!hit atto Auh Vranthingo fn Varliamtut.

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE WEER.

House OP Loans. Monday, July 19. Massacre at Jeddah ; Lord. Stratford's Questions—State Services - The Duke of Marlborough's Motion—Universities (Scot- land) Bill reported—Government of India (No. 3) Bill committed—Local Govern- ment Bill read a second time.

Tuesday, July 20. Sale and Transfer of Land (Ireland) Bill reported—In- demnity Bill read a second time—Medical Practioners Bill committed—Government of India Bill (No. 3) reported—Militia Ballot Suspension Bill read a third time and passed.

Wednesday, July 21. Legitimacy Declaration Bill read a second time—Public Health Bill read a second time—Government of New Caledonia Bill read a first time.

Thursday, July 22. Indemnity Bill read a second time—Administration of Oaths by Committees Bill read a second time—Local Government Bill comtuited- Universities (Scotland) Bill read a third time and passed—Chelsea Bridge Act Amendment Bill read a second time.

Friday, July 23. Royal Assent to Funded Debt, Law of False Pretences Amend- ment, Jews, Oaths, Indemnity, Army Service, Militia Ballot Suspension, Bills— Marriage Law Amendment : Lord Bury's Bill thrown out—Reformatory Schools (Ireland) Bill read a second time—India (No. 3) Bill read a third time and passed— Sale and Transfer of Land (Ireland) Bill read a third time and passed.

Horse OF COMMONS. Monday, July 19. Metropolis Local Act Amendment Bill read a second time—Chinese Emigration Bill withdrawn—Jews ; Lord Lucan's Bill reported—Government of New Caledonia Bill Reported—Civil Bills- (Ireland) Act Amendment Bill in Committee—Public Health Bill read a third time and passed— Appropriation Bill read a first time. Tuesday, July 20. An Indian Amnesty ; Mr. Buxton's Question—The Hudson's Bay Company •, Mr. Roebuck's Motion—Operations in the Gulf of Bothnia ; Mr. Crawford's Motion—Appropriation Bill read a second time—Government of New Caledonia Bill read a third time and passed—Militia (Service abroad) Act Cm, tinuance Bill read a second time. Wednesday, July 21. Lord Goderich and General Evans ; Personal Explana- tions—Jews ; Lord Lucan's Bill read a third time and passed—Oaths Bill Lord John Russell's Resolution on the Lords' Reasons—County Court Districts Bill read a third time and passed.

Thursday, July V. Appropriation Bill committed—Metropolis Local Act Amend- ment Bill committed—Militia (Service Abroad) Act Continuance Bill committed- Dmughts on Bankers Bill committed.

.Frulay, July M. Corrupt Practices PreventionAct Continuance Bill reported-- Civil Bills Su. (Ireland) ActA mendment Bill read a third time and passed—Metropolis Local Act Amendment Bill reported—Probate and Letters of Administration Act Amendment Bill read a second time—Wivorce and MatriraimialCauses Act Amend- ment Bill read a second time.

TIME-TABLE.

The Lords,

The Commons,

Hour of Hour of

Hour of Hour of

Meeting. Adjournment.

Meeting. Adjournment.

Monday

.... 121. Om

Monday th (w) 2h 30ra Tuesday bh Sh 50m Tuesday

4h (m) 21,15m

Wednesday

4h .... 4h 30m

Wednesday ...

..... ,.. NOM .... 411 OM

Thursday 5h ., 712 40m Thursday

Noon .... 4h Om

bh .(tet) lh 45a1 Friday 4h Ilk 45m Friday Noon , . 4h Om

eli • ... Ha 60m

Sittings ibis Week, 5; Time, 31h bm

Sittings Chit Week, 7; Time. Oh 801

— this

Session. 86 ; — Om

— this Session 123; — 825h 5m

THE STATE OF THE FINANCES. The Appropriation Bill, that immediate forerunner of the prorogation , passed through Committee on Thursday. Sir GEORGE Lzwrs took this opportunity of examining the figures 011 the face of the bill and comparing them with the estimates in the budget. Mr. Disraeli estimated the expenditure at 63,610,000/., the revenue at 63,900,0001., showing a surplus of 300,0001. But, in the Appropriation Bill, the expenditure stands at 64,445,000 against an estimated revenue of 63,900,000/. ; the votes for the Army, the Civil Ser- vice and the collection of the revenue having increased it to that amount. Instead, therefore, of an estimated surplus of 300,0001. there is an eati- mated deficiency of 535,0001.

i

The only way in which the Chancellor of the Exchequer can supply' est' &swinish is either by showing that the produce of the revenue would be greater than the estimate, or by diminishing the balances in the Exchequer, which he is entitled to do if he can show that the balances left at the end of the year will be sufficient. The difficulty alleged to have been caused by the discreditable administration of the late Government was purely imaginary, en Mr. Disraeli postponed the repayment of debt, the only real difficulty to d!t with. Mr. Disraeli accused the late Government of a profuse and lavish expe-tulsture. That is a charge he will substantiate with difficulty, since be has adi66,0001. to the civil service estimates. ke!‘ 1 Mr, Disuses' saiii'he should not criticize the two systems of finance. Ketenetes are difficult to for:P.; and no doubt his estimate of expenditure has been exceeded. But then his e-stsinate of the revenue has also been

exceeded up to the present time. Upon the enarter there is a sur- plus over the estimate, derived. from the chief Imaa.; of finance, of 223,9441. The aggregate increase in the receipts from the four great branches of

revenue, customs, excise,. stamps, aud post office, which, more than any other, indicate the condition of the country, during the period from the 1st to the 19th of July of this year, as compared with the receipts during a similar period last year, is 364,0001. Thetis a statement which will enable the House of Commons to go to their constituents with no very gloomy view of the finances of the country. He had taken power to raise 2,000,0001 to pay off Exchequer Bonds, he had only used 1,000,0001. As to the charge he brought against the late Government, that did not apply to Sir George Lewis, whose administration was " wise and prudent." It was not con- fined to the civil service estimates, but was especially directed to those much greater branches of expenditure which are brought before the House for consideration. But policy controls expenditure, and reductions cannot be made in a moment. Our finances were never in a better position, and peace is more secure than it was eighteen months ago.

Mr. Wiesen; reminded the House that Sir George Lewis had not questioned the present state of the finances, but had simply shown the miscalculations of Mr. Disraeli.

In Committee, Sir INERT WILLOUGHBY moved a proviso on clause 25, intended to prevent the appropriation of any sums to the public ser- vice without informing the House of the fact ; but it was negatived by 89 to 41.

THE INDIA. BILL.

The Government of India Bill No. 3 went through Committee in the House of Lords on M,onday night. The Committee began its labours on clause 34, regulating appointments to the scientific branches of the Indian army.

The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH objected to this clause, because it intro- duced, for the first time, open competitive examination for admission to the Engineers and Artillery. This proposition is an uncalled for act of homage to democracy, and the most dangerous of all modern innovations. The perfection of the existing system is admitted. There is a competi- tive examination for admission to these services at Addiscombe. The cadets are not crammed to pass an examination, but their conduct, moral character, and intellectual attainments are ascertained. We have gua- rantees that they are gentlemen ; his moral superiority enables the Eng- lishman to keep India, but the tendency of the innovation is to substi- tute persons of inferior education and position for gentlemen.

He had always been most desirous that we should retain the highest gen- tlemen we could procure at the head of affairs in India, and therefore he was particularly anxious that in this case the son of a grocer or a tailor, of the .John Gilpin class,. should not, through being highly crammed for an open competitive examination, be preferred before the son of a country gentleman or retired officer, who might not be able to pay enough for an education of that kind, but who might, nevertheless, be the fittest candidate for the situa- tion.

The Earl of DERBY said that the clause did not introduce the principle of competition, open or not open. It proposes to admit persons into the Artillery and Engineers on an examination under regulations to be pre- scribed by the Secretary of State. He should propose an amendment, the effect of which would be that the clause would not introduce the principle of " strict " competition. Competitive examination is a great experiment ; if there is one portion of the public service to which it can be fairly applied it is the scientific branch of the army ; with proper re- gulations we should run no risk of not haying gentlemen. He hoped he was not insensible to the advantages of birth and station, but he confessed he could not join with hie noble friend in saying that because a person happened to be the son of a tailor, a grocer, or a cheesemonger, pro- vided his mental qualifications were equal to those of his competitors, he was to be excluded from honourable competition for an appointment in the public service. He did not think that was a legitimate argument for his noble friend or for any one to use. A man's origin was nothing; the ques- tion to be asked was, 'What are his qualifications for a scientific appointment, and what is his moral character ? ' If they show Lord Derby, a man who was superior in both of these respects to his competitors, he cared not what might be his birth—that man was the best entitled to the appointment to which he aspired. (Cheers.) He could net understand why a principle which has been introduced into every part of. the civil and military service at home should not be introduced into the scientific branches of the Indian

army.

The clause was opposed by the duke of SOMERSET, who said it would be a great mistake to abolish the College of Addisconibe. Earl G141.'1,11.1.4 did not see the use of the clause if it were amended as proposed. The Duke of NEWCASTLE said the effect a adopting the clause, as amended, would be to destroy the College of Addiscombe. He proposed that the College of Haileybury should be reestablished, and the resources of Ad- discombe developed and increased. Lord MOETEAGLE was opposed to the abolition of Addiscombe. Lord Buouenrox thought the clause gave the Government power to do away with College of Addiscombe ; whereupon Lord DERBY said that the clause gives no power which the Government does not possess already.

The clause was amended by omitting the last three lines, and was then adopted by the narrow majority of 41 to 34.

On clause 53, providing that the financial accounts of India should be annually laid before Parliament, words were introduced on the motion of Lord DERBY providing that statistical information should be periodi- cally produced respecting the moral and material progress of India. A new clause was substituted for clause 55, limiting the employment of troops in India to India itself, unless their use out of India were sanctioned by parliament. But the clause was only carried on a divi- sion by 52 to 36. The remaining clauses of the Bill were agreed to. Its considering the bill as amended on Tuesday, the word " alone" wag maer.ted in clause 2, on the motion of Lord ELLENBOROUGH, in order to make it evident that " the expenses of the government of India are to be paid out of the revenues of India alone." In clause 66, the word treaties was inserted, making the clause run that all contracts, covenants, liabilities, and treaties, of the Company may be enforced by and against the Secretes), of State in Council.

THE INDIAN AMNESTY.

Mr. BUXTON inquired whether, considering the prodigious number of executions that had already taken place and the great slaughter of the enemy in battle, it would not now be desirable to offer a complete am- nesty to all who would lay down their arms, unless they could be proved to have been present at the murder of Europeans? Lord STANLEY replied by reading extracts from the despatches of Lord Ellenborough and the Court of Directors to show that the policy the Governor-General is instructed to pursue amounts, except in case of aggravated offences, to an amnesty for political offences.

If the Government have not reiterated those instructions, it was because it seemed to them that the good sense and good feeling of Lord Canning vesuid liesline him of his own accord to act upon the policy indicated to him. In evidence of thiii uo quoted the proclamation to Rohilound. " If we have not sent out positive and peremptory orders that an amnesty shall be de- clared by a certain day, it was simply because we were not willing, having confidence in the judment of Lord Canning, to tie his hands by imposing upon him an absolute command to do a certain act at a time when we, cone sidering the matter here, could not possibly foretell what the state Of India would be.'

THE MASSACRE AT JEDDAH.

Lord STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFE inquired OR Monday whether the

Government had received any official advices of the massacre at Jeddah; whether instructions have been issued for demanding full reparation from the Porte ; and whether adequate measures are to be employed for enforcing our just demands in the event of obstructions or delays amounting to a denial of justice ? The massacre in Arabia is no leas important than afflicting. There is no small reason to apprehend that the assault was ;premeditated. The remissness of the local Pacha is not to be attributed to the Sultan and his Ministers. No doubt they were sincerely distressed when the horrible intelligence reached them, and did

not hesitate to " promise " an immediate and complete satisfaction. But justice in Turkey moves at a slow pace, and promisees are but too often unnecessarily delayed and inadequately fulfilled. It may be presumed that the Government have taken steps to obtain reparation, and to en.- force, in concert, if necessary, with the French Government, that exem- plary amount of retribution which may produce a wholesome and lasting effect throughout the Ottoman empire. We are bound to follow up the aid given to the Sultan in time of war by encouraging the repression of fanaticism in his dominions. At the same time he trusted that no at- tempt would be made to seize Mecca—" an idea which has been whis- pered about"—because no degree of success in a military point of view could make up for the bitterness of hatred which it would engender against us throughout the Mussulman world. s The Earl of MALMESBURY said, that as soon as he received a telegram respecting the massacre he sent a telegram to Sir Henry Bulwer in- structing him to obtain immediate redress and retribution, and to allow no trifling whatever on the part of the Porte. The Turkish Govern- ment has scarcely required any urgency to take up the cause of the suf- ferers, and has sent to Jeddah a large force of troops from Egypt to put down any fanatic insurrection. The Pacha in command is armed with powers to execute capital punishment upon any offenders, without re- ference to Constantinople. The Turkish Government is entirely ready to do its duty in the matter. The rumour respecting the seizure of Mecca is entirely without foundation.

TEE Jew Quesnox.

The motion for going into Committee on Lord Lucan's Jews Bill was contested by Mr. Kismirrii.ey, Mr. BENTINCK, and Mr. SPOONER. They insisted that the House of Lords was responsible for this " queer, odd, strange sort of Irish compromise ;" that the climax of absurdity was reached when the Bill was sent down with insulting reasons why it should not be passed into a law. The House is bound to include Turks and Heretics in the Bill. The doctrine acted upon in this case was that " the end justifies the means." Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it was not for him to defend the Bill of the House of Lords ; but he did think the Earl of Derby, as the head of the Conservative party, was entitled to more respect than he seemed to receive from many Conservative Members in this House. (" Hear, hear !" The House went into. Committee and adopted all the clauses of the entrance of Mr. SPOONER from the lobby whence issued the "ayes," and the honourable Member's accession to the cause of Jewish emanci-

pation was hailed with loud cheers, not unmixed with laughter, from both sides of the House.] An attempt was made to carry the third reading late on Tuesday, but the minority, by repeatedly dividing the House, compelled a postpone-

ment. On Wednesday, however, the bill was read a third time and passed, not without further opposition. Mr. WARREN moved that the

bill should be read a third time that day three months. He was not one who regarded the assertion of the Christian principle as a counter with

which politicians may play a game. If he did not oppose this measure, -in which the front Ministerial bench seemed sullenly to acquiesce, he should be a party to this flagrant dereliction of principle it involves. He belonged to a party called Conservative, and if the principle that party has contended for year by year is sacrificed, there is hardly anything else left worth fighting for. The passing of such a bill as the present with the sanction of the Government inflicts a deep wound on the members of the Conservative party; from which unlooked-for events may flow. Mr. ROEBUCK observed that Dogberry, in a fit of virtuous indignation, wished that somebody would write him down an ass ; but the House of Lords, unlike Dogberry, without calling for extraneous aid, had done that piece of business for themselves. (Laughter.) They have done a good thing in a foolish way. Mr. SPOONER explained that be had not voted for going into Committee on the bill by mistake. His vote had nothing to do with the merits of the bill. He had voted simply against a motion for delay. Had he changed his opiiiions he would have said so. He should support Mr. Warren. No bill could be devised more calculated to degrade the House of Lords. Mr. Desicostee defended the House of Lords. They have made a. concession because it was neces- sary. Mr. NEWDEGATE said the concessions had been wrung from the Peers contrary to their judgment. The main promoter of the infraction of Christian principle is Mr. Disraeli, who, in a published work, has

and laughter.) Bill. [During the division considerable excitement was created by the gone so far as to justify the Crucifixion, and who holds the opinion that the Jewish race has a right to govern other races of men. Upon him, and upon Lord Stanley, who has seceded from the opinions of his noble father, and not upon Lord Derby, rests the responsibility of this con- cession.

The third reading was carried by 129 to 55, and the bill passed.

The House then took into consideration the Lords' reasons for insist- ling on their amendments to the Oaths Bill. Lord Joan RUSSELL re- marking, that it was unnecessary to resist the Lords' amendments be- cause they have departed from their own reasons, moved the following resolution-

" That this House does not consider it necessary to examine the reasons offered by the Lords for insisting upon the exclusion of Jews from Parlia- ment, as by a Bill of the present session, entitled Act to provide for the relief of her Majesty's subjects professing the Jewish religion,' their lordships have provided for the admission of persons professing the Jewish religion to seats in the Legislature." One objection taken to this resolution was, that the last two lines did not accurately state the facts. The bill does not provide for the admis- sion of the Jews ; it only enables either House to make such a provision. The difficulty was overcome by the insertion, at the suggestion of Sir JAMES GRAHAM, of the word "means" after the word "provided" ; and the resolution was agreed to. On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL the house adopted a further re- solution to the effect " that the House do not insist upon their disagree- ment with the Lords in their amendments upon the said Bill." A messenger was sent to the other House to make their lordships ac- quainted with the decision of the Commons.

STATE SERVICES.

The Duke of Msittnoitouou moved an address to the Queen, praying that if the services of the 5th November, 30th January, and 29th May, should be no longer annexed to the Prayer Book, her Majesty would direct the insertion in the Thanksgiving appointed for the 20th June— her Majesty's Accession—of a thanksgiving for the great deliverance vouchsafed to the nation by the frustration of the Gunpowder Plot, the Restoration of the Church and Monarchy, and the landing of King Wil- liam III. He desired that the recollection of these great events should be kept alive, and he proposed to do that by expunging the objectionable phrases from the old services.

The motion met with the support of Lord Drsoixxox alone. Earl STANHOPE regarded it as a retrograde movement. Lord EBURY regretted that the motion had been brought forward. The Earl of DERBY said the time had come for the discontinuance of these services ; he had no doubt that the Queen would see fit to direct the adoption of a course in accord- ance with the wishes of Parliament ; and if pressed to a division he should vote against the motion. The Bishop of LONDON also opposed it; and the motion was by leave withdrawn.

THE HUDSON'S BAY COMPANY. • The orders of the day were postponed on Tuesday to give place to Mr. Roebuck's motion touching the Hudson's Bay Company. Mr. ROEBUCK said, that while the United States have increased from thirteen to thirty-three states, the English colonies have remained idle, and have not added one acre to their vast territory by way of coloniza- tion. He desired to see established a counterpoise to the power of the United States which, were it not established, will overshadow not only England, but the whole earth. We have the means. Charles II. granted to the Hudson's Bay Company the sole right to trade and com- merce over certain wild lands. When the English took Canada they carried on a trade in furs in competition with the Company, and wars took place between the rivals. Then Mr. Ellice (the Member for Co- ventry) told them they were fighting a useless battle, and persuaded the two companies to unite. They did unite, and cheated the public. The Hudson's Bay Company, depending on their charter, and following up their own interest, has maintained the territory in the wildest state, and has kept out civilization. He maintained they have no rights under that charter ; if they have not, Parliament will know how to deal with them ; if they have, Parliament will purchase them out. It is the duty of the Government to ascertain whether they have or have not. Mr. Roebuck drew a glowing picture of the future prosperity of the country when a railway should be opened from Halifax to Vancouver's Island, and civilization is carried from the Atlantic to the Pacific. He moved- " 1. That the privileges of the Hudson's Bay Company about to expire ought not to be renewed. 2. That the legal validity of the exclusive rights claimed by the Hudson's Bay Company under their charter ought at once to be determined by process of law. 3. That so much of the territory hitherto held by the Hudson's Bay Company as may be needed for the purpose of colonization ought without delay to be resumed by the Government of this country." Lord Busty seconded the motion in a speech that drew warm en- comiums from succeeding speakers. The House ought to be informed of the intentions of the Government in regard to a question which not only concerns Canada and the Hudson's Bay Company but the whole empire. Canada cannot colonize it. She has not filled up her own territory. The real point at issue is whether the Company should continue their monopoly, should keep closed doors, should put up a " no thoroughfare " board at every inlet into this country, or, whether it should be thrown open to the enterprise of all her Majesty's subjects. Now he contended that the Government is bound to investigate the legality of the rights claimed by the Company. But as the Government declined to do that, he, having all sorts of relations with the colonies, had investigated those clauses. Before, however, stating the result of his investigation, he said a few words up in the nature of the territory claimed by the Comprity. Out of the House he seldom heard that territory mentioned without being more or less associated with the terms " barren," sterile," " ice-bound," " unfit for colonization and the support of human beings." But that was an entirely erroneous supposition. It might be true that comparatively only a small portion of this vast territory was fitted for colonization, but it was no less true that that comparatively small portion consisted of something like 500,000 square miles, and would afford occupation and means of subsistence to, he be- lieved, every person of full age in her Majesty's dominions, both in the colonies and at home. Eastward from the Rocky Mountains, and as far south as Peace River and Lake Athabasca, the country was barren and unfit for settlement ; but southward from that point, as far down as the boundary line, the 49th parallel of latitude, it was magnificent, consisting of the same fine prairie land as that in which the Ohio and Mississippi sprung—well watered, very fertile, stocked with wild animals and fish of every descrip- tion. Another part of the country consisted of impenetrable forests, the soil of which, like that of the Canadian forests when reclaimed, would be

found well suited for agricultural purposes ; but the prairie lands were those most susceptible of cultivation, and upon which the development of the country and its future prosperity would chiefly depend. With a view te. the opening up of a communication between Lake Superior and the Pacific_ he would suggest that the system adopted by the United States in the formation of a certain ship canal might be very easily applied. In that case 180,000 acres of land were set aside in the State of Michigan, and were given in trust for the persons who made the canal on condition that they finished it ; and as it advanced and they wanted money part of the land was sold and supplied funds for prosecuting the work. It was found that the sale of these lands, made infinitely more valuelle by the canal itself, fully remunerated the shareholders for their undertaking; and he thought it would not be at all difficult to set aside reserves of land along the line from Lake Superior to the rucific, and apply that to complete the communication between those two points. With the exception of a single rapid (which might ),e avoided by a canal) the navigation of the Saskatchewan offered no nifficulty. With this one exception, you could take a vessel of considerable size up to the foot of the Rocky Mountains ; and at this point there was a gay in the mountains which would interpose no great obstacle in the way of a junction between the Columbia and the Saskatchewan, whose sources were but a little distance apart. Thus a communication would be established with the Pacific, and he hoped some day to see this great work accomplished. As regards the claims of the company, it will be conceded that no grant is valid unless the land were in the possession of the granter at the time. New the country did not belong to England when Charles II. granted the charter. But if it did still the treaty of Ryswick upset it. The French possessed it in the time of Henry IV. In 1629, when peace was proclaimed, the Eng- lish, then in possession of Canada, were withdrawn. But it was in 1670 that Charles II. granted this Charter at the instance of two Frenchmen who had failed to obtain one from their ewn Government. The new Companyerected forts and the French colonists were ordered to oust them. They succeeded so well that the Company held one fort only at the time the treaty of Utrecht was concluded. Until 1812 the Hudson's Bay Company languished. Then Lord Selkirk, a man of iron will, entered the Company, and founded the Red River Settlement, for the purpose of taking Fort William from Canada. Steps were taken to remove him, and the struggle ended in the union of the rival traders. The rights claimed by the Hudson's Bay Company are of a twofold nature. One is the monopoly of trade over Rupert's Land, granted by charter, and the other is a license of occupation for twenty-one years, which will expire next year. With respect to the license now on the eve of expiration he had nothing to say, that being strictly within the power of Parliament to grant or withhold as it might think proper; but as to the monopoly of trade over Rupert's Land, even if the charter was valid there are legal objections to it. He found that Blackstone in his Commentaries laid it down that in a newly discovered country, having no laws of its own, the laws of England come into force as soon as we take possession of the land. The charter of 1670 declared the Hudson's Bay territory to be one of His Majesty's plantations or colonies of America, and therefore it is liable to the same laws which govern the other dominions of the King of England. One of those laws declares that all monopolies are illegal and bad, and Lord Coke, a contemporary authority, said that monopolies of traffic are opposed to the liberties of the people. It followed, then, that King Charles by the charter granted what he had no power to grant. Much has been said about the colonizing tendencies of the Hudson's Bay Company, but he would invite the House to consider what was the fact. There is an astronomical boundary, south of which is to be found a teeming population, while north of that line the country is in respect of population a perfect desert. Every year the population of the -United States advances northwards, and very soon will overstep the boundary which marked the commencement of British territory. When that happens the hardheaded- American farmer will not stop to inquire whether he is on British or American soil, but he will miss the protection of American laws, and will demand to be placed under their safeguard. He believed that there is far more danger of difficulty arising from that source than from any Central American question. In conclusion, he would quote the words of a Canadian legislator, one who occupied a prominent position in that country, who declared, "This was the very madness of monopoly. Surely the Hudson's Bay Company could not expect by their effete and stupid charter to shut up. for ever the route to the great West ? " Lord Bury agreed with with him in that sentiment.

Mr. GLADSTONE concurred in the objects sought by the motion, and expressed strong doubts as to the validity of the charter. But he ad- vised that the matter should be left in the hands of the Government. Mr. LABOCCHERE testified to his own anxiety when Colonial Secretary to arrive at the rights of the question. He appeared to be convinced on legal authorities that the charter is valid, and advocated his own plan of settlement—the renewal of the licence over all districts except those wanted by Canada for settlement.

Sir EDWARD Lrrrois explained the views of the Government. Every intelligent Englishman must be humiliated and amazed that there is a large segment of the earth abandoned as a desolate hunting ground for the sake of the furs of wild animals. Now the trade in furs excludes civilized men and obstructs civilization. The solution of the question lies in the adoption of a compromise by which civilization may gain all it asks, and the savages who inhabit the fur districts be protected. The country capable of colonization should be withdrawn from the jurisdic- tion of the Hudson's Bay Company, and the vuntry incapable of eclo- nization should be left to that jurisdiction. The Government will not renew the licence over any part of the territory which promises early settlement, but they rem :rve the question whether they will renew it for a limited period over the remote northern regions.

Sir Edward dwelt on the cp :ming prospect of civilized life in the regions between the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the harbours of Vancouver, and seemed to think that we ought to take the colonization of these regions into our own hands, and administer them by a Government in concurrence with Canada. These countries will be peopled by Canadians, and Americans, English, and Scotch. We need not fear the influence of the Americans, be- cause colonists soon identify their national feelings and interests with the

land in which they live. Here is land fit for settlement ; if civilized men will settle in it, let them. Never let us mind the difficulties of access, soil, or climate. Leave the difficulties to them. Nature and man will fight their own battle and make their own peace." As to the fitness of the place for colonization he cited the opinions of the Hudson's Bay Company themselves, and as to its safety he quoted a report from Sir William Eyre. He showed that the monopoly in the Red River district has already been broken through, and that it can no longer be maintained. As to the charter, the late law-officers of the Crown held that it was valid ; the Government will consult their own law-officers, and ascertain whether there is any just mode by which a ju- dicial decision may be taken on this venerable title-deed. As to the Com- pany itself, it is not stubborn or intractable. It says it is willing to give up any land required for colonization, but it expects some kind of conspen- sation. If Canada rejects the proposals of Mr. Labouchere our hands sill

. be free for unfettered action. " It is my sincere wish and hope that ar

Tangements for that object may be effected in a spirit of reasonable concilia- tion to all parties concerned, and that we may thus lay the foundation of a civilized community, upon those principles of humanity towards the red men, and of honour and honesty towards the white, which our civilization should carry along with it wherever it extends, as the colonizers of old car- ried along with them a fragment of their native earth, and a light from the altar of their ancient council hall." (Cheers.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought that the legal rights of the Company ought to be ascertained, but that at all events the land capable of coloni- zation ought to be so applied. Mr. LoWE contended for the rights of the Company, in a speech which Mr. CHRISTIE characterized as one that sounded very much like that of an advocate of the Company. The debate now languished. Mr. ROEBUCK replied on the merits of the whole question, and with the permission of the House withdrew his motion. NEw CALEDONIA.

The Government of New Caledonia Bill passed through Committee without any alteration. Mr. GrAnsrosrn took the opportunity to remark upon the absence of any provision for free institutions. He had hoped in 1852 that the next time we dealt with a colony of free settlers, we should, like our ancestors of the seventeenth century, recognize it as a free and self-governing society. This bill, however, begins by establish- ing a society which is not free, and then provided that at a future period free institutions may, if it is thought fit, be introduced into it. He wished the Government could be prevailed upon to embody in this bill the principle that we are about to establish a free society.

" At the same time he was prepared to repose confidence in the executive Government upon that subject, and to throw upon them the responsibility of suspending, if they thought fit, the establishment of free institutions. But he wanted that that should be done in deference to a distinct necessity, of which the executive Government were to be constituted the judges, and with respect to which Parliament should hold them responsible, and require them hereafter to show for every year and every month during which free institutions were not established that there was an absolute necessity for postponing them strictly connected with the exceptional circumstances of the colony itself. If, therefore, the Government had chosen to frame their Bill in such a way that it should begin with the establishment of free in- stitutions in principle, and should then grant to the Crown a special dis- cretion, strictly limited to peculiar circumstances and a sufficient cause, of suspending their action, he for one would not have objected ; but that was not a course which had been adopted. Although for a length of time we had been steadily advancing with regard to our colonial policy, and al- though the public mind at home had arrived at something like a general settlement as to the true principles by which it ought to be regulated, now, when an Act of Parliament was to be passed recording our present ideas, it was one which, instead of carrying them forward, actually appeared to carry them backward."

THAMES PURIFICATION.

The motion for the second reading of the Metropolis Local Manage- ment Act Amendment Bill led to a long and somewhat dull and statisti- .cal debate on Monday. Sir HENRY WILLOUGHBY objected that the Bill gave enormous taxing powers to the Metropolitan Board without pro- viding for the judicious and effective expenditure of its revenues. Mr. AxaoYD objected to the plan of the Metropolitan Board, and seemed to recommend the deodorizing system pursued at Leicester. Mr. LOWE questioned the capacity of the Metropolitan Board for the execution of the work in hand.

Their plan is, that the sewage of the metropolis should be collected at a place on the River Lea, about twenty feet below flood tide ; that it should be pumped from thence by steam machinery ; and that it should then be discharged into a reservoir at Barking Creek, a mile below Woolwich, whence, having undergone a process of deodorization by mixture with lime, it should be discharged into the Thames.

Mr. Lowe went into elaborate calculations to prove that this plan would be more costly than the plan of the Government referees, which provides a permanent remedy, and that its efficiency will be exhausted in 1871.

Mr. HEADLAM objected that the plan of the Board would diminish the volume of water in the Thames and thus increase the evil. Before hand- ing three millions to the Metropolitan Board some guarantee should be taken for its proper application. Mr. STUART WORTLEY took up the same line of argument. The Government is proceeding with undue haste.

Lord Joni:- MANNERS said, that a fortnight ago the Government was threatened with impeachment unless they settled the question of the Thames in twenty-four hours, and now they were described as acting with "undue haste" and without proper consideration. It would be impossible to embody a plan for the drainage of London in a Bill, and no better mode of settling the question has been suggested than that proposed by Government. Mr. GLADSTONE said that Lord John Manners had misapprehended previous speakers, whose speeches were not accusations against the Go- vernment, but honest and ingenuous confessions of the difficulty in which the House found itself. If the Government took up the matter it would be a proclamation of the incapacity of London to manage its own affairs. In spite of the difficulties of the question, he did not abandon the hope that we might see a larger and much more effective application of the valuable principle of municipal self-government to the metropolis than any that had hitherto been made. He objected to the constitution of the Board of Works, because that body is not chosen by direct election. Their relations with the ratepayers are indirect and circuitous, and hence there is not that real responsibility which should exist in all cases where money is levied and expended. There is another difficulty : it is not provided that the new tax shall be borne by proprietors, but levied upon occupiers and lessees. Here was a fair opportu- nity of raising the question of the liability of parties. Who will be ultimately responsible for the payment of this money ? Then it seemed to he set forth in the Bill that Parliament is the author and projector of the scheme. If that were so it would be vain for Parliament to think of avoiding to pay for it. He did not think that the question was in such a

state of maturity as to give the House a hope of satisfactorily dealing with it.

Mr. CUBITT said he was quite satisfied that if the Metropolitan Board of Works were invested with entire power and authority, that body

would devise a scheme which would satisfy the requirements of public opinion.

Mr. CONINGHAM objected to the scheme and put forward the views of his friend, Mr. P. 0. Ward. Sir BENJAMIN HALL supported the second reading of the Bill. Mr. Nr.sriam. asked for time to consider the measure. Mr. JOSEPH LOUSE thought the scheme proposed was not expedient. Mr. HENLEY said, that if they waited until the "competent authorities" agreed amongst themselves they might wait till doomsday. If the country at large were willing to pay for the works then the matter might be left to the Queen's Government ; but if the country refused to pay or to assist in paying for those works, then it ought not to interfere in the construction of them.

Mr. STEPHENSON insisted that the intercepting system would ef- fectually meet the evil ; that Mr. Lowe's objections were altogether in- appropriate ; and that the chief recommendation of the intercepting plan is its capability of extension. He hoped the House would agree to the Bill unless they intended to postpone legislation altogether. Sir GEORGE LEWIS strongly objected to the power taken by the Government to ap- point a Superintending Inspector. It was said the Government was not in favour of any plan, then why was a rate named and an estimate made ? He was afraid the House would be called upon to guarantee a further loan. Lord PALMERSTON supported the motion for the second reading but suggested divers modifications in the present measure. The Bill was read a second time.

On the motion for going into Committee, Mr. BUTLER, Lord ELRING.• TON, Mr. CONINGIIAM and others, renewed the objections to the principle of the bill. They did not find much support, for on a division the House resolved to go into Committee by 133 to 11. In Committee the discussion was renewed. Mr. HEADLAM said that if the bill were adopted the House would sanction the absurd plan of the Metropolitan Board of Works. In order to prevent that, he moved the omission of part of clause 1, and the substitution of general words authorizing the Board to undertake such works as may be necessary for purifying the Thames and improving the main drainage of London. Mr. STEPHENSON said the two works were one. The one cannot be executed independently of the other. He vin- dicated the Board of Works. The amendment was negatived by 81 to 38. Clause 2 limiting the power of the Board in making outfalls was omitted. Clause 12 giving the Government the right of inspection was amended so as to limit the right to mere inspecting and reporting. All further at tempts to alter the bill failed, and it passed through Committee.

MILITIA SERVICE.—A bill to revive the act of 1854, enabling the Go- vernment to send out Militia regiments to relieve veteran regiments abroad, in order that the latter may be sent to India instead of the raw levies re- cruited this year as second battalions, has passed through Committee in the House of Commons.

A PERSONAL EXPLANATION.—Lord Gonr.nreir, on Wednesday, called the attention of the House to a personal question. He was a member of the Committee on the transport of troops to India, of which Sir De Lacy Evans was Chairman. When the evidence had been taken the Chairman presented a report. The Committee decided by a majority of one to adopt resolutions before framing any report ; and the resolutions adopted had been reported to the House. Now the Chairman had circulated a document, headed " Parliamentary proceedings," and in form like Parliamentary papers, in which he impugned the motives of those who voted against him, and 'had said they were anxious to obtain for their political friends the usually amiable verdict that nobody:was to blame. He had not, however, sent a copy of that document to the accused. Now, the whole proceeding was one of grave irregularity, entirely without precedent, and if followed up would materially alter the character of Select Committees. He had been asked by his friends to bring it under the notice of the House. He would accept a frank assurance that Sir De Lacy did not intend to impugn the motives of himself and his friends, but if that assurance were not given they must leave the matter in the hands of the House.

Sir DE LACY EVANS denied that he had imputed improper motives to Lord Godcrich and his friends ; he had only attributed to them an amiable desire to favour their political friends, surely not a grave charge. At the same time he regretted that he had been guilty of an irregularity, and stated that he had no intention to wound the feelings or impugn the motives of Lord Goderich and his friends. He did not see, however, why they might not have disregarded his imputations. Mr. DISRAELI severely censured the proceeding of Sir De Lacy Evans. Lord Goderich had completely vindicated himself and friends, and he hoped they would let the matter drop. In this Lord GODERICH concurred, trust- ing that what had taken place would not interrupt the friendship that had hitherto existed between himself and the honourable and gallant officer.

SALE AND TRANSFER OF LAND.—In Committee on this bill Lord ST. LEONARDS objected to clause 51, whereby the owner of an unencumbered estate may go into court and obtain a Parliamentary title to his property. Such a provision, barring out as it does all claimants with rightful titles who turn up after the owner in possession has got his Parliamentary title, will revolutionize the whole law of property. The Lonn CHANCELLOR de- fended the clause. It would be unfair to give the advantage of an inde- feasible title to encumbered estates, and withhold it from unencumbered estates. The security against fraud is the publicity of the transaction. The clause was supported by Lord CRAM WORTH and the Earl of CLANCARTY, and opposed by the Earl d Wicimow. On a division it was carried by 29 to 10. The bill passed through Committee.

THE BURNINGS IN THE GULF OF BOTLINIA.—MT. CRAWFORD moved that an address should be presented to the Queen, praying that a Royal Commission might be issued to inquire into the claims of British subjects, whose property was destroyed in the Gulf of Bothnia during the Russian war, for compensation. He claimed 54461. on behalf of three firm ,s whose timber, stacked at Uleaborg, was burnt by Admiral Plumridge. This tim- ber was private property purchased by British merchants for building pur- poses. It was not contraband of war. Admiral Plumridge sought to jus- tify his proceedings, by stating that twelve gun-boats were being construct- ed at Uleaborg ; but that was not so. Not a single gun-boat was in course of construction there. Mr. ADAMS seconded the motion.

Sir JOHN PAKINOTON said he could not assent to it. He denied that the property destroyed was private property, but, on the contrary, property contraband of war. It was beyond a doubt that twelve gun-boats had been built at Uleaborg, and this timber might have been used for a similar pur- pose. He regretted that British merchants had suffered loss, but he con- tended that we were justified in our proceedings. Mr. MILNER Ginsox and Mr. WEGUELIN supported, and Sir CHARLES NariEn. opposed the motion. The Somerron.-GENERAL said, the claims of the aggrieved parties had not been made in two cases until two years, in the third until four years after they suffered this loss. The difficulty of tracing the facts must be immense. No doubt the articles were contraband of war. Mr. CLAY, Mr. Ileums, and Mr. PRICE, supported the motion. On a di- vision, it was negatived by 105 to 6.5.