements of personal property are mostly deeds of gift. These things show that landed property has not that great advantage over personal pro- perty which some imagine. But then he agreed with Mr. Nifilliams, that the probate scale is capricious • that it is a hardship to make the poor man pay 'double duty ; and that while personal property has increased the legacy- duty has not grown up in proportion ; and he would give it a serious consi- deration. He showed that in the scheme of taxation proposed by Mr. Wit- llama there were several omissions. All lands sold for the purpose of dividing the proceeds pay legacy-duty. Probably six-seventeenths of the legacy-duty is paid by real property. All mortgages of land pay these duties; and surely Mr. Williams did not mean that land should pay twice over. With respect to stamp. duty on tranfers, it must be remembered that there is from 780 to 790 millions of funded property which pay nothing in transfer and nothing in descent. In considering the taxation of real property, we are bound to look not to one tax only, but to our whole system; and in doing so, it is im- possible to exclude from our view the system of local taxation. We cannot forget that in England alone 10,000,0001. are paid by real property, of which personal property knows nothing at all. [Mr. WILLIams—" Railways and houses pay."] He must say he had always thought railways, with another class, the holders of tithe, were unfairly treated, as compared with the own- ers of other property.. He thought that, instead of endeavouring to reach mathematical precision in this and other taxes, they should look to the re- sults of our taxation as a whole, and come, if possible, to a conclusion that would be as nearly as possible just and equitable to all. The time would soon come on for the discussion of the Income-tax. At present he would not open prematurely that discussion. He would not speak of the Income- tax in so far as it falls on skill or on labour ; he would only look at it in so far as it falls on property. In so far, then, as it falls on those subjects which are likewise the subjects of the legacy and probate duties, he would say boldly that we cannot defend the present incidence of the Income-tax on real property.. All other property—property in the funds, capital engaged in trade, the interest on mortgages—pays the Income-tax, and pays on income actually received. But real property pays the Income-tax on income not actually received. Income-tax is paid on repairs, on arrears, on vacant farms, and in half a dozen other forms. In tine, we must make up our minds in many cases to put up with inequality, and be content if, on the whole the ends of government and justice are attained, and that these in- equalities, on the whole, are pretty nearly balanced in the country. Before

the Hou i se comes to consider what s to be done with these legacy and pro- bate duties, he thought they should have more fixed views and more definite intentions on the subject of the Income-tax than have yet been come to. He could not separate the two questions. It is said, here is a system of law which operates in favour of real property against personal property : but it is quite as clear that the Income-tax operates unequally in favour of per- sonal property againat real property ; and therefore these things should be considered together. It appeared to him, from a serious consideration of this subject, and without the slightest reference to political questions, that the Income-tax must be made the pivot on which the whole of this contro- versy should turn.

Gladstone hoped Mr. Williams would not press his motion.

A brief debate ensued ; in which Mr. Hume, Mr. BRIGHT, and Mr. Wriatistson' supported the motion; and Mr. HENLEY opposed it. The House divided, and the motion was rejected by 124 to 71.

IMPORT-DUTIES.

Mr. HtIdd advanced two resolutions with the view of carrying out Free-trade in its entirety ; but he only submitted one to the House. His first resolution set forth a schedule of 233 articles of foreign manu- facture paying a total of 434,1541. to the Customs, and 62 articles of fo- reign agricultural produce, paying 916,435/. ; and it declared the injus- tice, especially to the agricultura classes, of continuing import-duties on the articles of foreign manufacture of the same kind as articles manufac- tured in the United Kingdom. The second resolution, the one which he submitted to the House, declared that the House would, at an early pe- riod, consider with a view to their repeal the " strictly protective" duties on manufacturing and agricultural imports. He supported his motion by well-known argnments,—the injustice of monopoly, the advantage to the revenue by the increase of consumption, and the inequality of the taxa- tion as it operates on agriculturists. He only asked the House to affirm the principle contained in the above-cited resolution.

After the motion had been seconded by Mr. Mirens.LL, Mr. GLADSTONE objected to it, on the ground that the House ought not to part with the standing revenue until it knows and has determined what the.expendi- Lure is to be ; and that its duty is to vote the funds necessary for the pub- lic service, and then consider how such funds may be supplied. The sub- ject of the motion must be considered in the financial arrangements of the year. The House should not amuse itself by voting away the large sum of 1,350,5894 without regard to the balance between income and expenditure. Let the House judge the Government not by what they promise, but by what they perform. Mr. Hume had a right to ask for an opinion from the House, but he hoped the House would not give a promise without regard to the power of performance. As regarded the speech, the facts, and arguments of Mr. Hume, it would be difficult to find in what he differed from him.

Mr. APSLEY PELLATT, Mr. EWART, and Mr. BRIGHT went with Mr. Hume. Mr. EDWARD BALL was surprised at the opposition of the Go- vernment: he should vote for the motion. Mr. NEWDEGATE, Mr. HUD- SON, and Colonel SIBTHORP, were not Free-traders, and could not support the motion.

Mr. DISRAELI interposed in opposition to the Government.

He began by stating that the cultivators of the soil bear an undue weight of taxation. Then he glided into a defence of the remedial measures pro- posed by the late Government, not as a new commercial system' but only as a first step. He regarded the vote of the House on the financial policy of the late Government as final. He was undesirous of inventing occasions to harass the present Government with opinions on financial questions, but here was a case when he must pronounce an opinion. He commented on the speech of Mr. Gladstone. Had Mr. Gladstone refused to discuss the motion and called on the House to guard the Exchequer, all the House must have supported him : but he denounced Mr. flume's course as one of promise merely, and then made a speech which was promise from beginning to end. They had to consider the motion of Mr. Hume as a question of policy, and not as one of inconvenience to the Exchequer ; and as a matter of policy he concurred with Mr. Hume. "We cannot cling to the rags and tatters of the Protectionist system." He should vote for the motion.

Mr. CARDWELL observed that Mr. Disraeli had given a dexterous misdeseription of Mr. Gladstone's speech ; and, for the information of the many Members, now present, who had not heard it, he restated the sub- stance of what Mr. Gladstone really said.

Mr. Hymn, on being pointedly appealed to, said that if Government agreed with him in principle he should not divide the House. Here arose loud cries of "Oh, oh !" from the Opposition, and loud cries of "Divide, divide !" Accordingly, a division took place—For Mr. Hume's motion, 101; against it, 159; majority for Ministers, 58.

FOREIGN RELATIONS: REFUGEES : AUSTRIA AND TURRET.

On Tuesday, Lord DUDLEY STUART having asked whether there is any foundation for the rumour that a demand has been addressed by the Con- tinental Powers for the removal of the political refugees who now find shelter in this country, and what is the course it is intended to pursue should such an application have been made ? Lord Parareaserosr, on the part of the Government, replied as follows— "In answer to the question of the noble Lord, as to whether an applica- tion has been made by foreign powers to the Government of this country for the expulsion of foreign refugees now living in the United Kingdom, I have to state that no such application has been made. In reply to the other ques- tion of the noble Lord, as to what course would be pursued in the event of such an application being made, I can only repeat that which I think has been stated on former occasions in this House, that any such application would be met with a firm and decided refusal. (Cheers.) It is, indeed, ob- vious that it must be so, because no such measure could be taken by the Government of this country without fresh powers by act of Parliament ; and I apprehend that no Government could, even if they were so inclined—and the present Government are not so inclined—apply for such a power with any chance of success—(Loud cries of "Hear! ")—inasmuch as no Alien Bill, I be- lieve, within the course of this century, has ever been passed giving to the Go- vernment the power of expelling foreigners except with reference to considera- tions connected with the internal safety of this country. The British Govern- ment has never undertaken to provide for the internaf security of other coun- tries; it is sufficient for them to have the power to provide for the internal se- curity of their own. But I cannot confine my answer simply to that statement. I will ask to be allowed to add, that while, on the one hand, the British laws and the spirit of the British constitution give to foreigners, of all political opinions and of all categories, a secure and peaceful shelter within tins coun- try, I think that those foreigners who avail themselves of the hospitality of England are bound by every principle of honour, as well as by every regard not only to international law bilt to the law of this land—are bound to ab- stain from entering into any intrigues, or from pursuing any courses in- tended for the purpose of giving umbrage to foreign governments, and of disturbing the Internal tranquillity of any foreign countries." (Cheers.) On Thursday, Lord DUDLEY STUART called attention to the affairs of Turkey, as affected by the war in Montenegro ; and moved for copies of any communications made by the Governments of Aus. tria and Tnrkey on the subject. In the course of a very long speech, he described the relation of Montene- gro to the Porte and to Russia. By the treaty of Sistow, in 1791, the latest affecting the subject, Montenegro is specified as a part of the Turkish domin- ions, entitled to resume the nghts and privileges existing before the war began. Montenegro had always enjoyed a certain degree of independence, though entirely- under the suzerainty of the Porte. But of late the Monte- negrins had shown a disregard of Turkish authority. Montenegro is go- verned by an hereditary Bishop or Vladika, who is precluded from marry- ing; and so the succession goes from uncle to nephew. When Prince Daniel succeeded, he had no desire to be a Bishop, but he assumed the chief power, and went to St. Petersburg to get the sanction of the Czar. When there, it is said, the Czar advised him to adopt rebellious courses ; while he urged the Sultan to put Prince Daniel down by force. Both parties acted on this ad- vice; hence the Austrian interference. The most unreasonable demands have been made on Turkey by Austria ; and the integrity of the Turkish empire is threatened. Lord Dudley asked, does England hold the same con- viction of the necessity of maintaining Turkish independence as heretofore ? The motion was seconded by Mr. Mosrowrow MILERS, in an impressive speech upholding the necessity of maintaining Turkey against partition. Lord Joins RUSSELL hoped that the motion would not be pressed, as the negotiations are not concluded.

He fully agreed with Lord Dudley Stuart that this country ought to be anxious to maintain the independence and integrity of the Porte, repeatedly affirmed by treaty, and sanctioned by the convention of 1840. No greater calamity could occur to Europe than to have to consider what ought to be done in the ease of the dismemberment of the Turkish empire. We could not attempt that dismemberment without "committing a great crime—a breach of faith towards Turkey—a violation of all laws which bind nations together." But if Turkey unfortunately fall to pieces from her own weak- ness, a question would arise of such great gravity that he could hardly ex- pect it to be solved "without exciting a war in Europe." It would be hardly possible to provide for such a case without producing in Europe such a pre- ponderating power as would excite the jealousy and opposition of all the other European states, and such a state of anarchy in Asia as it was fearful to contemplate. Therefore the maintenance of the independence and in- tegrity of Turkey must be a great ruling-point of our policy. With respect to the relative positions of Austria and Turkey as regards Montenegro, he was able to give some explanation. The Montenegrins were acknowledged to be under the sovereignty of Turkey by the treaties of Car- levies and some others ; but they had always maintained a sort of independ- ence, which Russia acknowledged, while Austria acknowledged that Monte- negro was subject to Turkey. The Bishops of Montenegro resorted to St. Pe- tersburg for investiture. On the death of the late Bishop, Prince Daniel his successor obtained the consent of the Emperor of Russia to an arrangement that he should not be made an ecclesiastic, but that another person should be appointed Bishop : and the Czar dismissed him with the advice that he should commit no acts of aggression on Turkey. He did not profit by the advice ; for on his return attacks were made on the Turks. Upon this the Sultan raised a force of 50,000 men, placed Omar Pasha at the head of it, and seemed determined utterly to subdue the rebellious part of his dominions. To England and France this appeared an imprudent proceeding ; and Lord Derby's Government, as well as the French Government, advised the Sultan, in a friendly spirit, not to undertake this expedition. The expedition had, however, proceeded.

Passing over the military events, Lord John came to the mission of Count Leiningen to Constantinople. It was evident from the first that the demands of Austria were placed before the Porte in a very peremptory manner; and it was conceived that the most grave consequences might follow a refusal. Then the British Government asked for fresh explanations from the Aus- trian Government; and the reply of Austria showed that she was ani- mated by the same desire of maintaining the independence of Turkey as the British Government. Admitting that Montenegro belonged de jure to Tur- key, the Austrian Government represented that the mountaineers had long been independent ; that war would make the maintenance of tranquillity on the frontier difficult; that a large Austrian force must be kept up ; and that there was danger of a religious war. She therefore wished that Turkey should retain her title, and punish pillage in Turkish territories, but restore the quasi-independence of Montenegro.

As to Meek and Sutorina, the question was complicated. They formerly belonged to the Republic of Ragusa ; while other portions of territory given to Austria belonged to Venice. The Austrian Government had in 1832 and 1833 tried to purchase these small places ; but having failed, she claims to pre- vent Turkish ships from touching the Turkish coast, alleging that such right was always exercised by Venice. Then there were demands respecting the Hungarian refugees who were allowed to hold distinguished posts in the army of Omar Pasha, and refugees who had remained in Turkey contrary to a verbal engagement that they should depart. And added to these demands were questions of wrong to Austrian subjects. Lord John could not affirm that there was any one of them which could be said to affect the independ- ence of the Sultan, or which were not founded at least upon some allegation on which the Austrian Government might fairly rely as a Government not unfriendly to that independence. As to the precise arrangements that had been made, he was unable to inform the House. All he knew was, that these questions• have been placed before the Porte, and that the Austrian -Government has been satisfied that the mission of Count Leiningen has been successful.

Our course will be to give Turkey the advice beat calculated to maintain her independence. Lord Stratford will enforce this opinion, that all grounds of complaint may be taken away from her Christian subjects by good govern- ment; and if Turkey take the advice of the British Ambassador, she will always find a faithful ally in Great Britain. Many dangers which threat- ened her of late are now past, and the difficulties that remain may be solved by fair negotiation. The French Government has perfectly concurred with ours during the negotiations, except on the question of the Holy Places. The motion was withdrawn.

GRIEVANCES or PosTmax.

Mr. THomes DUNCOMBE moved a resolution, that the official salaries of the letter-carriers of Great Britain are insufficient ; and he urged their case on the Government.

Petitions have been presented from the letter-carriers of upwards of four hundred towns in Great Britain and Ireland, complaining of the smallness of their pay, and of the sudden prohibition of Christmas-boxes. In London, the red-coated or general postmen receive higher pay than the blue-coated postmen, who do the larger share of work. But the provincial letter-car- riers case is far worse than those of London. One man at Deal walked twenty miles a day, being engaged from six in the morning till eight at night, for fourteen shillings a week : he was knocked down by a cart while engaged in his duty, and disabled; his allowance was stopped, and when he applied for relief to the Postmaster-General, he was told there was no power to relieve him. Another complaint is of the unequal labour they have to : the number of postmen are strangely out of proportion to population. Manchester,

A 300,000 inhabitants, has 80; Leeds, 20; Sheffield, 16 ;

Bradford, 7, with 5 assistants. These men have no superannuation allow- ances. An old woman at Beaminster, who had acted as letter-carrier for forty years, has recently been dismissed without any allowance. Mr. Dun- combo thought that much of the dishonesty of postmen arises from the low- ness of their wages; though of course that could not be pleaded as an excuse. Mr. jasiEs WILSON concurred in a great deal of what Mr. Duncombe had stated.

As to the Christmas-boxes, the Postmaster-General had the subject now under consideration. The inequalities in point of emolument ou,elat to be met one way or another : they are greater than can be justified. There is not so much difference in the wages of the inland and district postmen as in their superannuation allowances—the former ranging between 20/. and 501., the latter only between 15/. and 231. As to the differences in point of emoluments in different parts of the country, Mr. Wilson was opposed to paying at the same rate everywhere without regard to the rate of wages in the district. Population affords no accurate test of the number of carriers re- quired. After sonic little debate, Mr. DUNCOSIBE agreed to withdraw his reso- lution.

RAILWAY ACCIDENTS.

The Earl of MALNESBURY, moving the Lords for returns respecting railway accidents in 1852, brought the subject of railway travelling and its incidents into prominent notice. Sixty _years ago travellers made their wills, now they insure their lives when going on a journey. The railway office presents side by side the time- tables and a seductive invitation to insure your life. The public are at the mercy of the great companies ; and whereas the old coach-proprietor stood hat in hand to the public, the public are now obliged to stand hat in hand to the railway-directors. Time is not kept. Whole counties are cut off from com- munication with the metropolis for months, except at inconvenient hours, by the caprice of directors.

Lord Malmesbury had noticed that the greater number of the injuries in-

flicted by accidents were slight, chiefly arising from the circumstance that persons sitting opposite each other were thrown together. He mentioned a case where four persons sitting so opposed were injured; while a fifth, who had no Via-i-via, was thrown against a soft cushion and was not hurt. It had been suggested—and he thought the suggestion was a very sensible one —that carriages might be made to hold three or four persons in a row, with- out any one opposite, and that the partition opposite them should be stuffed. Of course such carriages would be much narrower than those now in use, and might be something like a coupe without windows in front. At present, when collisions occur, a great many persons suffer very severely, who would probably escape if such a trifling alteration were made. He knew that they could not put the companies to the expense of making new carriages at once ; but he thought some controlling power might be established, which, acting with discretion, might, when useful inventions are brought forward, force them upon the companies gradually, and as their old stock wore out. He called for inquiry.

Partly in reply to Lord Malmesbuiy, and partly in answer to a question

from Lord VIVIAN, Lord STANLEY Of ALDRELEY stated, that after a railway is once opened, Government has no power to interfere and stop the traffic on it. He cautioned Parliament against diminishing the re- sponsibility of the railway companies by interference. Still, if inter- ference would promote security, in this as in all other cases " Salus populi supreme lex." An inquiry is proceeding in the other House, and he thought it better not to discuss the subject further until the Committee have reported.

The returns were ordered.

Eizonow Commirrees.

The Committees have continued to sit throughout the week ; and four more petitions have been disposed of, bribery being proved in three cases. Probably the grossest ease, this week, has been made out against Cam- bridge. The price of a vote there was 10/. Henry Mansfield and George Richardson were canvassed by one Gilbert, who took them to the Butcher's Anna and sent them up to a small bedroom, where they saw a gentleman named Long, who told them it was "all right." They then polled for Astell and Macaulay. About a week after the election, both these voters received envelopes from women, "dressed very common," containing, one a "clean" ten-pound and the other a five-pound Bank of England note. Mansfield said the woman "did not say what it was for : of course I expected it was for my vote." Richardson had always voted for the Liberals, but he saw they could not win' and "he thought he might as well have ten pound as not." Mills, a plasterer, said that Long promised to "pay him well" if he would vote.

On the morning of the poll, one Sterne came to Mills and said, "Now, Mr. Mills, if you vote right, you'll get your expenses and 10/. from Long." He didn't go then, as he thought he might have a little more. Witness got 81, the election before the last, when he voted for Sir Fitzroy Kelly. The elec- tion before that he got 101. for his vote ; that was in 1843. The same Long was giving out sovereigns to the voters from a "dollop" of gold which he had on a table at the Star and Garter. It was notorious that 10/. was the

price of a vote at Cambridge. Witness his nothing for h vote at the last election ; he "missed it by holding out.',

Both Mr. Macaulay and Mr. Astell, the sitting Members, were examined; and each emphatically denied all knowledge of the illegal practices resorted to. They had been led to engage in the election on the promise that their joint expenses should not exceed 12001.; but they had been subse- quently called on for 2001. each in addition. The agent of the parties emphatically told Mr. Macaulay that he was not engaged in illegal prac- tices. The Committee decided, and reported to the House of Commons, that Mr. Macaulay and Mr. Astell had been guilty of bribery, by their agents, but without their knowledge, at the last election ; and that there was reason to believe corrupt practices extensively prevailed at the elec- tion.

The issue of the new writ has been suspended, on the motion of Mr. VERNON SMITH, until the 11th of April. In the Chatham case, witnesses to disprove the allegations against Sir Frederick Smith have been heard, this week, before the Committee. In the strongest terms they denied the assertions of the witnesses for the pe- tition. Mr. Everest, Superintendent of the Chatham Police, described the witness Mount as an associate of thieves, and as a person not to be be- lieved on his oath. Mr. Grover, army outfitter, was with Sir Frederick during nearly the whole of his canvass, and never heard him promise anything like a place, or pension, or consideration, for votes. Mr. Isaacs, naval and army outfitter, was with Sir Frederick during the whole of his canvass, and never heard him speak to a 'voter, when wit- ness and other canvassers were with him, about place, or pension, or em- ployment. Ackworth, the tallow-chandler, admitted that on Cooper's

application for a place for Pitts, Sir Frederick had written a letter to the Admiralty. Had "always understood that the appointment of Pitts was on condition of Cooper's voting for Smith." "Did not think it was an awkward matter, or that it was a bartering of Cooper's vote." Admitted that he told Mr. Grant, at the Admiralty, that the reinstatement of Pitts in the ropery would materially assist Sir Frederick in the coming election.

Sir Frederick Smith was himself examined for two days. He denied entirely and point-blank all the allegations against him. For instance—

Hoskins the baker said he should like to have a situation, as his health did not allow his going on with the business : Sir Frederick replied, "I can give you no promisee, nor entertain any such application." Hoskins voted for Admiral Stirling. Sir Frederick wrote on behalf of Pitts, be- cause he had been ill-treated. He gave Driver's son employment at Ply- mouth, because there was a want of bricklayers there for the public eel-- vice. The appointment in the Post-office for Greathead's son was a re- turn for the father's civil support in canvassing for me." He admitted that many applications had been made to him. He had resolved to pro- mise no place until a man had promised his vote. Between March and the election he had probably made twenty applications at the Admiralty for places on behalf of Chatham people. "I think it is quite impossible for a man to remain in Chatham five months and not promise places."

In the Clitheroe case, Mr. GASKELL has reported to the House that Mr. Mathew Wilson was, by his agents, guilty of bribery and treating at

the last election, but that it is not proved that such bribery or treating was committed with consent or knowledge ; and "that extensive and systematic treating, together with other corrupt and illegal practices, pre- vailed at the last election for the said borough ; that violent and tumul- tuous proceedings appear to have taken place at the said election ; and that hired bands of men, armed with Backs and bludgeons, were intro- duced into the said borough for the purposes of undue influence and inti- midation."

In the BritIgnorth case, Mr. BOUVREEE has reported that Sir Robert Pigot was guilty of bribery, by his agents, at the last election, but that it was not proved that the bribery was committed with the knowledge of Sir Robert.

7 The election of Colonel Boyle for Frame has been declared void, on the ground that he holds an office of profit under the Crown—the Secretary- ship of the Order of St. Patrick. On the motion of Mr. Herm; a new writ has been issued for Frome. On the motion of Mr. Tames DIINCOICBE, a Select Committee has been appointed to inquire into the withdrawal of the Norwich petition, by the agent, without the consent of the petitioners.