The Sun. — London, England, 1858-02-10 00:00:00

Ministers, but by the representative of France in this coun -4 gentleman well able to appreciate the force of public) feeling here, quick to observe, and faithful to submit his opinions as to the state of the public mind to the Emperor whom he serves,—the French Government, on being in formed of the view which was taken, and justly, by the English public with retard to these addresses, accounted for the insertion of such addresses in the _lfoniteur, and e xpressed their regret and the regret of the Emperor him self at their publication. (Some cries of Where ? wb"re ?") The argument as to time founded upon these addressees appears to me wholly to fail, unless it can be shown that the amendment or alteration of the law which we propose is itself objectionable, or unless it can be main tai ued that the law as it at present stands is sufficient to deter from the commission of these offences; and unless we can with a safe conscience assure foreign Governments that the law is strong enough to accomplish the object we desire s Walewski, expressing effect. The hon. and learned gen tleman oppo site expressed a hope that the despatch of Count h expressing the regret of the Emperor, which was referred r to last night by my noble friend, will be laid before ali went. I can assure the hen. gentl ema n but as it is a ;n that that des patch will be laid before P ar liament at once abort document perhaps the House will perm it me now to read a translation of it. (Hear-) It is a despatch to Count Walewsli to Count Tersigny, dated "Purls, Feb. 6, 1855," and in these terms : "M. le Comte, —The account you gave me of the effect pro 1 d in England by t he insertion in the Moaiteur of certain a ddresses from the army has not escaped my atten tion, and I have made a report of it tdithe Emperor. You Ihr , aware of the sentiments by which we have been ieflu d in the steps we have adpted with Her Britannic jej e esty's Government on the occasion of the attack of the 34th January, and of the care we hare taken, in applying for its concurrence, to avoid everything that could bear the A ppearance of pressure on our part. All our communica ei•lns manifest our confidence in its sincerity (loyaute), and our deference for the initiative being taken by it ; and if, in the enthusiastic manifestations of the levotion of the army, words have possibly oeen ieserted whi h have seemed in Zugland to be characterised by a different sentiment, they are too much opposed to the language which the Emperor's Government has net ceased to hold to that of her Britannic Ifajesty for it to be possible to attribute them t o anything else than inadvertence caused by the number of those ad. d resses. The Emperor enjoins you to say to Lord Clarendon bow much he regrets it. (Loud cheeks from both sides of the house.) I authorise you to give a copy of this despatch to the Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affeirs. I think that letter or despatch, which I trust from the cheers with which it has been received is satisfactory to the house--(renerwed cheers)—shows that no valid objec tion can be made to the introduction of this bill at the pre sent time on account of the insertion of certain addresses 11 the Moniteur by what appear to have been acts of inad vertence on the part of the Government of France. (Soma tries of " No, no.") I hope, for the reasons I have stated, that the house will agree to the introduction of this bill, and that the debate will be continued in the same calm and temperate tone in which I am happy to say it has been commenced. Mr. BOVILL saki that the proposed bill could not be nsideeed as a measure of ordinary legislation, but intro duced under the exigencies of the case, and founded upon the despatch of Count Walewski, which was not couched in courteous or resi ectful language. If the law required amendment, and the bill had been introduced solely for that object as a measure of law reform, why had it not been includei in the list of bills it was intended to conso lidate and amend, of which the Solicitor-General had given notice? It appeared to him this could not be consi dered as a measure of law reform, but one based on Count Walewski's deapatcb; and it would be an admission of the statements therein contained, which ought to have met with a dignified denial from her Majesty's Government. (Hear.) Couched in language similar e to that of Lord Hawkesburyn in ln:13, ho enntenelen th bill wee nee re quired, and it alas the den. of Ler nieje.hye, uev ee.o ment to have first put the present law in force, and on finding it defective, then have come to Parliament with the present bill. He considered this bi , l would be as powerless as the present law, because the difficulty of proving overt acts requisite before convicting of conspiracy would be as great then as now. More stringent measures would not deter persons who risked all they possessed to accomplish their ends, and it was only deluding the Em peror of the French to pass this bill under the impression that it would give him additioual security or comply with the demands he had made on this country. It would have been much better had the French Government been told that it was impossible to pass a law which should effec tually check these particular offences. This bill could not setiefy France, and for this and other reasons he should vote against its introduction. If, as the Rome Secretary had said, this was a measure for the amendment of the law, why was it not made to form part of those measures for the reform of our criminal code, some of which he be lieved were to be submitted to Parliament the next day ? (Hear.) What would become of this act when the general cede came to be considered? Was it to stand by itself? (Hear.) Before we dealt harshly with refugees, whether French or otherwise, we ought in mercy to consider whe ther their appearance in this country was voluntary or upon compulsion. (Hear.) Many foreigners were hounded to this country, and disaffection to the Governments which expelled them was only to be expected. He had no sym pathy for men who, seeking shelter here, violated our laws. No punishment could be too severe for such conduct, but it was quite a different thing to propose an act which could not fail to be inoperative, and therefore unsatisfactory in its result to the people in whose favour it was passed. By lending ourselves to the demand made upon us, a bad ex ample would b 3 set to other countries, and it would go forth that England succumbed to external demands. (Hear.) Comply with this particular demand, and others in the same direction would follow. (Hear.) Mr. A. B. HOPE denied that the bill was necessary, either as a matter of form or of practical expediency. It could only be carried out by employing spies and informer., in a manner wholly opposed to our ordinary modes of pro cedure. Was it a matter of political expediency to pass • such a bill at a time when so many important subjects de manded their attention, and in the face of the threatening addresses of the French colonels, an 1 despatches of the French Government ? Mr. COLLIER would not support the measure if it was intended to restrict our laws of hospitality ; out he did not believe it would have any such effect. Was it an inter t ranee with any mae's liberty to take from him the liberty of conspiring. It was very doubtful how far we could punish a foreigner for conspiring to murder a foreign prince, in the same way as we could punish an English man. Some measure was necessary to clear up the doubt. As for the time, it was our habit to legislate not on system, but as the occasion arose. Mr. W. HUNT said that the question before the house was whether they should make it an offence in this country to combine or conspire with persons resident in a foreign country or in the United Kingdom to commit murder. In Ireland conspiracies of this kind were by no means un common, but in England such cases were comparatively rare, and were made a misdemeanour only, while in Ire land the offence was made a felony. He had no objection to see the law made uniform in the United Kingdom. But he perceived great difficulty in bringing home to persons conspiring. the offence which was to be made a felony by the bill. If a political refugee was residing here who was obnoxious to a foreign Government, a charge might bo .made against him of conspiring with some persons in a foreign State, and evidence of this kind could only be ob tained from correspondence which would require to be pro duced through the instrumentality of a foreign police. Seeing the difficulty which would exist in making the law applicable, without introducing into our jurisprudence priaciples which were at once novel and dangerous to the liberties and interests of the people of this country, he should feel it his duty to oppose the measure now sought to be introduced. Mr. WHITEHEAD said that while he was n t disposed to be dragooned into the passing of any measure such as that before the house, still he felt that the bill was one which was called for by the circumstances the, had re cently taken place in Penis. He caned upon hon. members to place themselves for a moment in the position of the people of France, an I suppose that a plot to onsasFinate the illustrious lady on the throne had been as nearly carried into execution as that which had endengered th r life of the Emperor. In that case would not our remonstrances have been very much stronger than the mill and temperate de man 1 made upon us in the despatch of Count Walewski ? (Hear.) Thera could be ne doubt that our law respecting the punishment of conspiracies of this kind required amendment, and was it right that such amendments should not be carried out, simply because they had been tusked for by the French government, and because it was supposed to be undignified for us to erant what was asked ? The object of the present bill was not create any new of fence, but it was in effect to bring our legislation more in accordance with the spirit of the age and the reforms which had been introduced into our criminal laws. It proposed to make the crime of conspiracy to commit murder one to be punished with ;imprisonment, and not with death, as was the case in France. (Hear.) No person was more in favour of maintaining in all its integrity the right of asylum in this country, and he hops.) that the political re fugees of all countries would continue for ages yet to come to look upon the cliffs of England as those of a country " whore the weary were at rest ;" and where he hoped it - would yet be found, " the wicked ceased from troubling." (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Mr. DENT had listened with great attention to the statements which had been put forward on behalf of the , bill, but had not been able to detect any arguments which could have any weight with him in its favour. No evi dence ban been given to the house that the law of England was inefficient to deal with conspiracies of the kind re ferred to in the proposed bill. (Hear, hear.) For his part, he took no heed of the vapouring of the French colonels, but he feared that the feeling throughout the country would be th a t th e bill which was now proposed had been introduced in obedience to the dictation of a foreign power. Theresult to ofpassing the bill would be to give the greatest pleasure distress to the friends all despotic States, and the utmost of freedom and lib e rty in all parts of the worn. Mr. BENTINCK (Hear, hear,) !IL no insult offered by any fo reign power was so great the . insult of supposing that we were prevented from l as e is t. atang by their obaervetions. It was absurd to say--ever ) t une we found it neces sary to alter our Alien It was we were violating the principles of hospitality. complimentary to nabnootdun ass assination were the refugees to say that r e f ugee i sm bounden duty to as la convertible terms. It wa n our sist in forestalling such attempts as e t lately been made against the life of the Emperor,twhich had conduct be praised in the highest terms. e w h ose Mr. MONCKTON MILNES said he felt it to hi duty to record his vote against the measure. The c b- ;;;" which had recently been committed was one of the greatest; atrocity, and every foreign refugee residing in the country would find that the crime of assassination was one held in the greatest horror by all classes of society in the country. The Emperor of the French in his exile in this count ought to have learned to understand better the opinion of the people of England on this subject cf the right of • asylum than to suppose that we could consent to foreg o that right and privilege. At present we knew nothin g of the details of the events, or of the personages by whom the atrocious crime had been c oncoc t e d an d carr i e d out. All that was known was that one of the conspirators had es caped from the dungeons of Austria, and the account of whose escape had been a popular book in this country, and • there was also the accident that some of the grenades were made in Birmingham. But of these facts, he contended, did not justify the putting forward of a demand such as that contained in the letter of Count Walewski. Attempts at assassination of French monarchs were not new, and some of them had been as atrocious as that which had re cently been attempted, but no demand had ever been made upon the Government of this country to alter their laws right of asylum :n consequence of those a r rt s p . ect ( i e n e g e se t .r y was this indecent baste to legislate on the subject displayed on the present occasion, even be fore the perpetrators of the climeha(l i been put P• The demand t n their ed. (Hear.) u h . e trial, and either acqu i t ted or tondcin demand of Count Walewski in his despatch amounted, in fact, to the total abrogation of the right of asylum, an:l this bill appeared to be on the face cf it a concession to s uch a (L.:mai - FL No hon. Liviober could possibly - suptcse that this Lill would be effucLive in putting a stop to such times and offences as those which had recently taken place, The mere conversion of the crime of conspiracy into felony for a misdemeanour, would not deter such men as were employed in these atrocious crimes from concocting and carrying them into effect. He not only considered the bill as perfectly inefficient for its purpose, but he could e.,• but regard it as havingbeen introduced for the purpose of show ing that the Governmentof her Majesty was not insensible to the nature of the crime which had been committed, and were deeirous of giving such a demonstration as would satisfy t'ee French people. Even this would not be effected, for the French people would see that it was a mere sham and pretence ; and the concession would bo only a proof of the weakness of the Government of this country and regarded as such by the Emperor of the French and by the great majority of his subjects. He believed that the Govei n ment, so far from being weakened by the withdrawal of the bill, on the contrary, he believed it would tend to strengthen the present Government. It had been well said that assa-- sins never killed kings, but they often made them do very foolish things. It was too true that assassination had been mixed up I , l'l so much of the Italian annals, that even the mind of the great Napoleon himself hat become tainted with the idea, and it was melancholy to find this great man, in the last years of his life, indulging in this terrible weak ness, and in his last will bequeathing a legacy to the man, who attempted to assasinate the late Duke of Wellington. He regretted that he felt compelled to vote against the in troduction of the bill proposed by the nob:e lord at the head of the Government. Mr. NAPIER supported the bill as a wise amendment of the law, and a proper time forcarrying that amendment into effect. He found in prosecutions of the Ribbonmen in Ireland that some of the members of the affiliated societies were in England ; so that the members of the sam e soc i e t y were tried for felony in Ireland and mi s de meanour i n England. Lot not England, from any false feeling of dignity, refuse this necessary alteration. Lord J. RUSSELL said - It is one of the disadvantages of the present discussion that whilst on the one side the arguments in favour of the bill bring prominently forward the attempt made on the life of the Emperor of the French, its proposal, on the other hand, naturally leads to a dis cussion of the conduct of the ruler of France, and induces observations which at this time it would be wiser to avoid but which it is iwpossible to avoid if we are fairly to dis cuss this bill. I therefore consider it part of the responsi bility of her Majesty's Government that at a time when we should all join in the sentiments of horror and indig nation caused by that atrocious attempt on the life of the Emperor of the French and those who accompanied him, they have brought into discussion in this house a measure which brings forth edema opinions and expressious of sentiment and opinion which cannot but be distasteful to a great part of - the French nation. (Beer, hear.) I consider it another part of the disadvantage of this discussion that the members who have spoken on behalf of the bill—those who have spoken on this side, and the hon. and learned gentleman who has just sat down, have confounded together two subjects which might be kept distinct, and which ought to be kept distinct, but which by the proposition before the house aro unavoidably connected. They all say that this would be an improvement of the law. The hon. and learned gentleman says that the law regarding conspiracy requirothimprovement, and that he is in favour of that which he considers to be an im: rove meat; and then ho turns round and says, " but will you refuse that which is wise and just, because it is asked for by the Government of France." Why the hon. and learned gentleman, and those who adept that argument, beg the whole question. (Hear.) They say, first, that this is an improvement, and then they say you will be so obstinate, so unreasonable, so fanciful, as to refuse an obvious im provement of the law because it would be agreeable to the Emperor of the French, But that is not the question be ta, , ee t, roes. b It by rre tin; it f , r , vlr I in this manner they confound two separate things. I wili, tuereture, en deavour to discuss these two separate things. But let me say, in the first place, that I wish in this discussion to ob serve that respect which ii due to the ruler of France. He has deserved well of England (hear, bear)--he h as d eserve d well of Europe, as a sovereign who has consulted the inte rests of Europe by maintaining the balance of power by wars and treaties. (Hear.) But with regard to his govern ment of France this is not the place to speak, nor am I, a member of this house, the person to speak of it. For ray part, when I find that this French people are content with their own government, and that that government gives a promise of stability, my wish has always been for its per manence. It is for the French people to determine the con ditions b 3 which they are to be ruled, and tiaeinternal form of their own government. These are my views with regard to the Emperor of the French, and I trust that in opposing this bill it will not be supposed that I either yield to any one in the respect due to that sovereign, or that I should be unwilling, if it could.be:proved that this measure which has been brought in would save him from conspiracies to murder him, to give my consent to any such bill. (Hear, hear.) But, with regard to this improvement of the law, which we are told is so urgent on the ground of its import ance, I am very sceptical. In the first piece, if it is an im ' provernent of the law so urgently needed, how does it hap pen that her Medeety's Government have not, either at the end of last session or in the notices which they have given for this, made any mention of it? They ate about to intro duce a bill to consolidate the law relating to offeocea against the person. They are careful of our legislation with regard to deer and lamb, but with regard to this most im portant subject, the preservation of human life from con spiracy, they have been totally silent, and until thedespatch of Count Walewski was received, there was no iutioaatioa of any intention to amend the law. In tho next place, I am in very great doubt as to the proper nature of the amend ment. We have heard to-night that conspiracy to murder is a very grave offence—that it aims at human life —and therefore two years's imprisonment is not sufficient for the offence, and that those offenders ought ti, be punished in a more aggravated form. But, sir, there are two questions to be considered with regard to every criminal law—first, what punishment every crime deserves, and the other, how thecrime is to be prevented? These are two very different questions. As to the first, if life is to be taken away at all for any offence, then the law of Irelan 1 with regard to per eons who conspire to murder may not b 3 too severe; as to the other matter, we have to consider how we are moat likely to prevent the crime of conspiracy. For some hun dreds of years the offence ofeonspiring to mend -r has been a misdemeanour in our law; it is only the person who occu pies the throne that has any greater guarantee, but I am not aware that any subject of her Majesty has complained that his life is insecure, or that the law has net been suffici eat to protect all the subjects of the QueLn L wit Hawkes bury would have told us that a law which was found suffi cient for all subjects of Great Britain should not be altered at the wish of a foreign power. With regard to the general nature of the change, the question is whether the remedy has been efficacious; the hon. and learned gentleman who has just sat down has told U 3 that in Ireland the law is dif ferent, and capital punishment isafaxed by law to the crime of conspiracy, but will he go on to tell us that life is equ illy safe there against conspiracy as in England ? (Hear.) Will he tell us that there is greater security for life in Ireland in consequence of that severity that in England under the milder provisions of our own laws? If, sir, that is not the case, let us look a little to the principle of the proposed change, and consider it with regard to the nature of the crime. Conspiracy is a very heinous crime, disgraceful and detestable in the person who commits it, but one exceed ingly difficult to prove. It often requires very vague evi dence to bring it home to an individual. If such a case be brought before a jury as a conspiracy to murder, it is probable that'we shell find the witnesses accomplices or spies. Such evidence is much distrusted by a jury, and the advocate who is empowered to defend the prisoner will lay great stresa on the nature of the evidence produced. if a letter is shown or a conversation repeataJ, he will affix a different sense to the words used , he will endeavour to point out that they will not beer the construction put upon them ; he will suggest for the consideration of the jury what is the punishment affixed to the offence ; a d it may very well happen that a jury might think the evidence sufficient to convict a man of a misdemeanour, but would hesitate to convict when they knew that transportation for life would be a consequence of their verdict. It does not fellow be cause the crime is a horrible one which ought to be p,-es vented that we shall prevent it by affixing to it a greater punishment Lan before. It seems to me that the spirit of the proposed enactment is contrary to the whole course of that enlightened legislation which Sir Samuel Romilly was the first to urge on this house, and which Sir Robert Peel and others have since pursued. We all know that in the time of George I. and 11., if a new crime arose it was a common thing for a member of this house to get up, and stating the crime was on the increase, propose to create a new capital felony. Mr. Burke tells us that he was kept in the house to make a house I for a bill of this kind, without any one knowing what the crime was. Our legislation then was founded on the principle that severe punishment was sure to defer from crime. Since then a safer doctrine has prevailed, that a light punishment was more likely to ensure convic tion and prevent crime. I demur to the proposal as a ques tion of law reform, because it is doubtful whether it will be efficacious. Let us new look to the nature of the crime, and the persons by whom it is likely to be committed. These conspiracies are often the work of persons who aro base enough to receive hire for the deed, but they are more likely to be concocted by persons under the influence of extreme fanaticism, religious in former times but now po i litical. From the time of the murder of Henry PI. of France, a deed which was ext o ll e d i n magnificent-language by the Jesuit Mariama, to the attempt on the life of Louis XV. by Damiens, all these crimes were the effect of reli gious fanaticism, to which Henry IV. of Franco also fell a victim ; but of late years, since the commencement of the French Revolution, it is political and not religious fanati cism which has been the moving spirit of such attempts. Now, sir, men who meet by twos, or threes, or fours, for the purpose of declaiming against what they call . tyranny, until they begin to entertain the conception of this horrible crime, these are men whose fanaticism is so rooted, and their confidence iu each other so unbounded, that we are not likely to defeat a conspiracy of this sort by the dread of the punishment that may be inflicted on them after it is carried into effect. Men who are excited by the spirit of fanaticism to commit such deeds have their imagination so excited as to be ready to lay do wn theirlivea. They all know they expose them, for whether the attempt succeed or fail, they who commit the crime are sure to perish by the hand of tho executioner. Can we suppose that men of this kind are to be deterred by telling them that instead of two years' imprisonment they will henceforth be subject to penal servitude ? I will give the house one or two instances which, however, have nothing to do with France or this French government. I have been told that the night before the assassination of Count Rossi, the Minister of Rome, some young men met at a club. luflamed with their own oratory, they declaimed with the greatest vio lence against Rossi's tyranny and despotism. One of the men there, the instigator of all the violence, said to tin of them, "Although you speak very brave not one of you would be prepared to take his life." The young men itn trZnky themthat you as Id e a're an d readyssaid, i d to , niediat elY said, " We are ready." The artful instigator ";aAkeftßero9havvainligfet,eiltd would be and the next toshrink . " first time to open th the basest cowardice Arrangements were then day, eie s Count Rossi was going for the surrounded by a party of those Assembly, he was the heart. This was the effect young men anal stabbed to it possible of the violent fanaticism of been these n iyno the eg leastm on , influenced and wag peseible they would have one had stood ly and against the life of an , ther : tdoolclyotuhekuti;o—wyoyuouarNevici will conspirin g irin ; any condemned to penal servitude for to which he would life if you succeed ? The instanceotheri who a high situation in gentleman holding rer Piedmontwas thatlast o y f ea a r g . to preach assassination, declared th o at w ts as o" of thole said had gone to him end proposed to assassinate man when young bert, the King of Sardinia. Mazziei. sitnxie him Al. h ar dl y worthy to commit such au action, but ho was Turin, lending him his own dagger. Was such sent hial im t n o likely to be deterred by the fear of a p ena lt y ? oe:thin—, was certain, that what they really wanted was, not the punish:neat of the crime, but the detection. If these men who lately went over to Paris to make the hor rible attempt could have been detected and brought before an English court, naver mind what the pueish ni eat Was, whether two yews or twenty years their purpose would have been defeated when owe they were detected. What the French government want is, not punishment but detection ; this bill will servo no purpose of detection, and therefore will not serve their purpose. I believe that, as far as this is a question of the amendment of the law, it will fail of its purpose. I now come to the question, that it is an amendment of the law asked for by the government of Francs. In dealing with this question, I fear I must take a more general survey of the situation than the ministry who brought in the bill seem to have done. It seems their view is, that if they can make some amendment of the law with regard to conspiracy to murder, thereby making the legisletlon of England more. har monious—the punishment more severe—they will satisfy the French government, and meet their wish for an amendment of the law. I fear, sir, that calculation is entirely wrong. What the French goy, rament want is to put an end to those assemblages of fanatical politician in London ; and that can only be done by sending them out of the country before any crime is proved against them. (Hear.) That, in fact, is the real question, and I will read the passage from the despatch of Count Walewski already referred to, to show the house that it is so. He says : " It is no longer the hostility of misguided individnals, manifesting itself by all the excesses of the press and all the violence of language, it is no longer even the work of the factious, seeking to rouse opinion and to prove dis erder ; it is assassination ' elevated to doctrine, preached openly, practised in repeated attempts, the most recent of which has just struck Europe with amazement. Ought, then, the right of asylum to protect such a state of things ? Is hospitality due to assassins ? Ought the English legis lation to contribute to favour their designs and their plans, and can it continue to shelter persons who, by their fle,grant acts, place themselves beyond the pale of common right and under the ban of humanity? The ambassador of France had taken a very unusual course. I will not find fault with him • he was a gentleman of great honesty, very much attac hed to his master, and also to this country : but in his answer to the Lord Mayor and aldermen he stated clearly what he wanted :—" Permit me, then, to tell you what is the true question ; it does not lie in the attempts at assassination in themselves, nor even in the crime of the 14th of January, which your Government would have hastened to warn us against if it could have known it beforehand ; the whole question is in the moral situation of France, which has become anxiously doubtful of the real sentiments of England. Reasoning in effect by analogy,'popular opinion declares that were there in France men sufficiently infamous to recommend in their clubs, in their papers, in their writings of every kind, the assassi nation of a foreign Sovereign, acrd actually to prepare its execution, a French administration would not wait to re ceive the demands of a foreign Government, nor to See the enterprise set on foot. To act against such conspiracies, t , anticipate such crimes, public notoriety would be suffi cient to set our laws in motion, ant measures of security would be taken immediately." My right hon. friend, the Home Secretary, will therefore clearly see that this bill is not what the French Government want. They want se curity against the whole body of refugees. My right hon. friend has told us that the law was found sufficient in 1851, and why should it not be now ? Count Walewski does not say—Why do not the Goiernment prosecute the offence? (Hear, hear.) If the - Government is in posses sion of any information which would support a prosecution it was their duty at once to have put the law in force. The question was decided half a century ago. Reference has been made to Lord Hawkesbury's correspondence, which I have lately had occasion to consult. I found he treated the question with perfect fairness aid perfect justice, as to how refugees and foreign Governments ought tube treated, Let me remind the house that in the opinion of Mr. Peel, Lord Hayskeshury was as well fitted to hold the seals of the Foreign office as any man in this country, he dis played a calmness and a temper which deserve the re spect of the whole country. When Peltier advised the I assassination of the First Consul he was brought to trial for doing so, for attempting to excite discussion with a Pieed'e sine-. The then e tterene-nerersl nreed. and Lord Eheuborough, the Cuief th13 , ,1e,, Lwid Lii.i.:, Lily law was sufficient to meet every such case. The First Con sul was not then an enemy, but a friendly power. War, however, broke out before Peltier was brought up to judg ment. The whole question, however, with regard to re fugees had been discussed and settled ; if peace had con tinued, Peltier would have been sentenced. All the tren sa.ctions took place in August ; it waif not until October that the question arose with regard to Switzerland, which led to the renewal of hostilities, and it was not till Feb. Peltier could have been sentenced. There is one instance upon which I cannot help remarking in connexion with that trial. In the celebrated political speech which Sir James Mackintosh made on that occasion, he very naturally, but with great art, represented his client as a poor affiiste'd roan who had to contend against the chief of the most powerful military nation in the world. The Attce ney-Goneral, Mr. Percival said that such was not the case ; that it was the King of England and his government that prosecuted Pel tier, and that it was due to the law of England that he should conduct that prosecution. Well, then, sir, with regard to this matter on which M. Welewski and Count Persigny have raised a question, there can be no doubt whatever with respect to the law of England. That law was enforced by Lord Hewkeshery • it was enforced by Lord El'enborough ; it was consented to by all the authorie tics of that time ; and the great men of that day, including Mr. Pitt, Mr. Granville, and Mr. Fox, concurred in think iug that the language and conduct of the British govern ment were such as became the country. I say, then, with regard to this complaint, that, so far from our wanting a new law, the existing law is fully sufficient for its purpose; and the assertion of the law which was made in 1 O 3 was the foutulition of the declaration of the Secretary of State in 1851, who is now Secretary of State--a declaration which was believed at the time, after it bad been fully considered by the cabinet of that day, to be one worthy of an Eng lish minister—this declaration being that this country shall be a safe asylum for foreigners of all descriptions, but that if they commit any offence against the laws of this country, if they incite to the assassination of a foreign sovereign or the chief magistrate of a foreign state, or if they impair our friendly rolations,with foreign states by their reviling% and their libels, they should then be liable to punishment according to the well-known and established laws of England. (Ilear.) Well, then, sir, such being the complaint, it is a matter of astonishment to me that Count Walewski should have written his despatch and no answer should have been made to it. (theats.) Because the answer seems to be quite obvious. I should have thought that anybody who valued the reputation of the British name, and had any regard for the hen cur of Great. Britain, would have said, " We are not a nation that protecti assassins, as seems to be supposed : the criino of assassination is abhorrent to all our feelings ; we cannot sufficiently condemn it; show us that these men hive been preaching the doctrine of assassination, and we will bring them before our courts of jaatice without the loss of an hour • make out that it has been advocated by them in any of their clubs, and they will no doubt be convicted as Peltier was convicted." Such seems to me to be the plain language which ought to have been used. (Hear.) The noble lord at the head of the Government says. to my sur prise, that an unfounded notion has been prevalent on the continent that this country favours assassination, and therefore ho brines in this bill. This does seem the oddest consequence that there ever was. (Hear.) How much better it would have been to ask for the names of those persons who had been guilty of the crime in ques tion ; and if, as very likely would have been the case, no person could be found who could be vet vieted by due course of law, then would have been the thee to say, " We punish offences, but those offences must he duly proved by the evidence of witnesses openly heard --(cheers) —and that evidence must be weighed and summed up by a judge sitting on the bench and a true verdict returned according to that evidence by the jury." (Cheers.) If that answer had been given, I think strong ground would have been taken. Whereas, look at our position now. It is a position as regards the future which I confess fills me witt considerable alarm. (Cheers.) You do not propose to do that which the French Government wish you to do ; that which, unhappily, is en forced by the threats of the military bodies whose ad dresses have been so inarlverently inserted in the .11oniteur. (Hoar, hear.) You do net do this by any mans; but you say that you will change the law, and thus in eke a decla ration of your sympathy with the French Government. But look at the consequences. If you hail attempted to alter the laws with regnel to aliens, if you had attempted to give power to the Government of the day to send away any aliens upon the representation of a foreign Minister, you would then have roused the anger of the people of England, and yon could not have earl led your measure. If you had given a refusal—if you had said, " Ocr laws are sufficient, and we will simply put them in execution," you would then, no doubt, have disappointed the wishes of the French Government by acting in conformity with that opinion, and that statement of Lord ilawkesbury, to which I have previously referred. This measure seems to use an exceedingly skilful, I may say an exceedingly cunning, artifice, by which it is intended that neither the people of England nor the Emperor of the French should be offended. (Hear, hear.) We must wait a little to see the result. I think that. after the passing of this bill, inflict ing a heavier punishment for conspiracy to assassinate than now exists, you would not find th e s t a t e o f thi ngs mach altered. f there are still fanatical men who are still plot ting assassination, they would pl o t s ecre tly as muc h as now ; they would not be deterred at all by the vain ter rors of this new law. (Hear, hear.) What, then, would happen ? The French Government would day, "We have no doubt of the sincerity of the English Government—we have no doubt of their wish to act loyally in this matter— but their expectations have been altogether disappointed, that ' den of assassins' which we wished to be cleared re mains as it was • the same conspiracies still ex i s t ; y ou who have agreed to this object must agree to the means ; your means have been found totally insufficient; you must see' s yourselves that the object is not gained; you must there fore, look for other means.'z What could those " other means" be ? They could only be means which would violate that sacred right of asylum which the government profess their desire to preserve. (Loud cheers.) Well, I have no doubt this country would not consent to a change of its laws in that respect. But, then, I must say you would have given a far better grievance to the Government of France than they have at present. They would say "We have been deluded; this bill, which you toad us was a satisfactory one, has been a complete mockery. We have no more security than we bad before, and wo now insist upon some change that shall be sufficient for the purpose." I own that I think it is a short-sighted wisdom that would thus put off the evil clay. (near.) I think it would b 3 far better wisdom to say at once, "This is no light question ; it is no mere question of changing whathas bitheito been a misdemeanour into a felony ; we tell you, in plain t ru th. that the asylum which you call a ' den classassins' must remain sacred; we do not mean to change our laws; hut if any case can be pointed out in which those laws have been violated, we will act as we have done for the last half century ; we will act according to the principles which have been known in England ever since we have been a nation ; we will admit aliens according to the statutes of our land, but we will take care that no offence shall be committed against the head of a foreign state without its being brought under the cognisance of a jury." I think if you had prcceeded in that way your position would have been strong. The position of the University, lam sorry to say, is, I think, at present not strong. (Hear, and great laughter.) I was speaking, of course, of their position in argument. (Hear.) I don't think they are strong as re gards France, whore dernends are rather evaded than cone pied with. (Bear.) I don't think they aro strong as regards the people of this country, whose just expectations seem to me destined to be disappointed. (Hear,] hear.) Because, if Parliament were to pass this bill, and if here aft6r the d,-mend of which I have spoken were made, t id h eßo o aa;t p ,es, a eta o h: p rzt l , e of England would naturally say, " A demand was made upon you by the French Government ; you thethati inou by relations o t h a t his o pottifii amity al teration to nt ld re u st s t fo ht ii u had sa ti s fi e d that demand ; you wouldl be lowloft w u h n i which undisterbed; tynotold us r u b ed proposed ; and yet all, oft now you have the same complaints again, and even greater tch th e c r w e ez o e r. r e e ni b a e i f n o s re a thato e f on a rs c e e f s o s r a t t h io e n H o o f use of o c o o n in fi . out difficulty—. 0 e on Fre f nch ambassador said very justly is the a::: n still i Io pa: it t l 4 ti e s e p ea c e s b ti ii E l i O 2e ple n n d La t w a o m s the o it f Y E H ouse e z t la w n ee l o . n f Co m mons n(Cahi (Cheers. e n r s a ')' that th is is a course which is not with aanding upon Id ea itself flora all embarrassment by lee to decluo that we abhor the c - rine'e e TilE SUN, LONDON WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY lO, 1658 that has been committed in France ; that, far from sym pathising with, we are indignant against, those assassins who perpetrated the crime, but that not for the friendship of the Emperor of the French are we disposed to give up the right of asylum, or to change the ancient and esta blished laws of England. (Loud cheers.) Sir, I think the French Government would appreciate as it would deserve to be apprecisted the frankness, the sincerity, and I may say the friendliness of that course. (Hear ) We should thereby spare ourselves these irritating discussions; we should relieve the Government of France from any expec tations that by the direction of their official paper they could induce the Parliament of Eugland to recede from its just position. (Hear.) I trust we shall act in that man ner. I have, I confess, been a good deal shocked by some of the declarations which have been male in the course of this debate—declarations from which it would seem that the favour of a foreign power is to be considered of more value to England than the maintenance of her ancient laws. (Cheers.) It think that those who epsak in this manner, and who give their votes for bri ging in this bill, incur a vast responsibility, both to the present genera tion and to posterity. (Hoar.) This is the first brea'cing in upon that system which was declared by the Go vernment of 1803, and which has remained intact up to the month of February, 18:8. Who can say what the next step in this .'irection will be ? It is easy to ask for a mild measure, and at first to satisfy a foreign power; bat any dame id of this kind naturally arouses the jealousy and susceptibility of the British people. Tile only other care in which I remember a bill to have Win brought in at the request of a foreign power is that of the Foreign Enlistment Act. Mr. Canning, in introducing that act, took the utmost care to explain that Spain was sa weak a monarchy that she was quite unable to contend with her n neighbours in arms ; he p a i n ted the weakness of her re sources, and her inability to defend herself, an I he asked whether we could be so ungr ac i o us as not to afford her that s uccessful. No appeal could now b e male to us du that ground ; th e thre at has been somewhat too barely exposer, somewhat too loudly uttered ; it has been T pr h a a t t ec a t p i real agwaiansstforeign invasion which s h e requ i re d . se uttered, that I confess if I were to vote for the intro duction of this bill, I should feel shame and humiliation in giving that vote. Let those who will, support the bill of the Government ; that shame ani humiliation I am deter mined not to share. (Loud cheers.) The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, notwithstanding the wide field over which the noble lord had passed, he be lieved the decision of the house would, after all, tura on the question with which he started—viz , whether or not the present law was sufficient for the purpose ; and, with great deference to the noble lord, he would declare his own belief that it was insufficient. He ventured to say that the law on this subject was more anomalous in its operation and more inadequate to the attainment of the object than any other branch of our criminal law. One reason, why an alteration was required was the change of circumstances. Increased communication had brought into this country a number of persons who were opposed to the laws of their native land. England gave them protection, but it was not unreasonable to require that they should have it on the same conditions on which it was enjoyed by Englishmen. If Englishmen conspired in England to send an Englishman abroad to commit a murder,-those who remained here might be indicted for the offence ; if foreigners conspir e d h ere f or the same purpose, any of th e number who remained would o nly be punishable with floe mad imprisonment; they would only have committed at common law a misdemean our. That was an anomaly in the position of foreigners as coin pared with Englishmen which, independently of the severity of the punishment, required alteration. More over, he would put it to the house whether the crime of conspiracy to commit murder was adequately punished by fine and imprisonment? The noble lord had said that this bill would be of no avail, because those who would be affected by it were euthucasts. But the measure did not propose to legislate for enthusiasts. It would legislate not for those who went out to commit murder, but for those con spirators who remained behind. The pnniehrnent for those les whoa' c,j %, C The noble lord, too, objected against the bill, that it was . net a legal iefcirm, for it was not introduced as a legal measnra, and allusion was then made to those consolida tion bills which were to be brought before the house. Now the feet was that the present bill could not properly be introduced with oth-r bills. Those were measures based upon the report of the statute law commission, and they were in the main in the nature of bills to consolidate exist ing statutes. They did no doubt in some degree amend the law, but it would have beou a very unfit course to have placed provisions amongst their clauses amounting to so totally novel a step in legislation as the present bill. Such provisions would there II eve been out of place. But sup pose the government had taken such a course, and intro duced the clauses oZ this measure into that bill, what then would have been said? It would have been said that at the request of France an alteration was about to be made in our law, and that an endeavour was made to shuffle that alteration unobserved through the House of Commons. It had been almost admitted by some that this was A good bill, bat it was said the house ought not to pass it new. Redly he could not see why a bill should be thrown out on Tuesday to he introduced on Thurs day. In truth, it was not over easy to arrive at what, were the real objections to the bill. It must be aslinittd that if the noble lord established his pro position, that the bill was not an improvement of the law, and that fine and irnprisonmeet were sufficient puniel ments, then no doubt legislation was unnecessary, but the instances given by the noble lord failed to bear out hi, statement. Indeed, the only tensible objection to the measure was this, that it ought not to be passed at the present time. But ho trusted that the house would look at its content', and if it wee found t ) be an improvemect in our criminal code, that it would not hesitate to pass sir. DISRAErel—The principle of the proposed bill of the noble lord (Lord Palmerston) I apprehend to he this—it is to change the crime of combiuiug and conspiring to murder from misdeamnour to felony. Upon this point there has been co siderable discussion. So far as the debate is concerned, it nay still be deemed a mooted question. Nor does it appear to me necessary, according to the usual order of our business, 17';.pemaoillftineeptas-71ha fle' nientnid? denouncedpeeelild it take P n o ) that this point should be decided at the present stage of the measure. If this bill comes to a second reading----(ironical cheers)—that will bu the legitimate occasion upon which the house may enter fully into that importaut point of the dis cumin ; and no doubt it will ree,'ive, as it is entitled to, the most grave and dispassionate consideration. Bet at this moment there are some other ,observations which I intend making. I mu,t remind the hou3 that it has not been un usual in the hi-tory of this eonatry, and in the practice of Parliament, that when some crime has been committed some crime known to the law—Parliament should take the circumstance under its considerations with a view to legisla tion. Throughout this debate ,ti nforonel,eq.iiritielenwttyh i.acliilitutrsioimoenn,:nolassflehataa,amorsipbl.e,,too:,gbiir.,siteeiiisioohinriff made to the (litre , cute of the law upon the matter under dif elusion between Eugland and Ireland. But how came that diffe ence ? It was owing to the peculiar circumstances of Ireland. The prevalence of conspiracy to murder ha 1 led the attention of Parliament to the stihjlet, and though I offer no opinion upon the expediency of the course wh elm 1001 beets adopted, still it is a fact ry th a o t fm t am l l i l e i stp s rr i y :e si c iei i ti a l d e al l i t n - c c ,el u d m i stances of that country induce 1 Parliament to legislate for it in the avenues it had done. There is a other h n c w a i s d e c h w legislation o ye s ti, n t ssiveF w b t;:hti e l s z e s r i ote n cione t induced Throne —the m e b nl yt he special circumstances ate Mr. Harley, the then the Iris Cockpit at a sitting of cause of great exciteme .t. this Louse arc peculiarl i y iknim i tei l d i u t ne e ut s the House of Commons o t (t e Gi h fm : tecutaillinieciesseacillas;:oire;;cooaofiflttit:tleihseslmeli : 1 E 1) ctc ; : e ci T u ll e' h e t a to llu ofy , ; g r a . a , g s s i 4 u: si G eospy l Idddvlast m t eloquently step ? Did it take no means of expressing its opinion o. the bill e:c r w m l i n t i which )f the rendered ° fre ° C e le ° crime lrh p o y r fa s a s t i i t r o e ' i rn i assassinateteopb,tti reprobation of oms: (kl,-ar, hear.) As s of s e •e v g e ::n t l o s 't t s i s ir l i t ;e a se l ;s i t iv e Y as e e ° 2 l i u t ei i i s i° n r se fe le lo s l : . for me to attempt to efcelvinligicsh of ha p s eci ' i L li \s e ' r horror. deaouneed by members wars been detain the rho cierced in lth i e t u i t s giving to crime toti,iliAii,isme,el has i oe t l:e l i t tnn m tirst y ;ac e wi x ocirtiiiill bear.) swirl But the state of the ease is that a great crime has been attempted to be perpetrated against a Sovereign ha:Unreasonable, where opinion upon the with whom we are at this moment ou terms of friendly and the safety of the person of one of the most fri ndly and pow erful of our allies is concerned, that his life should be thought principle intimate o a f l alliance. of less interest to Parliament than that of a British Minister. All the circumstances connected with the attack on the il i e ec. measure, 'v Em peror of the French would, of course, excite the sympathy and demand te e good feeling of this country and of Parlia ment. (Hear.) There can be no question but that during the last five years we have found in the Emperor of the French a constant and tried ally—(hear, hear)—not merely an ally using fine phrases and specious assurances, but an ally whose fidelity was well proved, and on w h ose constancy we might depend. (Cheers.) Therefore, on the first blush of the ques tion, the fact that strikes us is that an attempt has been made on a great scale to assassinate the Emperor of the Freuch, MI attempt which showed very considerable organisation, and that plan was formed and matured in our own country. (No, no,and Hear, hear,) Well, I don't wish to enter into the details of this subject, but roarer what I state is a mat ter of notoriety, that some of the principal agents framed and designed their plans in this country. These, I say, are cir cumstances which, though they do not justifyany attempt to invade or destroy the right of asylum, yet do jn-tify the house in exhibiting considerable sympathy' with the Emperor of the French. If no oihercitenniitancerflead happeted*—if n 6 other matters were before us, but that a greatand most criminal at tempt had been-made on the life of theruler of France, and if under such circumstances, an appeal had been made to the Government of England for our support in the dangerous po sition in which the Emperor of the French found himself, I believe the universal expression of feeling would be that such an appeal, with due regard to our own rights and privi leges, should be treated with the utmost respect. But I frankly and fully admit that much has happened since the attempt at perpetrating this enormous crime which has dashed that feeling, and disturbed the generousand natural emotions of the people and Parliament, and have embroiled this ques tion with considerations which could not have been antici pated, and which I would not dealfrankly with the hous s if I did not say were most distressing and embarrassing. (Hear.) I am not here to defend or palliate any circumstances which have been so severely, but so justly, animadverted upon in the course of this debate. I do not think that despatch of Count Walewski's (though it has found'a defender in an hoe. friend of mine) is written with that tact, temper, and good sense whi h generally characterise his lucnbrations. I am bound to admit that that despatch was as unfortunate des patch. I do not wish to deny for a moment that the observa tions of some of the culeuels ware tho height of impertinence (Laughter.) I think.thattheintroduction of those observations into the authentic and authoritativejournel of the empire was an act of i signal n-iscretion. But after the despatch which has been read by tho Secretary of State this evening, I am not inclined to dwell as much as I otherwise shonid upon those matters. We all know in plicate life, however excited our feelings may be when ruisunders:anding arises, however warm our expression 3, and however indignant our feelings, that the moment a gentleman says that he regrets the offen sive expressions made use of, we forget the offence---(hear, hear) --and if this is done with a good grace and n •t in a churlish mood, very often the feeling which succeeds is one of greater cordiality than that which preceded the misunder standing,. (Hear.) Now, sir, I must say that that expres sion of regret on the p ar t of the Emperor of the French was A frank and full one— (elteers)—and I do not think that it becomes us after that to remember with too much severity those incidents to which I have referral. If I refer to them, if I dwell upon their unfortunate occurrence, it is simply that I may induce hon. gentlemen, before they come to any deci sion upon this very important subject, to re.olleet that what has occurred recently within these few days or weeks in France, which has excited so much unfortunate feeling in this country, and it is I believe created so much misapprehen- EiOn, has,nest been peculiar to this canary only; but there are other countries, great even as England, and with power as grcat eves as those Who hold may iu these highly twoured isles, who have sometimes been subjected to annoyance equally flagrant, but who have exhibited great good feeling —great forbearance—and have not allowed these occurrences to disturb the amicable course of dealing between the two countries. (Cheers.) I cannot help recollecting that it is exactly five years ago this very month of February—l be lieve, by a singular coincidence, this very night in February, 1853—that it was my duty to submit a motion to the House of Commons, the object of which was to call the attention of the house to the state of the relations subsisting between France and England. That motion was brought forward in consequence of expressions having been made, and a line of conduct having been assumed, by great personages in this country, which, in my opi nion, and in the general o, Mimi of Europe, were calcu lated to destroy the good fecli .g which we have always con sid,Ted—(loud cheers)—it was a cardinal point of I olicy to cherish and maintain between England and Franco. I recur to these recollec dons because I see the beneficial influence which memory may exercise over hon. gentlemen who have made these indignant speeches, if they will only rocollect what has T wed, what happened in 1853 under a Government of which the noble lord who has just spoke and who fools such humilitY ion at even voting in support of the bid, was an emi neut member, and, indeed, I believe, the leader in this house ? Why, sir, you had statesmen of England, the most eminent, denouncing the Emperor of the French as a tyrant, and usurper, and despot. (Loud cheers.) You had then a Cabi net Minister quitting the Cabinet, and hastening to the hus tings to amuse his constituency by depicting the dangers of their country from the impending piratical invasion of the French people. (Laughter and cheers.) You had a Cabinet Minister saying to his constituency, "What protection have you for wives and daughters with such an alliance as the French—with such an ally as the Emperor of France ?" (Laughter and cheers.) I had to bring these circumstances, and many similar ones, before the considera ion of this house, because I felt that, if announced by this house, they were calculated to seriously impair, if net destroy, the relations— the amicable relations —which subsisted between the two countries. And what did we see ? We witnessed, in conga queue() of that debate, the gratifying exhibition of statesman after statesman, Cabinet Miuiiter after Cabinet Minister, apologising for the off.nsive expressions they had used towards the Emperor of the French. (Laughter and cheers.) That was a very salutary spectacle. (Rear.) It did a great deal of good. It conduced to the maintenance of the peace of Europe ; and it conduced to the maintenance of the pea 4 of Europe only because the French Emperor was a forgiving and forbearing man. Were the statesmen of England less offensive in their observations than the co!onels of France to us? (Cheers ) If the Empo or of the French and the French nation could endure those insults ,of English Cabinet Ministers, I really think that the people of England can pocket the insults of the French colonels. (Loud laughter and cheers.) I will now, in two or three sentences, explain the course which I feel it my duty to take in reference to this projected measure, and the general subject before us. I thi k it necessary for us to take a large view of this question. What we have to consider are the relative positions of England and France. The alliance between the two countries has, under different forms of Government, and with various degrees of feeling, subsisted now for upwards of a quarter of a contrary. At no period has it beep- warmer, at no period has it .been more effective, than under the present dyn ,sty, and daring the last five years especially. We fought aids by side with the French iu a war of almost unexampled severity -we have comblued with the French people in the management of im portant affairs —our councils have been united, notwithstand ing national prejudices which undoubtedly exist ; and every Court in Europe, as well in Asia and America, have felt the influence of our united councils. I believe it is true when I say tlkkt I think the feeling of the rest mass of the English people is a genuine and cordial feeling. (Cheers.) I thiok the great body of the people look to the French people with a feeling of sincere friendship. On occasions like the pre sent, when it is necessary to speak without disguise, I am. bound to say, so far sal canobserve, although there are many eminent persons in France, although there are many influen tial classes in Franco favourable, and highly favourable, to v at is called ; and all;bea.ol I think a ten. deney, slight, buteordial, tendency of feeling throughout toe French Empire increases in favour towards the people of this country, yet I am bound to admit that I do not think tha• on the part of the great body of the French peo,,le there is that reciprocity of sentiment with the people of this country --there is not that similarity of feeling which we extent to them. (Cheers.) Now, under these circumstances, what is the position of the ruler of that country, who has the good sense to feel that an alliance between Englaeld and France is a policy eminently calculated for the welfare of his own country f What difficulties be has to encounter. We must remember that, although he may from his personal ex• perience, from the character of his mind, from a thousand in fluences which operate u,,on a person of his elevated intellect in his elevated posit' ou—althongh he may arrive at a coa . ie tion that the maintenance of an alliance between the two countries is eminently conducive to the welfare of that France which he governs, still ho is the chief representative of those feelings and that policy ; and although in prosperous times, and in moments of prolonged tranquillity, he may, by Lis commanding abilities, be able successfully to manage the affairs between the two countries, and to cherish and increase that good feeling which pervades France, yet, in moments of public excitement, when the minds of the people are agitate 1, it is clear that the position of the present ruler must he ono of immense delicacy. (Hear.) And he comes, the faithful and generous ally of this country—(hear, hear)—he comes, not with threats, although lie may have acted with some appear ance of passion ; but lie can well afford to act in such a man ner who can afford to mare the noble apology which we have just heard. The Emperor of the French on these recurring moments of difficulty, this generous and faithful ally, comes to the Government of this country ant says do not dis guise the difficulties of your position, but assist me consist ently with your laws and rights ; I have lived too long in yo r country not to know that no Britith Minister dare to whisper a project for introducing a measure by which your laws and privileges might-be violated. But aid me at this moment ; show to France, when all these hostile factious are raising their heads and jeering me with the British alliance, on which I have been buildinz my policy, show them that my coufi deuce has net been misplaced. I think under these circum stances it was the duty of the Government to rvspond to that appeal, and not to lend a deaf. ear to such an appeal to this country. I feel that there is nothing unconciliatory in sup porting any Government in any effort which they make to contiuue.the alliance between England and Franco, which is the key and corner stone of modern civilisation. As to the way in which the Government have attempted to carry that olicy into erect, that is altogether another question. It is difficult to conceive what' they may have cont mplat d ' themselves 7 —what object they proposed, and what wore the gMC us iwiiich they intended to carry that object into-effect. The noble lord the member for London (Lord J. Russel spooks of this country being , disgraced, and the Parliament, as dishonoured, if they accede to the demand the French Emperor, because it has been urged by a threat. Why, we have not acceded to the demand of the Fren h Emperor All that has been demanded has been flatly refused. if indeed the French Emperor is to be held responsible for the unfor tunate despatch of his Secretary of State. For, indeed, the demand insisted ou by Ccuut Wale wski cannot be listene 1 to ; at the firstbluahit WWI swept off from out of the ma trials of public coun el, and that is he best a swer to the sneer and taunt of the noble lord (Lord J. Russell). We are to do nothing udder a. threat, because all that has been demanded' l,as been refused. What we are to do is anothe - question. I admit I make lanai and frank admissi u, that a pro, , osition less satisfactory never appears to me to has”.! b en made by a British Minister than the o. e which is now on your table. (Hear, he avd laughter.) The English Minister should have been iu a positiou to show that the ruler of France had placed before him a statem nt of his grievances iu the form of a State paper ; the English Minister should have answered hat despatch in the free and logical characters of Caniiiiig ; that despatch and the answer should have been placed on your tabl comb Led with some glowing expression of sym pathy with our faithful ally. That is what we expected The Minister who missed that opportunito missed a great occasion. If Le had placed Count Walewskrs despatch, and an answer worthy i,f it, on this table we should have felt uo difficulty as tc the course we ought tc take ; the Lelines and tone between the two nations would have been maintained in a temper such as is highly desirable, and that de pitch would have been the key-note between the two countries. Parliament would have then come down and have given to the French Emperor what he wants and r:quires d- monstration in the face of Europe to the French peop!e, misled by calum , datory btlte:uents, whit • should hare teen an avowed and living evi dence of the respect and sympathy of the Parli , ment of Eng -1;111,l. Nothing of this kind has been done ' and all that is pro posed now to us is to cobble to tire penal laws f Ireland, aid to retrograde with respect to the criminal law of Eugland. I cannot suppose that any such proposition could give satisfac tion to the Emperor oft o Frenc Our object ought to have been to give him honourable s.tisfaetion. With regard to the reflections and criticisms which have been made o a the policy pursued by the French Emperor, those are details into whi.l we cannot enter. When a man has been elected by millions of that country, he is above petty criticisms. If indeed he were a tyrant dependent upon faction and supported only by prae torians, those criticisms might do him injury ; but the man wire has appealed again and again to the people, who have ratified their decision by millions, has nothing to fear from such criticisms as these. What the French Emperor required was a demonstration which would have cleared him from the misconceptions which have unfortunately been engendered in France. I cannot con give that such a bill as has been pro pos d will at all tend to that most desirab o consequence ; but so far as I am concerned I fool most fully that iu this un fortunate position this oppohunity has been mismanaged by the Government so as to alarm E Jgland, aid not to please France. (Hear, hear.) I cannot think that we should take any course which might have the effect of prolonging miscon- ception, becanw we disapprove of the feeble and clumsy manner in which Government have used it. Therefore, I will vote for leave to bring in this bill, but I do not thereby pledge myself to support it in any of its future stoges, although I will listen to such arguments as are offered to convince me, as I am not convinced yet, that this is the measure required hY threrilis. Because lam desirous of coriVincing the French people, irritated and exasperated by the atrocity attempted in their metropolis upon the Emperor, that there is iu the British Parliament a. noble and generous sympathy with them, I vote for the leave to bring iu this bill whick is asked ; but I give that vote because I think I can do so con sistently with the laws of England and the privileges of the Englishman. (Cheers.) Mr. S. HERBERT, having adverted to the change which a few days had wrought in this country of the Emperor of the French, and to the causes of the irritation against his Go vernment, observed, that bof_re ho came to an ultimate de cision upon this measure ho wanted information. He wished to know, among other things, what was the cal state of the law; whether it wad True or not that the existing law w. 41 sufficient to reach a'iens conspiring here against ali us abroad; whether it was the practice of the English Governme , t, when it received information from our police, to give n ,tice to that of Franco ; and what would be the effect of converting a mie• demeatiour into a felony upon the powers of the police. Ho did not refuse to entertain the measure, and ho should be ready, after due deliberation, to express his opinion of its :writs on the second' reacting. Lord PALMERSTON said—Sir, I have beard in the cow so of this di scuss i on some argumen t s ag ainst the proposal of her Rajesty's Go v e rnmen t which I scarcely expected to have heard in the quar t er f r om which they came. We have been told by one gentleman on the other side of the house that we should give the answer of the Barons— " Nolumus leges Auglire mutari." We have been told by my noble friend be. hind me, who I always imagined claimA to be a reformer of the law, that wa ought to stand by the ancient law of the country, and bacause thin offence of conspiracy far a long course of time has been simply a misdemeanour we ought to refuse to apply the grave punishment attaching to felony. I trust the house will diEmiss from their minds arguments founded upon such principles .1s these. We are told, on the other hand, that there aro statements made on tho part of the Government and people of France which are so offensive and so contrary to truth that on that account wo ought to de cline to take this measure into consideration. Hon, members have taken great offence at the assertion made on the l art of France that this country has been a harbour for assassins and conspirators. Sir, I am concerned to say that in point of fact that which has recently passed pr_vents our meeting that assertion with refutation. It is not tree that the people or the Government of Elaglani intentionally encourage cr bour men capable of committing this crime, but unf rtunately it is a fact that men have plotted crime in England and from England have issued for their perpetration. When we are told by the right hoe. gentleman and others that we ought to have answered that despatch of Ciunt Willewski with an in dignant refutation I say, unfortunately facts prevented our making that indignant refutation. It is impossible to deny that which the right hon. gentleman the member fir B ck'ngham shire state]. It is notorious to all the world that this last con spiracy, at all events, was hatched in England, and that the instruments by which it was to be accomplished were fabri cated in this country,---net accidentally, as I heard one hon. gentleman say,—but decidedly for a purpose previously con ceived ; and that the persons to execute the plan had not as th 3 right hon. gentleman who spoke last says, passed a considerable time beforehand in France, but had issued quite recently from this country, for the purpose of committing the crime of which they are guilty. That nofortunate state of things naturally and necess trily led the G wernment of this country to consider the state of the law, and even before we had received any application from the Government of Franso we deemed it our duty to turn our minds to a serious consi deration of the evil. If any measure can be an effectual remely there wore but two modes of treatment. One mode would have been to have r course to legislation which existed at previous periods and for a limited time with regard to aliens by which the Government had the power of expelling per ens suspected to be dangerous to the Government and welfare of this country, awl beyond that to have asked Parliament to give the Government power to oxpel persons supposed to be dangerous to the G iv:rnmeat of other countries That would, indeed, have been a course to which Parliament and the con ,try would not have listened for a moment. It would have been obviously ineffectual for the purpose, inasmuch as you could rarely have that degree of suspicion of the crime intended which would justify you in removing the persons accused. If we had had such a power upon the present oc casion it would not have enabled us to prevent the crime, be eaus3 uo suspicion attached to the pe sons who were the per petrators or the instigators of the deplorable act which has given rise to these discussions. If it were not possible to have recourse to a measure which would enable you to pre vent crimes of this kind by the previous removal of persons suspected to have the intention of eommitting them, the only other course was to increase the punishment which was attached to the commission of the crime, and thus to tn. d•iavour to increaso the motives which would deter men from entering into thew conspiracies. Tho noble lord behind me tells us that this bill would be ineffectual, because the severity of punishment does not deter from offences ; on the contrary, according to his re coning, the relaxation of pUnishment is the motive, by which you deter men from crime. My noble friend's argument is a plagiarism of the old rhyme. He thinks that punishment " Is great because it is so small," and his reasoning leads to the following conclusion, " Then 't w'd be greater if 't wore nano at all." (Laughter.) That argument is not founded upon reeeen, nor upon the experience of mankind. We know that too severe punishments fail, not from the iasufficiency of the motives which they afford to deter men from crime, but from the dif acuity to persuade juries t convict persons of c: inn', and thereby suhject them to a punishment which they t ink is beyond its deserts. That is the only reason of their failure. I hold my noble friend to be entirely wrong in saying that by raising the crime of conspiracy from a misdemeanour to a feliny we shall not actd to the motives which may deter men from mitering into such criminal project-4 as conspiracies to envier. It is idle to say that greater severity of punishment has not altogether put an end to crimes. If the argument were admitted that because a punishment had not in eariably lest an end to the commission of the crime against which it is aimed, therefore the punishment is useless, teen, ought to e en end of all penal laws. What pit ishment what penal law is there which has ev r succeeded in entirely e Aiugulehine the trim ag,aiest which it was directed 1 All en can hop from penal legislation is to create greater deterring ruetiv in the minds of 111311 who may be led to the co emission f erimes, but to iinaglua that there will not be men who from reckless passion, vain hope of impunity, or some oteer ca: use will be led to commit any crime whatever 'a to imagine Viet which is totally oppo- ed to the whole course if human expe rience. The severest punishment does not prevent the coin mission of murder, and you might as well argue that because murders continue in spiteof that ser oes pu ishment, we ought to dismiss punishment altogether, and leave mankind simply to the iufluonce and the morel teaching of those who may endeavour to guide them in the paths of virtue. Therefor, there is no forms whatever in the argument that to inflict a severe penalty ou the offence of conspiracy is not calculated to render the corn ilissien of the offence less likely. There aro two views in which this measure may be regarded, —first as an imp. ovement iu on own law withow regard to any extern al coneideratiens, and next as a measure calculated to prevent, as far s we can, the commission of a great crime—of a crime which would be highly injurious to the nterests of the country . , and would inflict a deep stain on its honour as character. No man can deny that there is great advantage in assimilating the law of the differeet p r tious of the united kingdom with regard to any particular offence. As regards the Irish law, the right lion and lear gentleman opposite has argued with great success on the ad vantage of reducing the penalty which is at present attache to this offence ef conspiracy to commit murder, and the argu ment is equally strong, on the other hand, that it would be a ,great advant,age in England to raise the offence from a simple misdemeanour to a felony. In spite of the maxim of the Barons, n spite of the new-born attachment of my no le friend ueldual me for our ancient laws, the bill whi :h we pro pose to you, regarded on its own merits, is a great improve ment ou the present law. It has been said, if this is merely a reform in the law why did you not make it part of th Con solidation Bills which are about to be laid before Parliament ? But my hon. friend the Solicitor-General has we 1 explained that this is a change, and not a consolidation of the I.tw, and that therefore it would not pr early have a place iu those bills. The real ground upon w Lich this measure rests is not that it is an improvemen in the law of the country, but that it is a measure calculated to prevent the recurrence of a great crime, the consequences of which would be injurious to the best interests of the country, as well as derogatory to its honour. Is it to be wJndered at that foreign nations should look with irritation and with feelings of mistrust on this country if they think that it harbours men who are here for the purpose of plotting most diabolical o .trages to be com mitted in ttieir own ountry ? I should be sorry if anything were proposed or adopted in this country which would inter fere in the slightest degree, with that principle by which the shores of England are open to political refugees of every country. Whatever they may know, and went ' e.er opinions they may hold with res ect to the Govern cent of their country, they ought to be allowed to come here a el remain here, under the security of our taws, so long as they continue to behave decently and do not commit an , offence against the laws of this country or against the laws o. God and mau. But it net er can be the w,sii of the Eug lab people that, under the pretence of cejoy.ng security ag dust oppression, men should ba allowe.l to be Lere plotting offences of the deepest dye, and instigating others to commit crimes in,olving other countries in scenes of bloodshed by the assassination of those who may be at the head of the Go vernment. And who are the persons against whom this bill has been. levelled? It has Leon said by the hoe. member for Pontefract that this bill will not sway the minds of those men ay; o, with mistaken views of patriotism and careless of their • ves, risk their existence for the accomplishment of such dreadful designs. These are the criminals who are the actois iu these assassinations, who pay the forfeit of their lives whe ther they succeed or fail. But the objects of this bill are -the cowards .who stand behind like the person alluded to by my noble friend in the case of the assassination of Count Rossi, who urged on those who w re to commit the crime, but himself remained behind. (Hear.) Those al c the met' against whom this bill is levelled, and with regard to them I have yet to learn that this bill will not furnish motives to deter them from the commission of such offences. It is (pelt° true that when you have awarded the punish ment it remains in each case to obtain the evidence by which the commission of the offence is to be proved. ( Hear, hear.) That, undoubtedly, is a difficulty iu all these cases, tut it is neither greater nor less is the case of a ii isdemeanour titan in that of a felony. The advantage of the measure which we propose is that if you get that evidence, if you are enabled at any future time to convict any individuals of the crime of conspiracy - to com mit murder, or of instigating others to commit it, there e ill be it severe punishment inflicted en them, which no man can contemplate without dread and apprehension. 'those who have spoken in this debate have drawn the at tention of the house to the great and important question of ,our relations with our neighbours in France. Sir, it is in vain to disguise that that no doubt is, and must be, a main element iu the consideration of the measure which is now before the house. We have not yielded to - threat or in timidation. The very arguments which have been used in the course of the debate negative that assertion. My noble friend objected to the bill that it did not accomplish what the French Government asked. Then, if it does not do that there is an end of the - argument that the house is called on to yield to the threats of a foreign country. This bill does not, undoubtedly, do that which is pointed out in one portion of the despatch from Count Walweski—it does not do thatwhich the French Government declares that it does not do itself in France—it does not infringe the prin ciple of hospitality to foreigners of al countries who seek a refuge from the tyranny of their own Governments. (Hear.) But the argument of those who say that we are not to do that which in itself is right because. forsooth, it is asked for and expected by others, is the very argument by which every tyrannical Government refuses to make any concessions to its subjects. (Hear, hear,) When discontent prevails, and it is pointed out that certain improvements iu their system would" remove that discontent, those Governments say, ' • No ; it would be undignified—it would be unworthy of our position— to make concessions when demands aro made ; let us wait until nobody wants anything, and then we may, perhaps, in our generosity and discretion do it." (Hear, hear.) Such is the argument that is used now. We are told that it may be right' that we should take some preettutions s -se far as thy are consistent with our constitution, to preient the commission of diabolical crimes abroad which are hatched in this country ; but we are asked to do it now by a foreign Government, and therefore we will not do that which in itself it would be perfectly ri k ht to do on another occasion That, sir, is not au argument which can be listened to seriously—we have interests of too much magnitude at st ike to allow us to listen to reasoning of that kind. We have our own honour and character in the first place to maintain, and I say that it would be disgraceful to the English nation if, knoWing that these crimes are the result of conspiracies hatched here, we were to refuse to stamp them with the mark of our condemnation by a new law which would be applicable to the case. (Hear, hear.) As far, then, as regards our own honour and character, I think that the country is 'bound to take some stop to show to the wor:d —not by speeches or by flaming and magnificent despatches, such as the right hon. member for Bucks would have had us writes but by some certain action—the detestation which Parliament and the country entertain of crimes of this kind, and their desire to do that which i s cons i s t ent with the law and constitution of the r alm for the purpose of preventing their repetition. I certainly do latnent—as many others who have spoken lamented —that expressions havoiebeeo used in the course of this debate, in regard to the Emperor of the French, which I think even those who used them must upon reflection regret, (Hear, hear ) We have only to look upon the Emperor of the French in that character in which he has been So eloquently described by the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire, as a steady and faithful ally of this country ----as a Sovereign who, placed at the head of a great nation by the wilt of that nation, hits, as far as the interests of his country are concerned, at ;east ahis to say, that it is in a state of as great internal material prosperity as was ever known in France before—we have only to look at him, I say, iu that character, to make us regret that tilts t expressions have been used, (Hear, hear) We have no right to inquire into the system of administration which the people of France are willing to submit to ; we look upon the Emperor of the French as the organ of a great and friendly nation; we have been allied to France of la:o years iu war end in peace, and we have found the Emperor steady and faithful, constant and true. (Hoar.) We have found him consulting, in the first instance, the honour and inte rests and dignity of his owe country, at the same time that ho made a due regard to those ends coincident with fidelity to his alliance with England, and showed how deeply lie was persuaded of the groat truth, that it was for the important benefit of both countri s that that alliance should continue, since it not only conferred immense benefits on the two nations, but afforded toe be:-.4t, security for the Maintenance of the general peace of Europe and the world. (Hear. hear.) If, then, we have an ally so true, so f Mani, so powerful to aid us, and so capable of rendering the :Owlets between the two countries beneficial to both and to the world at large, let us not lightly do that whick might be considered offensive to that sovereign and to the nation which he rules ; and if we aro able by any legislation of ours, without departing from the spirit of our constitution, and without introducing any new principle into our laws, to add the slightest security to the valuable life of that great and illustrious sovereign, W 6) should, indeed, incur a heavy respon sibility if, having those moans in our power, we were lightly • o reject them. We should indeed, be open to censure if, having it in our power to diminish the dangers to which that great and illustrious man has lately been exposed, we were, upon any paltry feeling of offended dignity, or of irritation at the expressions of three or four colonels of French regi ments, to act the childish pert of refusing an important mea sure on a ercrends so insignifi can t an d so t rumpery. (Ch eers. ) I sliontlhere explain, perhaps, what appears to have been very lunch lost sight of, that it i t almost invariably the habit of the Freed' ar.,,y, and even of small detach ments of the army, to send in addresses upon occa sions of this kind ; and, as a matter of. c urse, those ad dresses go into the Moniteur Hon. me berg seem to imagine that those ad tresses are selected by the bead of the Government, and that they a e inser ed in the .Lieoniteur by special order; but anybody who is acquainted with the course of business knows that it wou d be quite inconsistent with the numerous avocati ms of the Emperor that he should read through 200 or 300 ct those addresses in order to select those which he might wish to publish, and to repress the others. There is, therefore, no reason for saying that because those addresses were inserted in the Moniteur they were adopted by the Government of France. (Hear.) I hope the house will not, either by refusing us leave to bring in the bill, or by a niotini for delay— which would be tantamount to the same_ thing--create the impression that there is in the country or in this house any indifference to the abominable crime to which this bill relates, or to that important abiance which existe between the Governments and nations of Eneand and France. I trust, on the contrary, that the house, by giving us leave to bring in the bill, tutd by carrying it through its various stages, will afford a manifest proof that we do feel the utmost detestation for that base system of conspiracies to which the Bill refers, and that we are willing to do all that it is possible to do, consiete 'fly with he principles of cur constitution, to prevent the concoction of those crimes in England, And to add at least some security to the Emperor of the French by rendering it more difficult ior such atrocities in future to be planned in England, and executed by persons assembling ea these stores, which ought only to be the shelter of the v'rtuous, the honourable, the patriotic, and tko beam (Cheers.) Mr. COX, amid loud cric s o' " Divide," mevod ' he adjourn ment of the debate. Lord PALMERSTON—I should really hope that after two nights' deb to the house is at least prepared to come to a decision upon the preliminary question as to the introduction of the bill. (GenerA cheering ) If my„hon friend wishes to discuss the principle of the bill he will have ample oppok tnuity when it is introduced. (Laughter.) At all ov..ntt, I think it may uty to di ide against a further 'adjournment. Mr. MYLD hoped that his h in, friend would not press, his motion for an adjoarnment, arid to k • that'opportunity. of ..tating that although be intended to vote against the intro lucti n of the Bill he wa . not indifferent to the value of our alliance wit•, France or the atrocity of the a tempt to destroy the life of the Emperor. He prot sled against the interpre tation which the noble lord a tempted to put on.the conduct of those who were opposed to the Bill. (Cries of " Divide.") L ird . RUSSELL hoped that the division would take pl:ce that night, and suggested to t e hon. d learn( d gent's #nan (Mr. Kinglake) who had i, oved the amendment, the tesiralifeness of his withdrawal of it in order that the ques tion might be simplified, and the division taken on the ques tion that leave be given to introdu e the bill. (Cliecrs.) Mr. COX would withdraw his motion for adjournment. (Laught-r.) Mr. KINGLAKE —I understand it is the genera' desire of th houso that the division should be to en on a direc• ne .;ative rather than upon the mendment which I had the honour tv propose. (II ar ) In order that the house may determine whether it will be light to accede to my regnest that I shall be allowed to withdraw my amendment, I have Duly to remind them that the object o. the amendment was to induce the house to refrain from legislating upon this subject u ail documents relating to the point in discussion between the two Government should I.ve p educed. Now, it has fallen out that the material document to which my mind was di rected has been read in this house in the course of the ;re• sent debate. (Hear.) I think, tl.erefore, that, consistently with the ♦iew which induced me to prop° a the amendment, I may respectfully ask the house to permit me.t•• w thd: aw it. The motion of Mr. C is for adjournment, as well as the am.indatent of Mr Kiuglako, having be , u withdr,.wn, the arigiaal motion was put. The house divided. The numbers were, — For the bill Against it.. 99 Majority The Bill was then brought to and read a first time. ' LADY HAVELOCK AND SIR H. HAVELOCK'S ANNUITY BILL. This bill was read a second time, after some remarks by Sir CODRINGTON and Mr. GRIPFIT . SAVINGS-BANKS. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the Excimusa, it wss agreed that the Acts relating to sav ngs-banks and their ope' rations should be referied to a select committoe. FOR IMANA BRIDGE. Mr. WILSON •btained leave to bring in a bill for abolish ing the tolls at present loried at the bridge over the Shannon at POrtUMlia. HARBOURS OF REFUGE. On the motion of Mr. WILSON, the following gentlemen wer • nominated to serve on the , -;clect Committee on Ilar i , ours of Refuge :—Mr. Wiieon, Mr, Lowe, Mr. Baring, Lord Naas, Lord A. V Tempest, Mr. Kendall, Mr. Liddell, Sir J'• Smith Mr. Philips, Mr. Hassar.l, Mr. A. Smith, Sir R. Fer uson, Mr. J. A. Gurney, Mr Traill, Mr. Duff, N 7 r. Fergus, Mr. Dodson, Mr. Clay, Mr. J. Ewart, and Mr. Macartney. BANK ACTS COMMITTEE. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that tr. Ball and Mr. Tite be added to this committee. The motion was agreed to. PROCEEDINGS IN COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the fol. lowing resolutions, which were agreed to :-- " I That when a motion is made in committee of suPP I Y to omit or reduce any item of a vote, a question shall bs pro posed from the chair for omitting or reducing such item se. cordinzly ; and members shall ape .k is awl, question oulf , until it has been disposed of. 2. That when seven,' motions are offered they shall be taken in the order in which the items to which hey relate appear it, the printed estimates. 3„ That after a question has been proposgil from the choir_ for omitting or reducing any item, no motion shall be ma co ' debate allowed upon any preceding item. " 4. That where it has been proposed to omit or retitle° items in a vote, the question shall be afterwards put upon tho original vote, , r upon the reduced vote, as the case milY without amendment." The Conspiracy to Murder Bill W: brought in by Lord PAI:i =mon, read a first time, and ordered to be read a WO' tune ou Monday. The house adjourned at a quartor to 2 o'clock. PAIRS ON THE CONSPIRACY FOR MURDER BILL. For. Against. Fur. Agnew, Sir A. Bright, Mr. Wy, Mr. Rol g t. " 311 T. - Farquhar, Sir Johnstone, Mr. Gilpin,illoa g e h o b l. Locke, 31r .; l' o r 1 &unto Butler P ea l, G enera l W ort l e y, o'l'l SPORTING NOTES. LINCOLN IS. Turfites are n o t t o b e f ros t-b oun d situ. all. The 1 ' 1. ; gram from Lincoln is. satisfactory on tha , pout, fur l etatee that the running ground is in good ring order' and that th e races w ill b e d ec id e d at t h e a pp oin ted ‘iii )c ; Toethe people ar e s ce pti ca l on th e subjeat, and fancy the ground must be as hard a+ 'a paving-stone. severity of the weather, - which 'has Wen" `topped certain horsei in their oik, will d produce a diminishing effe:it on the fields, and cause lb ,' ale jug to tall short of that ' enccess w hi c h was orlc anticipated. The managers, however, will exert thisf selves energe ti ca lly t o pr e vent shortcomings, and I" care of Mr. Johnson and the zeal of Mr. Ford, O D ' der the proceedings regular and effiment. I know be little of the "form" of the different animals likely 0 0 , brought out, that I am unable to calculate the pov a i bilities with any degree of accuracy. My knowledge It' s- ir be derived from therunning of the horses last year and 0 2 opinion founded on known performances. It Odd Trick Commotion were to be brought out for the Trial Stakt r race of unusual interest for this early period of the 1, - b• would be occasioned. I should be induced to ts ol4 t h Cambridgesbire champion, albeit Church Langton /I l i ° 17ibe, thei best of' the weights, ought to be diffie ol ; i 0 shake o ff . Nothing is known of the mer it s or &Kat of the two year olds engaged in the BrocklesbY " - Ade Report, however, speaks favourably of Head IKnOide-" and the Queen of &etc Vandermulin has been t a lk e d a b ou t i n eons t E t with the Lincoln Handic a p, b ut , reco ll ec ti n g his 1J • down at Warwick, I am disinclined to trust bias too to course which will be somewhat hard. Could I 001°61 % upon a start, I should have no hesitation in giving 7 . vote of confidence in Yeller Gal, Plumstone, an d T. to Cooke. The jumping events I shall not attemP S foretell. Feb. 10. A FRESH MAN'. INIMM=MMT BETTING AT • MANCHESTER.--TWISDAY. TWO THOUSAND. 7to 2 agbt Clydesdale (*ken) sto 1 aget Brother to Marchioness (takes) 15 to 1 aget Vandyke (taken) 15 to 1 apt Coxwold (taken) • GREAT NORTHERN HANDICAP. 500 to 50 eget Vedette (taken) CHESTER CUP. 100 to 6 eget Adamae (taken) • 22 to 1 eget Blink Bonny (taken) 22 to 1 agbt Brother to Marchioness (taken) 22 to • 1 aget Blackthor n (taken) 25 tq 1 eget Charles the Second (taken) 33 to 1 eget Palatieter (taken) 33 to 1 eget General Bobquet (taken) 40 to 1 eget Botany (offered) LIVERPOOL STEEPLECHASE. 11 to 1 eget Little Tom (taken) 12 to 1 eget Jean du Queens (taken) 12 to 1 eget Lough Bawu (taken) 100 to 6 agbt Torn Moody (taken) LINCOLN RACES.—TUESDAY Bvi:1 116 '; tie The following horses have arrived :-- Squire - sham, Maley, logomar, and Weethorpe. rt a sseiq fro The following notice was issued m the """-- s ad Post-51hce, viz. :—Mails for the Me.literritnesu.sipos India, via Southampton, will be despatched by the,,,,,jets en the morning of the 11th inst , and also by the e with the Australian mail, on the morning of the meant. , hit° ADELE : By JULIA KAVANAGEI.-.-,, Adwe, work we have read. by Miss Kavanagh ; it i° abliorlie ing novel, full of delicate character painti n g . The AO manship is good throughout, and the intereft lf)cibler in the first cbaWor burns brightly to the close. with leer child's ways and woman's heart, is arts and wilful a little piece of imperfection as ever b 1,05 lb* (les or plagued the heart of lover . Mr. 0 hornet sa a d husband, is the beet drawn character in the ttir ,J the most thoroughly sustained. Hie acts are the st; w itil result of his motives and emotions--he is not pa ir td uPi spasmodic epithets, but quietly and carefully "'l i r : OP the result is a real life-bke human being c st blo:d."—Athenaur4.