The Sun. — London, England, 1860-08-10 00:00:00

auditing the accounts was defective, and made eartain re commendations in order to remedy that state of things. The audit of the army and navy estimates was satisfactory, but when they came to the civil service estimates they found the case quite different. In that department they had a board which was independent of the Government, holding office like judges ' for life, and invested with very large powers. In the miscellaneous estimates over L 2,000,000 was expended without being audited by the commissioners. The right hen. baronet proceeded at some length to point out the existing defects in regard to the audit of the civil service estimates, and again urged on the house the propriety of placing his motion on their records. Mr. LAING said that in reality the difference between the right hon. baronet and the Government was a very small one. After the report of the select committtee on public moneys, there could be no doubt that the audit de partment required improvement. (Hear, hear.) On the principle therefore they were agreed, but there were prac tical difficulties which had to be surmounted before im provement could be effected. The accounts of the army and navy services were reckoned up at the end of each financial year, while several of those of the civil service were remaining over for a considerable number of years. Mr. WILLIAMS supported the amendment, and con tended that under the present system there was no security of the public money being honestly expended. After some discussion, Sir G. LEWIS said he did not see how the Government could oppose the amendment, nor was he aware of any in superable difficulty in making the improvements necessary at the audit office. Ultimately the amendment was agreed to without a division. CHARITABLE COMMISSIONERS, &c. (IRELAND) Mr. HASSARD called the attention of the house to the constitution of the Board of Commissioners of Charitable Donations and Bequests in Ireland ; and he asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he could and would take measures to insure the attendance of a quorum of such Commissioners at reasonably frequent periods, so that busi ness could be transacted ? Mr. CARDWELL said that he would adopt the nem& sary steps in regard to this matter. SUPPLY. The house then went into committee of supply. On the vote of £100,440 for the maintenance and keeping in repair the Royal parks, k;ir J. SHELLEY asked for some information relative to the Serpentine, and to the sum of £l,BOO for draining Ricilimond F ark. He also looked with some distrust on a vote of X 750 for a railing in the ride inKensingtonGardens, and in order to obtain some explamtion on these matters he would move that the vote be reduced by that amount. Mr" WILLIAMS drew attention to the sum in the votes of £S,OOO for Regent's Park, which he considered a very large sum for the purpose to which it was to be applied. Mr. A. SMITH complained that iron hurdles had been erected in different parts of the parks, and that portions of the parks were encroached on for enclosures. He contended also that the parka were not in the condition they should be, considering the money that had been voted for them. Mr. HUGUESSON called the hon. gentleman to order. He said that by a recent resolution of the house they must confine themselves to the discussion of the specific item before proceeding to the consideration of another. Lord J. MANNERS said that unless the new ride were made a continuation of Rotten-row it would be quite use less for public convenience. The noble lord drew atten tion to different defects in connection with the parks. Mr. MALINS said that the ride was not of any great value, and so unpopular, that he believed if they polled all the parishes west of the Haymarket they would find the majority against it. (Cries of "No, no.") As far as his experience went that was the case, and four out of five of those with whom he conversed on the subject were strongly opposed to the ride. Mr. COWPER said, with respect to the £750 for iron railings, that amount was to be appropriated to three dif ferent services. One of these was for the removal of a por tion of the brick wall in the gardens. That was the por tion of the wall which ran next from the alcove to the place where the railing began. Another part of the money was for a gate, and the remaining £250 was to provide hurdles for the ride. (Hear, hear, and oh, oh.) He believed that not only the upper classes, but most of the respectable tradesmen and workmen, were in favour of the ride. Now, the real ques tion was whether the public should be admitted as readily as before. He contended that there was no reason why they should not be thrown open to persons who were de sirous of taking exercise on horseback as well as to pedes trians, provided no inconvenience was caused thereby to the latter. It was stated by some persons that they desired quiet and retirement, which were interfered with by the ride ; but the gardens were spacious enough to enable them to enjoy retirement in other parts of them. He thought that publicity, not privacy, was to be considered the -most useful in respect to these gardens. From the hours when the working classes were employed during the week days, they could not visit the gardens at the time the . _ ride in Kensington-gardens was used by equestrians, and on Sundays when they could attend at such hours of the day persons on horseback were excluded from the gardens. This matter had assumed a factious importance from having been taken up by five vestries in the neighbourhood of Kensington, who seemed to consider that the parks were under their special jurisdiction. To show that such a feeling was entertained, the right hon. gentleman said that in the parish of Marylebone resolutions had been passed at different times in reference to the parks. On one of these occasions it had been recommended that Lord Llanover should be prosecuted, and on another it was stated that the place of his successor would be rendered too hot to hold him. (Laughter.) He hoped, however, that the house would decide on the merits of the question, and not be led away by what had occurred at these vestries. Sir J. SHELLEY altered his amendment by substitut ing the sum of £250 for £750, as the amount by which the vote was to be reduced. Mr. A. MILLS opposed the amendment and expressed his opinion that the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Cowper) would not give way to the agitation that had been raised on this subject. Mr. H. SEYMOUR followed on the same side, and as serted that the agitation was purely of a local and vestry character. General PEEL also opposed the amendment. After a few words from Mr. J. LOCKE and Mr. SPOONER, the house divided. For the amendment Against it 7l Majority —23 Lord J. MANNERS enquired if the works would be completed for the annual estimate. Mr. COWPER said they would be finished for even a less amount. Colonel DUNN drew attention to the extent to which the country was taxed for metropolitan improvements, and said that Ireland had to pay 59,000,000. (Cries of" order," in the midst of which the hon. and gallant member resumed his seat.) The house suspended sitting at 10 minutes to 4 o'clock. The house resumed at 6o'clock. FINANCES OF INDIA. Sir C. WOOD gave notice to move, on Monday, in com mittee of the whole house, to enable the Secretary of State for India to raise a sum not exceeding three millions for the service of the Indian Government. Sir C. WOOD then moved that on Monday the house should resolve itself into committee to consider the expe diency of raising that amount.—Agreed to. . In answer to Mr. J. B. SMITII, Sir C. WOOD stated that arrangements were in progress for obtaining some concession of territory from the Nizam of Hyderabad ; and that as 130C11 as possession of the land was obtained the necessary steps would be taken for im proving the navigation of the river Godavery. THE FERMANAGH GRAND JURY. Mr. GRIFFITH asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether 12 out of the 23 grand jurors of the county of Fer managh hallately signed and preseatedanaddress to Cllief Justice Monaghan, repudiating some advice which he had given in his charge against party emblems and banners, by the use in such address of the following terms, " that they firmly believe that, unless owing to the remarks of his lord ship, no possible collision could occur between parties of different creeds of this county," and that " his lordship's stricteres would only lead to a more determined stand upon their legal rights ore the part of the Protestants, and to an aggravated idea of ;moral injury on that of their Catholic fellow-countrymen ;;-" whether at Londonderry and Ennis killen Orange flags had not been hoisted and party tunes played by the bells rof the churches during the presence of Chief Justice Monaghan and Baron Hughes at the duties of the assize ; and, iif so, whether in the opinion of Govern ment, gentlemen who could offer such an address to ajudge .of assize, and thereb:v encourage such party proceedings on a judicial occasion, b ave shown themselves to be fit to be entrusted with the o immission of peace in Ireland ? Captain ARCIIDALL moved the adjournment of the house, in order to make a statement on the subject. He thought the rebuke which the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Griffith) had received the other night from Lord J. Russell would have satisfied him for the rest of the session; but it appeared that the hon. 'member's desire for notoriety was still operating. As having been foreman of the grand jury of Fermanah, he wished t o state what had really taken place. Fermanagh was one of th a roost peaceable counties in Ireland.. All the principal officers sof the county were Roman Catholics, includi ng the clerk lerk of th e crown, the chairman of the quar ter 1(5218 , the inspect or of prisons, and the deputy-in spector-general their cOnsta bulary. Both the judges of assize, together with staffs, were also Roman Catholics. Though essentially. a Protestant county, the county of Fer managh had nehveerenq uBeairAlled with those appointments, the officers having '... l3 ted for their efficiency, not on ac count of their religion. e hatYthtlele statement of Chief Justice Monaghan, it speared t vati s r f imes were few i n num b er , and light. He said it w as to find such a s t a t e things at that time of the year , "ie . crimes of a ser i ous character were undergoing invoatigatlon elsewhere. He found that the 12th of July had passed off peace r,. h er . fec e t peace and quietness, no party feeling had No insult had been given to the Roman Catholics, andtyed.et this was the occasion when Chief Justice Monaghan had selected to tell the Protestants of Fermanagh that though they had kept within the letter of the law, they had acted iontrary to its spirit by the exhibition of certain flags—. with which they had nothing whatever to do. On that occasion he (Captain Archdall) had felt it his duty, as fore man of the grand jury, to make a few observations to the judge in court, assuring him that there had been no..inten tion to insult or wound the feelings of the Catho , ics, His lordship replied that although there might not have been such intention, the course pursued would undoubtedly have that effect. The grand jury felt that the remarks of his lordship were likely to be of a very injurious charac ter, and they consequently drew up an address 'Thiel was signed by twelve of their number. The rest would have signed it, but they thought his observations in court as foreman were sufficient. The Orange flag had been hoisted on the church some days before the judges arrived at Enniskillen. The bells of the church had been rung without his knowledge. He thought that thu grand jurors would not have done their duty if they had. not remon strated with the judge on the effect of his remarks. Mr. CARD WELL said he would not enter a t length into this discussion—the more so as there was a already in the house which dealt with the subject, on which hon. members might make such observations as they 'chose. He would answer the questions put to him as far as he could He had no official information as to what passed on the oc casion in question. He had only the same information as other members possessed, and the statement now made to the house by the foreman of the grand jury. As far as he knew, it was not the intention of the Government to take any such steps as had been suggested in connexion with this occurrence. As to whether party tunes were played subsequently, he had official information. What took place was this—a flag had been hoisted on Walker's monument, which was most properly taken down by the mayor. That was all the information he possessed. The motion for adjournment was then withdrawn. THE PIPER DUTIES. Mr. BRIGHT gave notice for to-morrow, on the motion for adjournment till Monday, to put a question to the Chan cellor of the Exchequer on the sibj ect'of the excise duties on paper, and to call attention to the present position of the house with regard to that question. (Hear.) SPAIN. Mr. M. BAILLIE asked whether any application had been made to admit Spain to the rank of a first-rate power ; and, if so, whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Government to withhold its consent so long as the Govern ment of Spain continued to tolerate the slave trade, and systematically to disregard its treaties and engagements with this country ? Lord J. RUSSELL—I am not aware that Spain has herself made any application, or expressed officially any desire, to be admitted as a first-rate power with the five great powers of Europe, which are usually so denominated. But the Government of France has expressed an opinion that it would be desirable that Spain should be added to those five powers. Upon that proposition or suggestion, the Government of Austria, or rather the Emperor of Aus tria, has answered that he would have no objection to see Spain one of the great powers, but that such a step ought not to be turned into a precedent for the admission of any other power. The Government of Prussia, on the other hand, has expressed an opinion that it would be injurious to the protestant states of Europe, if the balance in an as sembly of five powers were altered by admitting another Roman Catholic power amongst them, and that if that were done it would be desirable that Sweden also should be ad mitted. (Hear, hear.) Now upon that it is to be consi dered that Spain, Sweden, and Portugal signed the original treaty of - Vienna ; and I think it would not be desirable, if Spain and Sweden were admitted, that Portugal, which has always entertained some jealousy with regard to Spain, should be excluded. If this were dong, there would be eight powers instead of five. But we must also consider that Sardinia is a very thriving and flourishing state— (cheers)—and Sardinia would, no doubt, put in her claim ; and if that were the case, there would be nine powers in stead of five. (Hear, hear.) Considering, however, that since 1815, or somewhat later, the consent of these five powers has upon the whole, with two intervals certainly, very well preserved the peace of Europe, which I imagine was the object of the Congress of Aix•la-Chappelle in mak ing this arrangement—l own it appears to me very unde sirable that we should change the present state of things in that respect. At all events I can assure the hon. gentle men that during the recess her Majesty's Government will not consent to any change in the existing arrangement. (Hear.) PROPOSED CONSUL AT LYONS. In answer to Mr. BAZLEY, Lord J. RUSSELL stated he was very unwilling to in crease the public charge for the consular service—(heat, hear)—and for the present certainly he should not advise the appointment of a British consul for Lyons. MANUFACTURE OF ARTILLERY. Mr. BERKELEY asked whether the Low Moor Com pany (ironfounders in Yorkshire) were making smooth bored guns for her Majesty's Government, and for what purpose ; the same company having made cast-iron guns, to he afterwards strengthened by Sir W. Armstrong, how many had been made, how many had burst upon trial or failed, and how many had succeeded ? Did guns made by Colonel Wilmot on nearly the same plan in Woolwich Arsenal succeed? Was net the Secretary of State for War aware that guns made after the same plan had been adopted and were perfectly successful in France, and if not placed actually on board ship, were ready stacked for that purpose, both at Cherbourg and Toulon ? Was he aware that the Russians had adopted that gun, and were at the present time manufacturing it in Liverpool ? Mr. S. HERBERT was understood to say that the Low Moor Company were making guns, 68-pounders and 32- pounders, for the use of the navy. Those guns would pro bably never be displaced by any rifled guns that could be made. (Hear, hear.) Upwards of 300 cylinders had been made for the purpose of being strengthened with iron hoops. Of those five had been tested ; three had burst ; and that number bursting the Government had thought that there must be something defective in the manner in which they had been hooped. They had therefore resolved to wait for further inquiry into the mode of hooping, with the view of strengthening them more effectually ; and he had no doubt they should succeed in doing so. With respect to the other questions, Colonel Wilmot had hooped a gun made by one of the great founders ; it showed considerable strength,but burst at 391bs. pressure. He ought to state that. specimen guns were tried to destruction, inorder to ascertainwhat pres sure they would bear. As to the last two questions, the hon. gentleman had information which he had not. There cer tainly were guns stacked at Toulon and Cherbourg which the French Government had so little confidence in that they had not placed them in ships, and did not intend to do so, but in fortresses. Ho might state that there was doubt whether we did not over-try our guns, and apply too severe a test. The powder used here was very much stronger than the powder used abroad. That question had to be considered ; and it was very possible that gun might stand the test applied to them in France, and not stand the test applied here. The Russians laad not adopted the gun referred to, but they had in use a gun made at Liverpool by the Mersey Company, which was a wrought-iron gun. FORTIFICATIONS (PROVISION FOR EXPENSES) BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this bill, Mr. E. JAMES moved as an amendment that, before pro ceeding further with this bill, it is desirable that this house should be in possession of further information as to the en' ire cost of the construction and efficient maintenance of the sea defences, and the proposed land fortifications, distinguishing th• expenses necessary to be incurred by the country in re spect of such proposed sea defences and land fortifications. The amount proposed to be expended was so enormous that the Government ought' to furnish farther information be fore the bill was read a second time. Its object was to con firm the expenditure of two millions of money on the forti fications mentioned in the schedule. II• would not trouble the house with the details of this expenditure, but would rather take their sense on the question whether further in formation was not required. There was very great differ ence of opinion as to whether land fortifications were de sirable. Some great authorities were of opinion that the noble lord ought to have applied the amount asked for in sea defences. It would appear from the report that a sum of £11,000,000 was proposed to be expended on the construc tion and armament of the fortifications, but not a word was said upon that to which his amendment pointed—the cost of the efficient mainter.ance and manning of these fortifications. It appeared that about £6,000,000 of the £11,000,000 was to be expended on the sea defences, dockyards, and arsenals, and £3,000,000 on the land defences. The report stated that about 68,000 men would be required for the efficient maintenance and manning of these fortifications. Taking the cost of each man at £6O a year, they had an ex penditure of £3,000,060 a year for the maintenance of the fortifications. (Hear.) The report asked for £150,000 to buy land for a central arsenal at Cannock-chase. They fur ther said that the defences of Woolwich might cost £700,000, which was as much as to say that they might cost three or four times that amount. Now his complaint was that they were called en to vote these enormous sums of money with out having got from the Government any distinct statement as to the ultimate limit of tho cost, and he thought the House of Commons would be stultifying themselves if they voted £2,000,000 without having the most remote idea of the extent of the expenditure. He therefore called on the Government to give the house something like accurate and precise information on this point. (Hear.) Sir C. NAPIER seconded the motion. They had already spent 21,500,000 on the works at Portsmouth and Ply mouth, and the £2,000,000 now askec' for would go but a small way towards the completion of the fortifications men tioned in the report of the commissioners. The commis sioners classed the fortifications of Portsmouth under five heads. The first related to the defences of the harbour and its entrance. Now there was not a waterrnan at Ports motsth who did not know that by taking up the buoys and m ark s of the harbour, it would be impossible for the pilots themt elves to run a fleet into it. (Hear, hear.) It was excet'sively narrow and shallow. (Hear, hear.) A three decker' could not get inside with. her guns in, and of what use would she be with her guns out ? Some of their vessels were now ,built 3 , 50 feet long, and he had no hesitation in saying the tt the smallest mistake in turning the helm would run.ships i7f that kind on shore. (Hear, hear.) You would no more th ink of taking out a three-decker with guns in than you would of flying in the air. Again, you had only to create a fog at the mouth of the harbour, and no vessel could get in or out. (Hear, hear.) But it appeared from the evidence of the report itself that even with the for titlcation of Portsmouth east and west complete, it THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, AUGUST 10, 1866. would be impossible to prevent a ship running eight or nine knots from passing all the batteries. If that were so, the enemy's vessels could anchor in the Solent out of the reach of your guns. (Hear.) An enemy daring enough to do this would land in the Isle of Wight, and from the Isle of Wight they could command, not only Portsmouth Harbour, but the batteries which commanded Portsmouth Harbour. He had the map of the commissioners in his hand—a very pretty one it was—and any member on either side of the house could look and learn that what he said was correct. (Hear.) With the Armstrong or Whit worth guns it was difficult to strike a ship, but it would not be difficult to strike Portsmouth or Plymouth. When Sir Francis Baring was First Lord of the Admiralty, at a time when the British fleet had been got up at great ex pense, he wrote to say, " Come home as fast as you can— we don't want a fleet ;" and then the fleet was well officered and manned ; it was reduced to a mere nonentity. But the Government soon saw the mistake they had made, and they again got up a small Channel fleet. At that time he (Sir C. Napier) thought it his imperious duty to wait on Lord Derby in order to point out to him the weak state of our fleet. The consequence was, a better fleet was got up, and a lucky thing it was we did get it up, for we were over taken by the Russian war. But in an evil hour Sir C. Wood, when he was First Lord of the Admiralty, came down and told the Chancellor of the Exchequer that that fleet must be paid off. That was done and a fine fleet was sent to the winds. Well, the Whigs were turned out and the Tories came in. Sir J. Pakington, who was then First Lord of the Admiralty, said, "This won't do—we must got up our fleet again," and the very self-same ships which had been com missioned before had to be again put into commission, at a cost of something like £lOO,OOO. Sir J. Pakington deserved great credit; he was obliged to get up a fleet with a great deal of trouble and to give a bounty. We had now a fleet respectable in every point except as regarded petty officers. We had ten sail of the line at the present moment, which were about making a show at Portland. But he wanted to know what we were going to fortify against? It was impossi ble this country could be invaded except by France and Russia combined, but so long as we kept up a superior fleet, France would not have a proper force to invade this coun try. It might be possible to suppose that France would make a dash at Portsmouth or any other of our harbours; but France must have a fleet concentrated at Cherbourg or some other point. But supposing that to be possible, had we not better go to Portsmouth and launch 250 gunboats and 10 blookships we had there; let them be anchored where we were now going to erect stone batteries. That would be only ship against ship, and France would have to come with a fleet of gunboats and blockships, and we should be just as well able to defend our shores by this means, which we had already at hand, as by building stone batteries. France had an army of 500,000 or 600,000 men. We had no such army, and probably never would, BO we n.ust trust our defences, as we did before, to our fleet. We had abundance of ships; why not take them out, and then we should have our country in a perfect state of defence. Suppose an enemy had command of the sea, he must bring over with him a number of mor tars and Whitworth guns. He must not come to attack us as we did in the Baltic, where we had no mortars. Let the French fleet assemble at Cherbourg, with transports to bring over troops to this country ; let us send our fleet to attack them, and every man would tell us that with Arm strong and Whitworth guns we should be able to destroy every ship in the harbour of Cherbourg. At Cronstadt they had 2,000 guns which were protected by a want of water, for there was not so much water in that harbour as those large ships would draw, and with our Whitworth and Armstrong guns we could sweep the whole harbour of Cronstadt from one side to the other. But as to the works we were going to execute, they were the most absurd things that ever were known. If the French chose they could land their troops on any part of our coast they liked; but we might depend upon it they would fight for London only, and our fortifications at Portsmouth or elsewhere would be of no use. Mr. Tierney once said in the House of Com mons, "With a full exchequer and a well-manned navy, I would defy the world." (Hear, hear.) He (Sir C. Napier) said the same. If Louis Napoleon was serious, did they think ho would wait for three years till those fortifications Were ready ? He (Sir C. Napier) did, then, humbly beg the House of Commons and the country to think well before they went to this absurd expense—an expense which no one in his senses would think of incur ring. He counselled the Government to turn their attention to the manning of the fleet as the best and only safe means of putting the country in a proper state of defence. (Hear.) Mr. S. HERBERT expressed his gratitude to his hon. and learned friend the member for Marylebone for the brevity he used in introducing the question. The hon. and learned member wished to know what sum was proposed to be taken for land defences as contrasted with sea defences. The works proposed to be constructed at once would cost from first to last about 5 millions, of which sum 2} millions would be required for land, and 21 millions for sea defences, but at the same time it was questionable whether some of the land defences, such as those at Dover, ought not more properly to be included as sea defences. With regard to the maintenance of the works, he might state that the cost of maintaining the works at present erected amounted to about a quarter per cent. per annum of the original outlay. Of course the new works would involve an addition to the standing army of the country, but the addition would not be very considerable. With regard to the remarks of the hon. and gallant member for Southwark, it was unneces sary to attempt an elaborate reply, as the assertions of the gallant admiral were so contradictory that one entirely answered another. The whole idea of his hon. and gallant friend appeared to be that the fleet was never to be used as a means of offence, but was to remain a purely defensive force, and that the whole power of our navy was to be wasted in defending the arsenals and dockyards. (Hear.) As to the expense of the fortifications at Portsmouth, he believed that £1,120,000 would be required for the coast defences, and £BOO,OOO for those on land. The estimates of the commission had, however, been purposely made large to cover contingencies. Colonel DICKSON objected to the expenditure for land defences, on the ground that they were entirely unneces sary, except in case of a successful invasion, which he thought was perfectly illusory. The subject was not one upon which they ought to pay regard to expense, but their object should be to place at the service of the country the largest available army and artillery. He deprecated the mode in which the royal commissioners had conducted their inquiry, and expressed a strong opinion that too great pro minence had been given to the sea defences of the country. It was ridiculous to suppose that a sum of £2,000,000 would adequately provide for the defence of the country as suggested by the commissioners, and he was afraid that even £20,000,000 !would be short of the mark. He ap pealed to the noble lord at the head of the Government not to mislead the house, and wished to know whether any reliance was to be placed on the peaceful pro fessions of the Emperor of the French; and if so, why at this particular period the defence of the country became a question of such extreme urgency. The political position of Europe was very different now from what it was in the time of the first Napoleon. No one master mired swayed the destinies of the continent; but, on the contrary, it was generally admitted that the first man who wantonly disturbed the peace of Europe, would render himself the common enemy of mankind. (Hear, hear.) His own opinion was that the best way to provide for the de fence of the country was to increase the standing army. As they increased in wealth, and their colonies became more important, and looking at the state of the world, it would be necessary for them to increase their army, and therefore it was to be expected that their estimates would be proportionately increased, but the fortifications in ques tion ought not to make any very large addition to their estimates. An addition of £600,000 would be sufficient to provide for 20,000 men, but he-thought 10,000 or 15,000 men additional, with a small quantity of militia regularly trained, together with the militia reserve and the volun teers, would enable them to bring a large and powerful army into the field at a moment's notice. (Hear.) The hon. and gallant member reminded the house that an in vasion could not take place without some intimation of that kind being immediately known to the Government, when there would be ample time for preventing it and of throw ing up hasty earthworks on those points of the coast which might be invadel. (Hear.) He thought it would have been better to have had half a dozen entrenched camps at diffe rent parts of the country, instead of one, as at present, at Aldershot. (Hear.) Lord ELCIIO said he wished to tender his best thanks to the noble lord at the head of the Government for the course he had thought it right to pursue in reference to this question, and he hoped the noble lord would not be induced to relax in his purpose of putting the country in a thorough state of defence by the erping criticisms which the measure now before the house lima undergone. (Hear.) The inhabi tants of this peace-lolpg land had for the last 12 months been organising and tilling themselves till a volunteer army of 138,000 men had sprung into existence. (Hear.) That movement had met with the approval of the Queen and of all classes of her subjects. (Hear.) The hon. and gal lant gentleman opposite (Col. Dickson) seemed to imply that it was the result of a panic, but he (Lord Elcho) utterly repudiated any such idea. Col. DICKSON said he wished to explain that what he stated was not that it had arisen from a panic, but that the feeling bad grown up from the injudicious fostering by high authorities of that idea. Lord ELCHO continued. He could assure the hon. and gallant gentleman that the volunteer movement was not the result of a panic —(hear, hear)—but it arose from a deep sense of shame that a country like this should be liable to panics. (Haar, hear.) Not that there was any immi nent danger of en invasion by France, or Russia, or any other continental power, but from a belief that in the event of such being attempted this country was not in that state of preparedness that it ought to be in. They had been liv ing in what he might term a " fool's paradise," and so far from being able to repel, the state of the country was caleu • lated to invite, invasion. (Hear.) The volunteer movement was, therefore, the result of a feeling that prompted many to distrust an alliance as a means of protection to this coun try, and they determined that England should rest in secu rity not on the forbearance of any foreign potentate, but on her own inherent strength alone. (Hear.) He believed the volunteers were determined to go on and persevere in the movement till the country should bo placed in a thorough state of defence. (Hear, hear.) The cause which had led to the organisation of the volunteer force and the feeling in reference to it, bore strongly on the question under discus sion, and the same feeling which had led the people to vo luniker ought to lead the house to support the Government, and induce thorn to pursue that course which competent authorities had decided was necessary to give this country that feeling of security which all so much desired. (Hear, hear.) The objection to the measure had come from pro fessional and amateur professional men—the hon. and gal lant admiral the member for Southwark had urged the house to decide that nothing would be so good as an effi. cent navy, but the hon. and gallant member opposite (Col. Dickson) had advocated a standing army. The hon. and learned member for Marylebone had come out in anew cha racter, viz., that of engineer, and had stated to the house that these defences were unnecessary. Mr. E. JAMES said he had done nothing of the sort. He had only asked for information relative to these pro posed works, and the expense of them. Lord ELCHO said if the hon. and learned gentleman's motion did not imply it, there was not much point in it. He (Lord E Icho) hoped the Government would persevere with the measure. He believed the Emperor of the French wished to be on good terms with this country, and the best way for him to support the letter which he had lately written was to express his readiness to join this country in any course that humanity and justice might point out with regard to Syria, and in endeavouring to build up a strong power in Italy. (Hear, hear.) He wished to see England so strong that she could say that no one should interfere with Italy, and that the Italians should manage their own affairs. (Hear, hear.) If the Emperor of the French in tended to pursue that course, it would be the duty of Eng land to join him, but they must not forget the aggressive tendency of the Fronch people, and they should be on their guard. The empire that commenced with peace had been engaged in bloody wars, and they must not forget the recent absorption of Savoy and Nice. (Hear.) He considered the measure before the house, if carried out, would give strength to the country, and therefore he should cordially support it. Capt. JERVIS wished to ask the hon. and learned mem ber for Marylebone what was the meaning of his resolution. The simple question for the consideratipn of the house was whether or not they would keep up with the progress of science in reference to engineering and defence. If the hon. and learned member wanted to know the sum total of each work he would find it in the report, or if he wanted the sum total of all the works he would see it in the report, which gave fully all the details required. (Hear.) Mr. MONSELL was surprised to hear the noble lord be low him speak of the former debate as one of carping criti- clam of the measure before the house. Every hon. member wished to see the country placed in a proper state ofdefence, but at the same time they wished to know whether the sys tem proposed had been brought forward on sufficient autho rity or not. (Hear.) That he maintained was the real ques tion, and which the house was capable of deciding. The hon. and gallant member for Harwich on a former occasion expressed his dissent to the fortifications at Portsmouth, yet voted for the motion. Captain JERVIS said he did not Tote at all. Mr. MONSELL said every military man of experience in the house had spoken against the land defences. The hon. and gallant member for Chatham (Sir F. Smith) had spoken serongly against the Portsmouth defences, but he had not the courage to support his opinions by his vote. All the dis tinguished men connected with the engineers and artillery were opposed to the proposed plan of the Government, and that ought to have considerable weight with the Go vernment before they proceeded further with it. He con tended that there was no injustice in their asking the Government to take a little mere military evidence before they proceeded to act upon the report of the commission. Let the Government show that their proposals were really for the defence of the country, and the house would no doubt be ready to vote double the money that was now asked. But the commissioners had evidently not paid that attention to the details which artillery officers would have done. For instance, they contented themselves with merely giving an estimate for the 2,600 guns which they proposed to mount, and which they thought would cost £500,000 ; but they said nothing about ammunition ; whereas 300 rounds of ammunition for eaeh gun (and the proper number would be 500) would cost not less than £1,250,000. (Hear, hear.) Great stress had been laid upon the report of the military committee ; but he believed every one would agree that the aggregate opinion of a number of military officers collected together under the presidency of his Royal Highness the Commander-in-Chief was of less value than the independent evidence of any one of them examined separately would have been. (Hear, hear.) He hoped the Government would not expend any money upon the land fortifications without at least further investigation. (Hear, hear.) Sir DE L. EVANS should not have addressed the house but for a remark which had fallen from his right hon. friend who had just sat down. His right hon. friend said that every military man in the house was opposed to the measure. Mr. MONSELL—Every military man that had spoken. Sir DE L. EVANS—WeII, it came to pretty much the same thing. (A laugh.) Now as he (the gallant general) was the humble individual who had proposed the commis - sion, it would be extraordinary if he did not to a certain extent support its recommendations. On the day that the present Government came into office he went into the War-office in Pall •mall, and stated that he had two motions which he intended to propose. He was told that the right hon. gentleman the Secretary of State would not return from Wiltshire till the Ist of • July. Accordingly, on that day he went again and told the right hon. gentleman what his two motions were —namely, a motion for the abolition of purchase in the army (to which he certainly looked for the right hon. gen tleman's support), and a motion for the appointment of a commission t.• examine into the whole subject of national defences. The right hon. gentleman requested him to put both of them off until he had had an opportunity of consult ing his noble friend at - the head of the Government. That request was repeated several times, until at last, on the 25th, he (the gallant general) would wait no longer. The right hon. gentleman then told him that the Government were entirely of the same opinion as to the national de fences, and that they would recommend her Majesty to appoint the commission. With regard to the appointment of the commissioners he agreed to a certain extent with his right hon. friend (Mr. M onsell) ; and thought tha,t though there were some excellent men upon it, there were others who might have been replaced by meu of more authority. He agreed that the artillery portion of the question seemed to have been almost entirely forgotten, and indeed he might remark that on many other occasions the valuable assistance that artillery officers would be able to afford had been overlooked. There was indeed one very clever officer on the commission—a very able man and a great astronomer, too, but then that gallant gentleman had never seen an enemy. In a word he (Sir De L. Evans) could not but feel that a great mistake had been committed in not placing upon the commission some eminent artillerists who had had experience of actual warfare. (Hear, hear.) Looking over the report, however, he must say that it seemed to him to be the production of men of sense, and to be entitled tp the support of the house. The Secretary for War had stated that though the Government intended to carry out its general features they would deviate from some of its details, as they had done, for instance, in substituting five towers or works for the eight proposed by the commis sioners to be constructed on Portsdown-hill. Under all the circumstances of the case he (the hon. and gallant member) should give his support to the second reading of the bill, and he must say that lie did not see any great advantage in the house proceeding to criticise the minute details of the scheme. (Hear, hear.) Sir F. SMITH said the hon. and learned gentleman who had proposed the amendment had in the papers on the table all the information for which he asked. If, however, he had framed the resolution differently, and had proposed to omit for the present the land fortifications, he had no doubt that the hon. gentleman would have obtained the support of the house. (Hear, hear.) For his own part he could not imagine any greater absurdity than the works on Portsdown Hill. In the event of a war, works could be thrown up in a fortnight sufficient to de fend the heights against an enemy, and at a tenth of the expense now proposed. (Hear, hoar.) Let the Govern ment spend the money for which they had obtained the vote of the house upon the sea fortifications, and let them, at all events, take further evidence before they proceeded with those on the land side of Portsmouth. Let them ask the opinion of men like Lord Seaton—men who had com manded armies, and he was quite sure that they would give up fear the present the works on Portsdown Hill. As for the sea defences, they could not be begun too soon, or carried on too rapidly. (Hear.) Mr. B. OSBORNE thought the noble lord the founder of the volunteers—(cheers)—he meant the term as a compli • ment—(hear, hear)—had been rather unfair to his hon. and learned friend the mover of the amendment. The report of the commissioners was obviously imperfect, and the evi dence upon whieh the house was called upon to act was excessively scanty. He (Mr. Osborne) had asked the noble lord the other night why this important subject had been only introduced at the end of the session ; and the noble lord, while he managed to choke off the question, had se dulously evaded any attempt to give it an answer. Why was this scheme not brought forward till August, the . Government having had the report of the commission in their hands since February ? Another question he should like to ask was, why,'when this question was brought for ward, was the Chancellor of the Exchequer always absent? There was his right hon. friend the member for Ashton (Mr. M. Gibson), who in 1858 brought forward a plan for cutting down the estimates altogether, w h en this question of national defence was brought forward always cut his stick. (Laughter.) The noble lord opposite had tendered his thanks to the noble lord at the head of the Government for proposing the expenditure of these nine millions. He (Mr. Osborne) was inclined to tender him his thanks also, but for a different reason, for in the present temper of the house, he believed that if the noble lord were to propose to erect a China wall round London the house would agree to it. It was easy to see how these panics were created. Cabinet ministers got up and made speeches calculated to create panics. In the course of the day a pamphlet had been put into his hands by a general officer of distinction—Sir Dm.- can Macdougal—on the French plan of invasion and tho de fences of Great Britain, from which the house would see the way in which panics were created. Sir D. Macdougal said, " The revelations I am about to make will show the neces sity of no time being lost in calling into operation the ele ments of our national defences. A committee of French officers have worked out a special plan for the attack of Lon- ' don, a copy of extracts from which was placed in the hands of one of our ministers in October." He should like to ask if this were true, becaue if it were that would make a mate rial difference in his vote. The pamphlet went on .to say the plan was to take London in 1863, and to stop in it for three days. But what did the gallant general say of the plan of the commission? He said, " Instead of expending enormous sums of money on fortifications of dockyards and arsenals, I maintain that all that is necessary is to place them in a state of security against a coup de main." The Government, however, were going to build forts on Ports down Hill. Now, after the speech of the gallant member opposite (Sir F. Smith), who was one of the most distin guished engineering officers in the country, he thought they ought not to hear anything more about carping criticism. But they were talking about estimates. Let the house remember what estimates were. The estimate for erecting that building was £760,000 ; it had cost three millions. The estimate of the China war at the beginning of this session was £850,000. It was now three millions. Sir John Burgoyne, before the commission, gave an opinion decidedly hostile to these land fortifications, and every criticism that had been written by either foreign or English generals had been given against the plan of the commission. He thought the house ought to pause before they involved themselves in a ruinous expenditure in land fortifications which the evidence given before the commis. aion told them were of no avail, and which engineering offi cers in the house told them were not called for ; and he did not think the house ought to be satisfied with the Prime Mini ster getting up and joking away the objections. They were a Home of Commons sitting there to control the expendi ture. It was all very well talking about the responsibility of Government. What would be done with the Government if at the end of five years it was found that the money had all been wasted ? Why just nothing at all. Engineering officers recommended the erection of the martello towers, and the house supported the Minister who proposed them. Some millions were spent on them, and they were found to be utterly useless. He had always drawn a distinction be tween land fortifications and fortifications of the seaboard, and he thought the house and Government ought to pause before they committed themselves to the expenditure of millions of money for land fortifications. Sir M. PETO said they had heard from no person who was competent to give an opinion any approval of this scheme of the Government ; and the hon. and gallant mem ber for Chatham, than whom no one was more capable of giving an opinion, said that the defences at Portedown Hill might be constructed in fourteen days, which had always been his (Sir M. Peto's) opinion. He thought the course Government should have pursued in this matter should not have been simply that of taking such a report as that of the defence commission, but they should have had the evi dence of all the first men in the country, and upon that evidence they should have presented a complete scheme for the fortification of the arsenals and all the other points which demanded attention at their hands. They should not have asked for a sum of money for defences which were acknowledged to be incomplete. While he had been in the house he had seen the greatest evils produced from their voting sums of money with out their having proper estimates and plans. Wherever fortifications had been attempted, nothing had been executed worthy of the confidence of the country or of the engineering profession. The house would readily vote any sum that might be shown to be necessary, but there was no reason for haste. Let the Government prepare a matured plan before next session, and it would be cheerfully voted. It was agreed both by military and civil engineers that a sufficient defence of earthworks might be constructed in a few days. We were now spending a million and a half in ships that were to be shot-proof. If they were found to. answer, there would be a large expenditure on that class of ships; and this was another reason for not incurring this large outlay on land fortifications. A sum of £15),000 was asked for a great central arsenal. Such a sum ought not to be voted without a proper estimate. There was no oc casion whatever for precipitancy. He was told that the only thing now doing in Cherbourg dockyard was the re pair of Prince Napoleon's yacht ; and he believed that in our dockyards there were three times the number of men that were employed in all the French dockyards. Mr. WHITE said the impression ont of doors was that this matter had been brought forward to divert the atten tion of the people from the infringements of their rights in another place, and to cloak the pusillanimous conduet of the Government in regard to that infringement. (Hear.) The most wasteful expenditure had been going on at Dover, Alderney, and elsewhere, especially on the south coast. An artillery officer expressed the opinion that £lOO,OOO had been wasted on the Sussex coast. At Littlehampton a fort had been built on a boggy soil. At Shoreham and New haven the batteries were so built that the guns would not work ; and every one knew that hey were of no use. The Secretary for War had misquoted the opinion of Napoleon as to fortifications ; what he really alluded to was field works, in which he said there had been no improvement for 2,000 years. The measure of the strength of any fortification was only that of its weakest part, which was sure to be found out and assailed by an enemy. He had such confidence in the people that he believed no evil result would follow from an invasion. Noble lords appeared to fear the people more than they did French invaders. He did not believe that our institutions would be imperilled by putting arms in the hands of the people. They would be prepared to defend everything that was valuable in the constitution. Before voting this sum for fortifications, the Government ought to have fully developed the militia force and given greater encouragement to the volunteers. In the last war we had as many as 470,000 volunteers. Till these mea sures were taken he certainly should object to the vote now proposed. There had been a dominant party in this coun try known for their anti-Gallican and absolutist tendencies. That party might again.come into power, and by furnish ing them with these fortifications the present Government would only give them the means of indulging their aggres sive propensities. Lord PALMERSTON—I had hoped that after so de cided a manifestation of opinion on this subject as was given on a recent occasion, we should not have been led into a renewed discussion. We have heard the greatest possible diversity of sentiment on the present occasion, and if it be the fact that " Truth is one and error is infinite," I might compare the settled opinions of the Government in this matter with the diversity of the views entertained by the various members who have addressed the house. (Laughter.) The hon. member for Liskeard complained of delay on this subject, and he also complained of me for having brought the matter forward myself ; but I thought this was an imperial and not a departmental question, and that, as such, it was one which the head of the Government ought to submit to the house. The member for Finsbury took a different line, and complained of the precipitation with which we had brought this matter forward—(laugh ter)—and that we had no definite plan. But so far from having brought it forward precipitately, we did so only after repeated examinations, and, so far from not being a definite plan, we have brought forward that which is a de finite plan—a plan of great detail. It is curious to see the different views which the different members take in this matter. All, however, think defences necessare . (Hear, hear.) The member for Limerick, although he began by saying that we might trust the friendship of . foreign Powers, and that there was no possible danger of a hostile attack upon this country, yet, towards the conclusion of his observations he admitted that some additional force was necessary, only he preferred ad ditional troops rather than fortifications. It is curious to see the different views which members take according to their various lines of thought. Military men would have us to add to the regular army, forgetting that that woul.l be, perhaps, as expensive as these fortifications ; and it would have to be renewed year after year. (Hear.) It would compel us, moreover, to keep up an unnecessarily large military establishment in the time of peace. My hon. and learned friend the member for Southwark is for ships. He says that, if we will give him ships enough, he will an chor off Portsmouth and off Plymouth, and that, whatever may happen, our interests in these parts of the world shall be safe. Then come the lawyers. (Laughter.) They have been modest. (Laughter.) They have not stated their recipe. (Hear, hear.) But I suppose they would meet the enemy with an injunction—(laughter)—or issue against him a writ of ne exeat regno—that is, not go out of his own kingdom. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Now, these may be mighty good notions ; but I think that the majority of those who listened to the debate of the other evening will be inclined to 'think that after all permanent defences are the cheapest and the most effectual for the purpose. We have been told that we might as well at tempt to surround the island with a Chinese wall. (Hear, hear.) But we do not pretend to fortify the whole of the coasts of our island ; it would be absurd to think of it; but only those vulnerable points—those dockyards and arsenals which are the cradle of the naval power of this country, and which, if destroyed, would place us at the mercy of any poenr which has the means of arm ing a fleet for sea. It is said that we might defend them against the sea, but it was not necessary to defend them on the land side. But they must be defended at whatever point they could be attacked upon. (Hear, hear.) My hon. friend has told us that nothing is stronger than its weakest part. I thank the h( n gentle man for teaching me that word. (Laughter.) If you protect them by sea, we must protect them by land also. Every body admits that it is impossible to prevent a landing being effected on our shores, three or four hundred miles of our coast being available for that purpose. One of the argu ments against these fortifications was their inefficiency, and we were told that we ought to fortify London. But what does this imply? Does it not involve the admission that a landing is possible ? The member for Finsbury tells us that the requisite earthworks could be constructed in a fort night. But these fieldworks must have a sufficient force behind them before they can be made available, and nothing could prevent a large force in such a case from overpower ing- a small fejrce. What we want, however, is works of that permanent nature which will enable a small body of men to hold out against a larger body of men at least for some time. (Hear, hear) No man who understands the history of war, and who has a knowledge of fortifications, will tell me that our defences, as they now exist, are cap able of resisting a superior force. But the great objections which have been raised to-night to the proposal of the Go veanment, was to the works which it is proposed to con struct for the defence of Portsmouth. Well, now, I would ask any man who understands the destructive power of Mulls whether they could not be thrown front Portsclown hill int* Pertsmouth, if the former position should be taken ► by an enemy ? How many thousand yards between Ports down-hill and Portsmouth F Why, an enemy in possession of PoTtsdown-hill could to a certainty take Portsmouth. There are, however, a class of persons who say that an enemy in possession of Portsdown-hill could not damage Portsmouth with round shot. Well, but the damage to be done would not be by round shot, but the damage to be done would be by shells—(hear, hear)—which they could easily throw into the dockyard from that place. Mr. OSBORNE—How are they to get there ? Lord PALMERSTON—I am astonished, I must say, at the opinions entertained by some gentlemen upon that point. Why, unless Portsdown.-hill were impregnable, an enemy might land to the eastward or to the westward of it. But from conversations which I have had with expe rienced men, Portsdown-hill is at this moment absolutely a weak point. We are, however, told that the apprehension is the result of a panic. Now, my opinion is, that if we have not sufficient naval strength to defend Portsmouth, we should not fail to fortify Portsdown-hill. We are told that our panic was founded upon a suspicion of the designs of a neighbouring Power; but it is no such thing. The proposal is not founded upon any particular distrust of any nation, but upon the deliberate opinion that this great country ought to be in a condition at all times to defend its vulnerable points, and that the more we are in a position to repel attacks, the greater will be the security for the con tinuance of peace. (Hear.) The :hon. gentleman who spoke last night said that the Government is distrustful of the people. Now that is a strange accusation to make, seeing that they had already 130,000 volunteers into whose hands the Government have put arms, and they will be doubled in number in the course of the next twelve months. (Hear, hear.) Well, now the object of the fortificatio;;;; that with a small number of men behind them you can de fend the dockyards, and liberate the rest of your force to take the field. (Hear, hear.) My right hon friend the Se cretary of State for War said to-night that if you have not those fortifications, you must have a vastly increased num ber of men to defend your dockyards, so that, in fact, their construction would be an economical application of those resources of the country. (Hear, hear.) I trust the house will not reverse, or in any way impair the vote which passed the other evening, and that if my hon. and learned friend insist upon going to a division, that the house will show they are systematically and deliberately of opinion that it is necessary to defend the country, and that the proposed works should be constructed, and in as short a time as possible. The house then divided on the amendment that it is necessary the house should have further information as to the cost of the sea and land defences before proceeding fur ther with the bill, and the numbers were— For the amendment Against it Majority against —lll The bill was then read a second time. SUPPLY.—THE ORDNANCE MAP. On the motion. that the house resolve itself into a com• mittee of supply, Sir S. M. PETO moved "that it is expedient to discon. tinue the Ordnance Survey on the 25-inch scale till the sun vey on the 1-inch scale shall have been completed and pub. lished." Mr. S. HERBERT said it would perhaps shorten the discusssion of the question if he were to state what the Go- vernment proposed to do. His hon. friend appeared to mis take the object of the 25 or of the 6-inch survey. It was one thing to constract a map, and another to make a cadastre. The latter was the object of the 25-inch survey. He did not see why this expenditure should be in the army esti mates at all ; because it would certainly be valuable as affording facilities in courts of law, and for the valuation of estates, a purpose for which the 1-inch scale was insufficient. By the introduction of machinery for stamping, and other machinery, he thought the cost might be considerably les.. sened, and that the 25-inch scale would be little more costly than the 6-inch, while it would be more effective for its purpose. The 25-inch contained the 6-inch scale, to which it could easily be reduced, whereas the contrary process was not possible. The Government proposed to discontinue this year the Opening of any new ground, whether upon the 6or upon the 25-inch scale. They wanted all their force this year for military surveys. They proposed, therefore, merely to finish the survey of the counties which had already been begun, and which were, he believed, the four nor thern counties. It had been proposed to commence the sur vey in the south of England this year, and to work on to the north, but that plan the Government proposed now to arrest. Between this and next year the Government would have time to consider the question, and Parliament could pronounce a deliberate opinion as to whether the survey on the large scale should be proceeded with, and to what ex tent. (Hear, hear.) After a short discussion the amendment was withdrawn, and the house went into committee of supply. The first was a vote of £100,440 for the maintenance of the royal parks and pleasure grounds. Sir J. V. SHELLEY objected to the vote, as it had been understood it was not to be proposed. The vote was withdrawn. THE GALWAY MAIL CONTRACT. Mr. S. LAING, in rising to propose the next vote, which was for the Galway packet service subsidy, said the subject was one of considerable importance and interest, and as no tice had been given to oppose the motion, it might be pro per he should state the precise position of the Government with respect to it. A contract was entered into on the 21st April last year, by the late Government, with a company called the Atlantic Royal Mail Steam-packet Company, for the conveyance of the mails across the Atlantic. That con tract was duly signed, sealed, and executed between the re presentatives of the company and those of the late Govern ment. It was in the usual form, with the exception of one circumstance, to which he should advert, viz., the introduc tion of the words "out of moneys to be voted by Parlia ment," in specifying the subsidy to be paid to the company. The contract in question excited a good deal of interest at the time, and on the reassembling of Parliament it excited considerable discussion in that house, but no resolution was brought forward for the purpose either of confirming or in validating it. On the motion of the Government, however, a select committee was appointed to investigate the mat ter, together with other mail contracts, in reference to the mode in which they should for the future be carried out. That committee entered into a lengthened investigo tion, and ultimately, with regard to the Dover contract, recommended that the money should not be voted. On the question of the Galway contract, however, the com mittee made two propositions, but in neither of them did they offer any recommendation as to the withholding of the money. No proceedings having been instituted, there fore, during the last session of Parliament that deterred them from the undertaking, the company entered into con tracts for building four large steamers, at a cost of £480,000, which had now been nearly got ready. One was already per forming the service between Galway and America, another was launched and would be ready to start at the beginning of next month ; the third would also be ready next month, and the fourth was in a state of considerable forwardness. Just before the contract commenced an arrangement was proposed, to which he might advert, for the transfer of this service to the Canadian Government. The transfer fell to the ground, not being sanctioned by her Majesty's Govern ment ; for though it was felt to be of importance as concili ating the interests of Canada, which had to a great extent been overlooked, in the original arrangement, yet, in going into the details of the proposed transfer, they were found to involve so much new matter. such as the substitution of screw for paddle ships, the times of their arrival and sailing, and the penalties, as to render it substantially almost a new contract. The Government, moreover, felt themselves so pledged to the house not to grant new contracts of this kind without public competition, that they were unable to give their sanction to it. In dealing with the Galway Company, therefore, there was this simple statement of facts. There was a contract beyond doubt legally binding, and a commit tee of the house had reported without making any recom mendation affecting its validity. The company themselves had thereupon entered into engagements involving an ex penditure of half a million of money, and they were in a position, so far as the Government knew, to carry out their undertaking. There could be no decisive ground for break ing the contract, because the company might be a few weeks more in getting their four vessel* ready. If the con tract was to be broken, it should be broken on some broader ground than that ; and under those circumstances he ima gined every one would be of opinion that the Government had no other course before them than to fulfil the obligations they had entered into. Mr. BOUVERIE opposed the vote, urging that by the terms of the contract the subsidy was dependent on the sanction of Parliament, and it was postponed last year for the purpose of inquiring into the facts ; and therefore the house had a right to deal with it as they should think fit. The expenditure was a needless one, as there was already a contract with the Cunard line to perform this very postal service. He had felt it his duty to investigate this subject of the paid-up shares, and had moved for a return, which had been laid upon the table of the house, and which hon. gentlemen would do well to consult. It would be seen that the company had nothing whatever to do with two of the I ships which the hon. member for Galway described as Fe -1 longing to them, they having been, in fact, mortgaged to two clerks of a London capitalist to guarantee a current account. (Hear.) Up to that time it was a bubble company, perfectly incapable of performing what it had undertaken. The new ship now on it s vo y age b e t ween America and Galway had b een mor t gage d to th e b u ilders for the full of its value, or rather it had not been paid for at all. He could not understand Lord Derby's conduct except on poli tical grounds. The date of the contract was April 21, and on the 19th of April Parliament had dissolved. He did not scruple to say that this was an election job on a gigantic scale. (Hear, hear, and Oh, oh.) The whole of the ev i deuce warranted him in saying so. The house ought there fore to refuse to ratify and fulfil such a contract. It would be cheaper and better to pay off all the shareholders than to fulfil the contract, for the share capital was only £500,000, whereas they would have to pay them £546,000 during the next seven years. Mr. WHITESIDE said the right hen, gentleman had made a charge of this kind last year, but failed then from the same cause that he failed now —he forgot the facts by which hisy L ord r allegationserby signed could thisbe contract.substantiated. ir asked wb He answered, because because he was the First Lord of the Treasury. But it ;seemed that it was wrong for the Prime Minister to do . _— what it was perf e ctly r i g h t for a Secretary of the Treasury to do. He referred to the case of the European and Australian Company's contract, which was entered into by Mr. Wilson, and which he described as worse than this Galway business. In the passage from Galway there was no instance in which the vessel had failed. As to Lord Derby having done all this—as to taking up this subject on the eve of an election—that was an entire delusion, for the subject had been under consideration for the 10 or 12 years. An American gentleman then said— " Give the matter to me, for you'll never get it carried out to the advantage of Ireland." But was it not a most irra tional argument to say that the communications to Ireland should be carried past that country, instead of being brought, as they ought to be, direct to Ireland ? As re garded the contract itself, the sum was moderate, and it was of great importance to Ireland to have speedy commu nication with a country which to Ireland was more impor tant than to any other country in Europe. When the line from Galway to Belfast was completed the journey could be made in three hours or less, and that would be a great ad vantage to the linen trade of the north of Ireland, to say nothing of other matters. There was no corruption in the agency, as he ascertained it to be in operation. The matter had been legally inquired into, and £l,OOO were proved to have been given, but the verdict was not worth one far thing. Mr. Lover had certainly shown great activity in the matter, but he did not know very much of Ireland. The real fact was, Ireland was entitled to the contract, and a more wise decision could not be come to than that which would establish the communication between Ireland and America, inasmuch as it was the most rapid, most desirable, and best and safest communication that could be between England and the United States. (Hear, hear.) Mr. CRAWFORD was anxious to say a few words, with a view of drawing the attention of the Government to a point which had considerable weight with him in the committee upstairs. The contract was dated the 12th of April last year; and by its conditions the company bound themselves in the sum of £20,000 by way of ad pulated forfeit if their ships should not be ready. He thought Ireland had a right to obtain the contract if she could get it in fair competition ; but, as the question now stood, he should give his vote for the £60,000 proposed in the esti mates. Had the contract been dependent upon the decision of Parliament, such decision should have been taken before the company got to work and incurred expense. He should, however, give his vote for the sum of £60,000 now proposed. Sir F. BARING regretted that the chairman who pre sided over the committee upstairs was not now in the house, as he could throw much light upon this matter. He was not at all surprised at the speech which the right hon. and learned gentleman opposite had made in favour of the com munication between Ireland and America, as the most pre ferable one; but if the contract should not be kept, he hoped Government would at least put it up to competition, and then let Galway and other places come in and put in their tenders for it. That would be all fair, and he should have no objection to see Ireland have her fair chance in the corn petition. He thought, however, that faith ought to be kept with the company to whom promises had been given, and who had given guarantees to carrythe contract out. (Hear.) There ought to have been on the part of the late Govern" went the greatest care that all the parties should have beau heard, but they had heard that that had not been the case. There had been no strict inquiry, as was promised by Lord Derby. There had net been even the usual inquiry. (Hear.) The effect of the words introduced inte the eontract had been to warn parties that Parliament might object to the contract, and the parties had so understood these words. He quite admitted that there was a difficulty in the W er t inasmuch as Mr. Lever had handed over his interest to an" other company, and there might be innocent shareholder , / but he could not hold that that precluded Parliamen t from dealing with the subject. I here was, however, a most important principle involved, because it was the duty of Parliament to look sharp and keep contracts cleats There might be inconvenience to parties, but if Parliament could not interfere, how could it prevent jobbing ? Mr. DISRAELI thought the right hon. gentleman the member for Portsmouth could not accuse him as having, prevented discussion. He ass en t e d t o th e i n t ro d uc ti o n 01 the words, the special language in the contract, which had been alluded to, but he had no intention that this subjec t should be decided upon other grounds than its genera l merits of benefit to Ireland. (Hear, hear.) The arrange' ment was long and well considered. The decision was mature one—that it was for the welfare of the country a l !: of the kingdo m a t l arge t h at the arrangement shou ld entered into. Nor could he agree that the terms of it were improvident or unusual. The right hon. gentleman the member for Kilmarnock said it had been carried out 1 113 ‘ usually ; but that statement was directly in opposition 0 the evidence of Mr. Stevenson before the select committe e ' to the effect that that business was always left in the haul of the financial secretary o f th e T reasury. Th at was 31° altogether the fact, altho ug h it was near l y so fi r see t io years past, and that result h a d p ro d uce d grea t an d g ene ei 0 dissatisfaction. It was on such an o ccas i on th a t th e Frie l .. Minister examined the whole of the papers presented.; him, but those which related t o th e un d ers t an di n g °l the Canadian Government w ere a b sen t. Th e _record of er. that understanding at the Tre asur y was extremely ed feet, but, however that was to be regretted, he maisttall .. that a better arrange men t cou ld no t b e ma d e . Th e Pri m ' ciple of competition in reference to these contracts O l t subject to some modificati on , an d a certa i n a mour' of discretion respecting them was vested in the vernment. (Cheers, and cries of " Oh.") Well, if could show that exorbitant and improvident terms bad been conceded, the contract wou ld b e open t o censure °aoo ta that ground ; but they c ou ld no t. Th en w i t h re gard the corrupt motive of the Government. The charge , made in loud terms, but did no t on th a t accoun t posse:, strength, for it could be disproved by thi s s i mp l e fact th the Treasury minute was signed on the 27th of Febril before a dissolution of Parliament was even dreamt (Cheers from the Conservatives.) I n su pp or t o f the cos tract he bad received a memorial fr om eminent merelo.,,llo and bankers of London, headed with th e name o f RO I " child, and not only from London, but from the whole et; mercial community of the United Kingdom. This the corrupt proceeding which they were charged having entered into to promote their own political e x/ 00 , So far from that it was fully approved, as he had all° by the whole com merce : o f th e country . Th ere was , 10it „ .b. ever, a great deal of jeal o u s y i n cer t a i n p l aces aga i ns t IT red enterprise in any shape, but while S ou th am pt on reee l , £600,000 in subsidies, and Liverpool hundreds of thousa l 3 . .a distant Galway ought not t o b e env i e d thi s contraet,::, the conduct of the late Government oug ht no t t o have P .. ' impugned. (Cheers.) Mr. ROEBUCK said Mr. Bo uver i e h a d acc used se, ei body of corruption. As he (Mr. Roebuck) had n.egotist a ; this contract, he must have had something to do with 1 . 3 i w n a o rd r i s ce aw in him it. D an e d rh t y h . e other Ther p e a w rt a y s c a on d n is e g c ra ted ee wi at t t h ao t h h a e d b t ar o gaaninunwafnsuttlfir He a_; y a lr c w o neveraccu s a heardtion, a a n f d m r t h . e o r , e x w a s e court of justice, and that person had nothi ng to do 10 till in "" the contract. The committee divided at tw o o ' c l ock, and the 33--- no b()r0 were— For the vote 145 Against it .. 39 ...... Majority X lO6 The Chairman was then directed to report pregr e l and the house having resumed, he obtained leave to again. The Consolidated Fund (£10,000,000) Bill was rea d II second time. The Industrial Sch oo l s A c t (1847) Amendment B hil sc read a third time and passed. d The Titles to Land (S co tl an d) A c t (1858) Amenßi—Ali Bill passed through committee, an d was re p o rted, "" amendments, to the house. • ate The Land Loan and Enfran c hi semen t CompallY'- g 1860 (Mistake Rectifying) Bill was read a third time passed. The Attorneys, Solicitors, and Certificated Conver ine° Bill was, after a short discussion, postponed to this ditli j, THE CONJUGAL RIGHTS (SCOTLAND) BIL This bill was read a second time, it being agreed thet t clauses should be struck out in committee. THE RAILWAYS ACT, IRELAND (1851) MENT B. The Lords' amendments were lLL com3idered and agreed toe THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHARITIES BUD' This bill as amended was considered. AMMO ' THE METROPOLIS LOCAL MANAGEMENT of AMENDMENT BILL. The adjourned debate on the consideration of this ve • waa.resumed, but the fact of there being less than 40 nto bers present being called to the attention of the Spedl the right hon. gentleman counted the was adjourned house,andas t : t 12 members were present, the house w minutes to 3. BIRTHS. DORLING.—On s t o h n e . 7th inst., at Epsom, the wife o f 311.° Dorling, of a REEVE. —On the 7th inst., at 29 , Albermarle-streett 1011 wl ee p v ... , — e, O of n a th so e n 9 . th inst , at 35, Charles-street, a B e rkelel; square, the lady of Maj•r-General Robert Wood, daughter. M ARRIAGES. .• COTTON—READo—OII the Bth G 0 J . ` • inst., at St. George 'e Henry Morten Cotton, Esq . , o f Ecniftts square and Ch ancery -lane, to Emma Harriet, the or daughter of Francis. Read, Esq., of Upper Belgr s place, Pimlico. 1 111 WILXINS ON — v HANBURY.—On the 6th in s t , at St- SO. Church, Knightsbrid ge , Li eu t enant -C o l o n e l Hel l os Wilkinson, of the Scots Fusilier G uar d s , to the hot Louisa Catherine Bateman Hanbury, youngest dialg of the late and sister of the present Lord Batemall• DEATHS. ig; CAHLMA.NN.—On the Bth inst., at EastWi c kham, u'A e ' gj g ro Samson Cahlmann, of 13, Austin-friars, Consul -Gen" of Saxe-Weimar, aged 66. Aii gteh IMPEY.—On the 6th inst., at h er res id enc e, Bar eft Cottages, East Brixton, Fanny, relict of Admiral Ila aged 70. tot MORinst., GAN.—On the Bth at Harefield-grove , S tePP Morgan, Esq., aged 81. NicoL.l—On the Bth inst., in Ecclestnn-square, ga r g ar Dyce, wife of William Nicol, Esq ., M.P. _.......ig VOU C?. LONDON : Printed and Publi s h e d by M URDO of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun :Mee, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, 1,12, the 0 0 v Middleeex, Friday, August 10, 186(). To Kahl. I,_ Cone' M MI Ti To bf Chai r Colon Jame For f The