The Sun. — London, England, 1858-02-20 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT, SOUSE OF LORDS.--(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsao's at 5 o'clock. Lord WYNFORD presented a petition from the Quarter Sessions at Monmouth praying for a:: arneLd ineut of the evils which existed in the licensing system with respect to the sale of beer. Earl CARNARVON presented a petition from Bland worth, in the county of Hants, praying for increased facilities for the propagation f the Gospel in India. He asked whether it was the intention of the Govern :Bent to bring in any measure on this subject during the present session? Earl GRANVILLE said it was not the intention of the Government to introduce any bill on the subject. BANKRUPTCY LAWS. In answer to Lord BROUGHAM, The LORD CHANCELLOR said a bill for the amendment of the bank ru p tc y and insolvency laws was already prepared and would very shortly be introduced, but whether in this house or the Commons was not yet decided. CONVEYANCE OF TROOPS TO INDIA. Viscount DUNGANNON rose to call the attention of the Government to the unsafe and unseaworthy nature of the ships selected for the conveyance of the troops to India by the overland route from Suez to Aden, but more especially to the condition of the Alma and the Ajdaha, sent to convey a detachment of the 69th Regiment. This regiment was sent out to India, but on arriving at Suez it was discovered that the Alma, which ought to have conveyed them on, had broken her shaft. The troops were afterwards transferred to the Ajdaha, which also sprung a leak, and was compelled to put back when about four hundred m i les from Aden. He bad been informed that the Ajdaha bad been unseaworthy, and- bad been condemned eighteen months before she was taken up, and he wished to know from the, Government whether such a statement was correct I Lord PAM/ETRE said the matter was very easily explained. In her passage to Suez before the troops were embarked an accident occurred to an important part of the wiacbinery of the Alma, the vessel selected for the eonveyance of the 69th Regiment, and it was consequently impossible that she could proceed. The troops were transferred to the Ajdaba, but from an accident, which no human fore-ight could prevent, she sprung a leak, and was compelled to return to Suez. Both casualties were such that it was impos sible to provide against, but he was happy to say that no loss of life occurred. During the whole of the trans port of troops to India, there had not been a single instance in which loss of life had occurred. After a few words from the Earl of CARNARTON and the Bail of HARDWICK the subject dropped. EDUCATION IN INDIA. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH rose to move for a copy of the report of Mr. Chapman (Behar), director of public instruction in India in 1855 and 1856. The noble earl took the opportunity of calling the atten tion of their lordships to the state of education in India, and the efforts the Government had made to extend it. It was impossible that such efforts had not produced material effect, and it was desirable to know in what direction those exertions had extended, whether good or bad. He had not seen the report for which he moved, but, from extracts, which had been placed in his bands, it appeared there was a deep-rooted prejudice prevalent amongst the natives against the Government system of education. Earl GRANVILLE said it was early yet to fusee the effects of a m e asure adopted only in 1854. It was not true that the educational measure had any effect in causing the mutiny. He bad no objection to the pro duction of the report alluded to by the noble earl. The motion was agreed to. The Havelock Annuities Bill was read a second time on the motion of Lord PANMURE. Their lordships adjourned at a quarter-past 6 o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.) The Snwou took the chair at 4 o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Liskeard and Love Union Canal Company's Bill was read a second time. MERSEY DOCKS AND HARBOUR (CONSOLI DATION OF ACTS) BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this bill, Mr. LOWE said the Government had made an arrangement with the Mersey Board in regard to this measure, and the Government were prepared to support the second reading of the bill. The hill was read a second time. The Mersey Docks and Harbour (New Works) BM was read a second time. MUTINOUS SEPOYS. Mr. RICH gave notice that on this day week ho should put a question to the President of the Board of Control bearing upon the recently reported engagements of our troops with the mutinous sepoys, and ask him whether any and what orders had been given to tho officers of our troops relative to their giving quarter or not to mutinous sepoys found in arms. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. Mr. ROEBUCK gave notice that he should on Mon.' day next. if no reason was shown to the contrary, present a petition from an individual charging a member of that house (Mr. I. Butt) with a breach of the privileges thereof, and move the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the al!egations of the petition. After some discussion on the course to be pursue , ), It was suggested by the SPEAKER, and accepted by Mr. ROEBUCK, that the learned gentleman should present the petition on Monday, and fix a day for its consideration, after it bad been printed and circulated amongst the members of the house. PROBATE AND LETTERS OF ADMINISTRA TION. Mr. COWAN asked the law officers for England, Scotland, and Ireland respectively, that as, by an Act, passed in the last session of Parliament, provision was made for giving validity to Probates and Letters of Administration taken out in England and Ireland re spectively, if it be their intention now to introduce one or more hills whereby probates and letters of administra tion in England and Ireland, and a confirmation of executors in Scotland, whether of testate or intestate succession, may be rendered valid and effectual, and the benefits from the recent change of the hw may be ex tended and enjoyed throughout all the United Kingdom? The LORD ADVOCATE said that the subject was under the consideration of the law officers of the Crown. NATIONAL EDUCATION IN IRELAND. In answer to Mr. BLACK, Mr. WILSON said the contract referred to would terminate at the end of the montb, and would not be resumed except so far as the supply of books for the schools. The copyrights of those books would be thrown open to the trade. TITLES TO LAND IN SCOTLAND. Mr. DUNLOP asked the Lord Advocate whether it was his intention to introduce, during the present ses sion, any measure for further simplifying and rendering lees expensive the titles to land in Scotland ? The LORD ADVOCATE said he hoped to introduce such a measure immediately after the Easter recess. INCOME TAX RETURNS. On the motion for adjournment till Monday, Mr. CRAWFORD called attention to the late abstraction of income tax returns from the office of the collector for the City of London, and asked for the production of any correspondence that had transpired with the Government and the City Income-tax Commis. sioners in reference to the abstraction ? Mr. WILSON said the Government were not answer. able for the safe custody of the papers referred to. He would lay any correspondence that bad taken place on tke table of the house. MINISTER, OF JUSTICE. Mr. W. EWART put a question to the First Lord of the Treattury, for explanation on the subject of the ap pointment of a department or Minister of Justice. Whether he intended to appoint a Minister of Justice for the improvement and supervision of the law of the country 1 THE PARIS TREATY OF PEACE. Lora J. MANNERS put a question to the noble lord relative to the art icl e reference to the eir e e nf the Treaty of Paris, and also in Lord question,PAia tßhalth!Ge. said in reference to Mr. Ewart'sas far asaposscivhelren, mthenthtefehltpiintiothnesirofd theuty to give effect, house embodied in tion agreed to last e r e e e lttibb, but the resolu boy the house in reference to the least a Mi ni n iffi i e e n t e u t r lt hf to o Justice was so ambiguous that f it accomplish; understand what was meant. The apwpatolintd Minister of Justice was a desirable obj ect but there were so many difficulties surrounZeeern the Government had not been able yet to surrounding that that part of the resolution. With reference to th e ry cm out tion of the noble lord (Lord J. Manners), he believe - d e a e. application was made at Paris by certain Circassian chiefs for assistance against Russia ; but as th e Cir caselans took no part in assisting the allies, it was not thought desirable to renew h the war on their behalf, the olje b o a t vi f n o a r whic h the allies went to war with Russia accomplished. With regard to the 12 articles of the Treaty re lative to the opening of the ports in th e Bleck nef S P ert er 7 opened three on the eastern aide, but n'one R u s s ia o had western side. Application bad been made to Russia to open ports on that side, but she declined—first on the ground that the ports to be opened were On ly to be those where custom - h o use , quarantine, and police regulations existed. To that the Govern.meat remonstrated, and IRnsEla then excused her self from not opening those port., on the ground that s h e w as engaged in hostilities with tribes on that part of the coast, and had been unable to make the necessary Communications were arrangements for going • on between provisions of the treaty. After some remark 3 from Mr. Napier, Mr. Locke King, and the Attorney-General, The subject dropped. THE GOVERNOR OF DOMINICA. Mr. BLAND asked the Under Secretary for War, whether Majer Ord, of the Royal Engineer, had been appointed Governor of Dominica ? and if so, whether he was ■till retained on the full-pay list of that corps ? and if so, whether there were any reasons for his being shs exceptional cage Sir J. ii.A.DISDEN said that it was moat for offioors obtaining such appointments to remain for six months afterwards on full pay. This was not an exceptional case. The motion for adjournment was then agreed to. CONSPIRACY TO MURDER BILL. Lord PALMERSTON—In moving the second read ing of this bill, I wish to make a very few observations in addition to those which I addressed to the house on nuts ing fur leave to introduce the hid. In the first place, I would Bay that great pains have been taken to spread the notion that this is an alien bill. That impression is totally unfounded, and totally different from the nature of the measure. It is not an alien bill. The bill gives to Government no arbitrary power whatever, and con tains no enactments applicable to aliens which are not applicable to all her Majesty's subjects. I cannot deny that which I stated on a former occasion, that her Ma jesty's Government were led to look into the condition ef the law relating to conspiracy by the calamitous event which recently took place in France. Upon looking into the state of our law we found that in England the crime of conspiracy for the commission of murder was, as I stated in a former debate, a crime practically almost unknown to this country, and therefore no special law bad been framed to meet that offence. The crime of conspiracy to murder was only punished in the same manner as the offence of conspiring to do any other act which was wrong. As I stated on a former occasion, conspiracy to commit a trivial offence, such as hissing a bad actor, was placed in the same category as the grave offence to which I have alluded. We thought on looking into the law that that was not a proper state of things. A crime had been committed. There could be no doubt that a conspiracy to murder had been batched in this country. We thought the English law fixed too slight a punishment to so grave a source of crime. On the other hand, when we looked to the state of the law in Ireland, we found a law which had originated in unhappy times, when animosities ran high, when vio leoces were committed, and when unfortunately the crime was one of no very unfrequent occurrence, to which attached the heaviest punishment—the punish ment of death. We thought—looking at the present improved state of Ireland—that it was not desir able such a law should continue, and we considered it desirable to mitigate the penalty in Ireland, whil-t on the other hand, we raised the penalty in England. For that purpose we prepared the bill now under the consi deration of the house. The bill, I say, is of general application. It does not point exclusively against aliens. It only placesaliens on that footing on which they ought to stand—namely, on the same footing as all her Ma jesty's subjects within the realm. If a man goes into a foreign country he is bound to submit to the laws of that country. He cannot expect to enjoy privileges which are not ace , rded to the natives, and must submit to the laws which in the wisdom of the legisfature, are imposed on the native inhabitants of the country. There is no thing in this bill which gives to the executive government any arbitrary power whatever, either in regard to her Majesty's subjects or to aliensre.ident within the realm. It gives no power of expul-ion. There is nothing in the bill which interferes in the slightest degree with that law of hospitality by which we have been invariably guided with respect to foreigners seeking an asylum in this country. Any foreigner, whatever his ration may he— whatever may be his political creed—whatever may be his political offences against the government of his coun try—may under this bill as without this bi I find a safe and secure asylum within this realm as long as be conforms to the law, and submits to the law of the land which he has chosen for his residence. Neither does this law give to the government ar y arbitrary power what ever. The penalty which it imposes must be a penalty awarded by a court of justice—awarded by a court of justice upon proof of the offence committed, therefore, with respect to the judgment of the offence ortho award of punishment, the executive government will have nothing whatever to do. I conceive, therefore, that it is a grievous misrepresentation to give this measure the nickname ef an alien bill. It is, as I have before said, no alien bill. It is an improvement of the law of the land, with regard to an offence which up to a recent time might have been known to the law of Ireland, but which I am sorry to say has been committed in this kingdom, and committed, I am sorry to say, not simply by foreigners resident in this country, because there is too much reason to fear that the inves tigations which have been carried on elsewhere have tended to show that British subjects have not been alto gether exempt from criminality in this matter. (Hear.) That is one point on which I thought it desirable to make a few observations. I will now advert to another point. Objection has been taken to the course pursued by her Majesty's Government, upon the ground that we ought to have written and sent some very great, fire, eloquent, and indignant answer to the despatch of Count Waleweki to Count de Persigny, which was handed to her Majesty's Government and laid on the table of the house. (Cheers.) Now, sir, what passed in regard to the despatch was this : it was presented personally by the French ambassador to my noble friend at the head of the Foreign-office, who repeated to the French am bassador that which he, and I , and other members of her Majesty's Government have over and over again explained to all the foreign representatives who have approached the subject at all, that a change in our law with regard to the asylum granted to foreigners they must not expect, because it was utterly impossible. (Rear, hear.) They have often been told, and it was repeated on that occasion verbally, that we never had our law pointed against foreigners for offending against foreign countries, but that it had been framed to guard this country against dangers arising from the conduct of foreigners seeking a reioge in this country—the', it wool be a new law an enactment wholly and entirely new —that it would involve us in great embarrassment in dealing with foreign Governments, because if cases had arisen in which foreign Governments required the ex pulsion of foreigners on suspicions entertained by foreign Governments, the Government of the day in England would have answered that, having no well-grounded reason for suspicion, they could not put the taw into execution, and that naturally would have raised very disagreeable di-cussions between England and foreign Go vernments. (Hear.) That was explained to the French ambassador by my noble friend. Some gentlemen may say we ought to have written an answer to that effect. It would have been useless to repeat that in writing which had over and over again been so fully explained. (Oh, oh.) The Government might have announced to the French Government what they intended to do, but I do not think that would have been a very proper course. We told the French Government that the matter had already been under our consideration, and that we should take fte course v hich we deemed most consistent with our own interests and our own honour. If any party has a ground of complaint against us for not writing, it is the French Government, because they mightjustly say we were wanting in ordinary courtesy to them in leaving unanswered a communication which had been formally laid before us. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) But I hold that we are practically absolved on that point. I say there is no ground for blaming us for not writing a despatch, which either would have been controversial when great agitation prevailed in France —would only have aggravated the feeling which we desired so see spending itself—or would had the appear ance of our placing before a foreign government whet we intended to submit to Parliament. It is not right to submit our mcaeureato foreign governments, in order to see whether they will be satisfied with what we are doing. In matters of internal regulation we are not bound to give any account to foreign governments. I trust, therefore, diet the opinion which t he house arrived at on a former occa-ion, as to the Expediency of permit ting the bill to be brought io, will continue, now that the house has the opportunity of seeing its details ; and seeing that it gives no additional discretionary power to the executive—that it only provides a more appropriate punishment for an offence of a grave character—that while on the one hand it raises the penalty in England, on the other hand it mitigates the penalty in Ireland, and reduces the law in the two islands to the same con dition— I trust the house will consent to give the bill a L second rearing. (Hear.) The question having been put, Mr. T. GIBSON rose to move an amendment. He said, I am not one of those who haze laboured under the nii.rtprtrehFnci-n of tbfs , I j-cts of this bill to which the noble lord has referred, If such misapprehension does exist, I concur with him that he has taken a very proper course in putting the house in possession ef his views upon the exact aim of the measure before us. But, sir, with regard to certain conversations, confidential or otherwise, which are said to have passed between the noble lord at the head of the Government and the Foreign Minister of France, lam of opinion that matters of this grave importance; that matters affecting, perhaps, the honour and reputation of our country, ought not to be left to mere casual conversations, bet ought to be placed upon record, in order that they may stand before the world as the position which England has assumed in the question at issue. (Hear, hear.) I can assure the house, I can assure the noble lord at the head of the Government, that it is not my desire by moving the amendment of which I have given notice to provoke any angry controversy between, as it were, the people of England and the French nation. I attach great value to the maintenance of friendly relations with that great country, and were I to utter a single word tending to produce angry or irritating discussion, I should not be acting in accordance with my own conviction'. I can tell the noble lord that, although I have been no follower called democonsol Z it r r w eg it a h rd reference to the . policy which be has pursued to the foreign relations of this country, althou g h noble lard , have generally bean no admirer of what us s s e p l i t rited foreign" policy, I have frequently dangerou saneu t friendly contro versy understanding Antes we j ai b with the reflection that, whatever dis have with other parts of the world, the would or dispute be e with part y least, necessary to tle ci vilisation France , to ou any per with which I hold to be (Hear, hear.) I 1% i.ia a n d happiness of Europe. the resolution sehict; l efore I touch upon the merits of shall ven t ure to submit to the hous e , t o meet one to put th e brace co s two preli m i nary objections and meaning. It has Porheeesson of its exac t P arliamentary trthe°.t'j t e l : . ted by th e enemies of the bill before the house cuse ciently decid e d, t h at I ought to a h mendn aen t i s not suffi to throw out th e bil l altogether, to pinpoeed a mot i on with ignominy. (Float.) Undoubtedly,i my reject it, as it were not in that f. rm. On the other hand , amendment is att to the bi 1 Lave urged th a t this is gentlemen indirectlemen favour of defeating the measure, and that it would mote of candid if I had invited the house t o r rad the ve h b il e l t second time this day three months. (Hear.) Thee objections are founded upon a misapprehension of the object which I have in view. My object is to invite an expression of opinion from the house strictly relevant to the bill before us ; but by agreeing to the resolution which I now submit you would not necessarily defeat tie bill, you would simply avert its progress for a single :ds b.; co,:upteLt to any per day, aed it wei. ll 1-41t;r. . 3Vn to proceed with tho =awl and pass itinto a lAN (Hear.) My own opinions are undoubtedly averse to the bill, and when its merits come more distinctly before us I shall give my support to a motion for its rejection. At present, however, I think we are enabled consistently with our opinions of the merits of this particular change of the law to say whether we should now read the bill a second time, before having arrived at a decision upon the merle in which the floeernm-nt. I a-e Co ducted the affairs which has led to the introduction of the measure before us, and als o whether it is not the duty of the Par liament of England to declare that some answer should have been given to so important a despatch at that which has been laid on our table, and therefore legitimately brought under our notice by the executive Government. (Cheers.) I have been told by an bon. friend that I want to take an opportunity of passing a sort of indirect, he did not say censure, but unfriendly opinion upon the management of affairs by the Government, and for that purpose have given notice of an amendment which is calculated to draw to my side persons who are hostile to the bill before us, but who upon the whole do not disapprove the course which the Government have taken. (Hear, hear.) In answer to that objection I can only say that I should have been very glad, if it bad been in my power, to move my amendment as a substantive resolution ; but I have not the command of the time of this house—(cheers) —l cannot bring in any measure which I think fit, and I much doubt whe ther I should have obtained from those who have the disposal of our time an early opportunity for submitting such a resolution. It appears to me, however, that my amendment is strictly within the rules of Parliament ; that it is relevant to the bill before us; and, as the ques tion which has given rise to it is intimately connected with the proposal of the Government, I hold that I am taking a Parliamentary course, and one that can be jus tified by precedent, in asking the House of Commons to arrest for a single day only the progress of the present measure for the purpose of expressing the opinion set forth in my amendment—viz., that the important de spatch of Count Wale wski should have received a solemn 1 and deliberate answer from her Majesty's Government. What is the resolution that I propose to the house ? It states, in the first place, "that this house hears with much concern that it is alleged the recent attempts toper' the life of the Emperor of the French have been devised in England, and expresses its detestation of such gui ty enterprises." I imagine that every member of this house gives his cordial concurrence to the sentiment embodied in those words. I venture to say that throughout the length and breadth of this land enterprises to assassinate the Emperor of the French are viewed with universal execration. (Cheers.) I feel no doubt, therefore, that ti e House of Commons cordially approves the first passaee of my resolution. The next passage says, "That this house is ready at all times to assist in remedying any defects in the criminal law, which, afterdoeinvestigation, are proved to exist." I put the words "at all times" be cause I quite agree with the First Lord of the Treasury and the Secretary for the Home Department that if it be proved that our laws are defective we ought not to be deterred from making the requisite alterations because other persons may have committed indiscretions, or be cause suggestions may have come from foreign lands. But, at the same time, we ought not to make changes in our criminal law without "due investigation." We ought not to make important changes in the law of conspiracy, even conspiracy to murder. Conspiracyper se is an unful filled —or, as it has been called, an unconsummated— ietention. That is a vague, uncertain offence to deal with, and more than any other with which a ma's may be charged affords an opportunity for injustice being done- (Hear.) It therefore behaves the house to be careful as to the extent of the penalties to be attached to the offence. I think it is Sir Matthew Hate who says conspiracy is a net in which you catch the dove as well as the hawk, and therefore, seeing the uncertainties which surround prosecutions for such a crime, we ought to take care that we do not hastily make danger-us changes in the law of England with respect to conspiracy. (Hear.) I speak with hesitation, not with confi.ience, upon so grave a question as what may be necessary changes in our criminal law. I would found my opinions upon high authorities, when the dicta of men of great experience, upon reports of your pubic offiesra—such as the Statute Law Commissioners—rather than upon aey crude views, bzsed upon abstract reasoning. Now, I find that this very law of conspiracy to murder has already been brought formally under the consideration of the Statute Law Commissioners. The Statute Law Com mission met on Wedneeday, December 3, 1856, and there ' were present the Lord Chancellor, Lord Wrm,tesl y, Mr ". Baines, the Attorney-General, the Solicitor-General, Mr. Greaves, Mr. Colson, and Mr. Bellenden Ker. At that meeting a letter was read from the A tteroey- General of Ireland, drawing the attention of these . distinguished public officers to the differences between the law of Ireland and the law of England with respect to conspiracy to murder. " You will observe," wrote Mr. Fitzgerald, " considerable differences be tween the laws of the two countries, particularly in relation to conspiracy to murder." This called the attention of the Statute Law Commissioners to the par- Ccelar criminal law, which is now under discussion, and notwithstanding that we find that from his bill for con solidating and amending the criminal law of England with regard to effences against the person the Lord Chancellor has thought fit deliberately to exclude any change in the existing law relative to the offence of con- ' spiracy to murder. (Cheers.) I think that fact, ought to have some weight with the house, as &bowleg that the Bill before us is the result of a sudden determination-- not of deliberate consideration toll twine " due invesli -1 gation"— on the part of her Mejesty'e Government. (Heir.) It may be said that the bill introduced by tie -Lord Chancellor as the organ of the Statute Law Cnn• mission, merely consolidates and does not an the lavis to which it relates. TLat is not the case. rld re port prefixed to the "Offences against the Person Bill" besides referring to a vast 'muter of cases of the actual introduction into that Bill of legislation which is a i change and not the consolidation of any existing law, has the following passage which bears directly on the present subject:— •' At present, a great anomaly prevals in eases of attempts to commit murder. Sundry of them are made felony and .‘ highly penal, while the remainder are merely misdemeanours . at common law. . . It is obvious that, upon principle, attempts to commit murder should be of the same c'ass ; section 25, therefore, makes all such attempts felony." 1 Here is a c'eange in this bill for the purpere of anatliora tion in your criminal law, showing that thers was a power to amend, as well as to consolidate, and therefore I must suppose that the Chancellor of England and her Majesty's Government did not see fit to make any change in the criminal law of England in reference to conspiracy to murder, after deliberate inquiry by the Statute Law Commission. (Cheer:.) Ido not %lab to commit myself t) any mere opinion as to the law as it now stands is precisely what it ought to be ; but this, I think, is evident, that with respect t i the recent event which has taken place in Paris the law of England is sufficient in all respects to deal with the parties who who have conspired towards that act, who aided and abetted in it, or incited persons to commit the assasei tion. Do we not see that a warrant has been issued by the Government for the arrest of Mr. A llsop, a pers m charged with having been aiding and abetting, in some form or other, this attempt at the person of the Emperor of the French ? Do we not see, also, that an alien resi dent in England has been brought helot@ the police ma gistrates, and that proceedings are being taken with the view of subj-cling him to prosecutien, on the peeled of his being a conspirator, or having incited this act / (Rear.) I believe the law as it now stands gives mere power over persona who have aided and abetted this late I act in Paris than if you were to prosecute them under the • present Bill of Her Msjeiny's Government. (Hear.) Under the 9th George IV., cap. 32, Sir R. Peet's Act, any subject of Her Majesty, who is accessory before the fact to murder in another country, may, I understand, t be even punished to the extent of taking away his life, but certainly to the extent of penal servitude, if the charge is proved against him, and I believe that the highest authorities iu the laud have also held that under • the terms, " subjects of her Majesty," are included all persons who are resident within the dominions of her Majesty, and who are held, therefore, during that residence, to owe allegiance to our Crown and laws. If that be so, it appears to me that at the present moo ent , the law is amply sufficient to deal with any persons who have been concerned in thin ceive-y in ' rlngirg aleert Lou eleasifel attempt WLiell had lately taken place in Paris. (Hear.) But if there be any doubts on these points, I, for one, would not be the man, and I frankly say no, to stand in the way of such an amelioration of your law as would enable you to deal with persons, be they Englishmen or aliens, who can be proved by clear and conclusive evidence to have aided in the commission of such atrocious acts. So much for the merits of the Bill ; but I am not now asking the House, in fact, fur an opinion on the Bill, for that question will arise after my resolution has been dealt with, but I am merely putting it to the House whether it is right, under the cirsum stances, to read the Bill a second time this day. I hope that all, therefore, will agree with me that these woris in my resolution are reasonable words :—" Tbat this House is ready at all times to assist in remedying any defects in the criminal law which, after due investi gation, are proved to exist." (Hear, hear.) I must take leave to observe that the noble lord at the head of the Government and the right hon. gentleman the Secre tary for the Home Department have held argu- . ments in reference to this proposed change in the law which are not quite consistent with each other. First of all, they press ou us the maxim that we must do what is right without reference to our being asked to do it or not, which is as much as to say that we have been asked to do it ; that a blot has been pointed out de terred from dealing with it. AN!. pressing on us that by a foreign country, but we are not therefore to be de maxim, in which, to a certain extent, I express nay con currence, though, to use the expression of an hon, friend of mine, there is a species of awkwardness in cluing any thing, however right, under a sort of dures,--after, I repeat, pressing on us that good maxim —that ice must du right ourselves, whether asked to do it or riot, the noble lord and the right hon. gentleman sail that they were always going to make this change in the law, eve o if there had been no French despatch, and if there bad been, though I do not know whether they said this exactly, no calamitous event in Paris. But if this French despatch had nothing to do with ttoe bringing in cf this , bill, why was it laid in a formal manner oil the table of L b Y e l , I de a a b x r k l n e_ la , a o_ e mindsfoundationthe turned to this clef ct in the criminal quite unnecessa a t o analleged asthe intention of the Government id ea it's tome tithe past. It appears to me that the necessity of dischargingdefect in our criminal law, it was rert o d us such a lecture about the any rata, if it t was like a second thought ; and, at to the indiscretions of taluerradutir without any reference paragraph in my resolution. - 1 donnoowt know to the third whether ttefi t r h b e t house has gone with me so far as to Zrwee two paragraphs, but I take leave to assume it has no objection to them. With resnect to the third paragraph, I express my regret "That her Majesty's Government, previou-ly to inviting the house to amend the law of conspiracy at the present time, has not felt it to be their duty to make some reply to the important despatch re eeived from the Frene'n ' J..n. 20, 1S 8, and which has been laid before Pailiainent." I certainly feel regret at that circumstance, and the House of Commons is competent to express regret, without necessarily implying what is called censure. A man may regret unavoidable circumstances, and I do regret—whatever may have been the cause—the omis sion to answer Count Walewski's despatch, because I think we now stand before the world as admitting, a, it were, the truth of some of the charges contained in that despatch. (Cheers.) Nay, more ; seeing that the despatch calls in question the pelicy of England in reference to the right of asylum—that it reflects on the made in which England has thought fit to permit the right to be enjoyed by foreigners, I say it was the duty of the Go vernment of the country to have replied courteously, with dignity, but firmly, and to have defended and placed on record those great principles which have guided the policy of England in reference to the right of asylum. (Cheers.) Does it not look R 3 if we were ashamed to defend our principles when we find, upon the right of asylum being indirectly called in question, the insinuation is passel over in silence? (Bear.) And more than thi., I believe that a great mi apprehension exists throughout France as to the exact nature of our laws in reference t) the right of asylum. Now, Count Walewski says in his despatch of the 23. h January : "It is no longer the hostility of misguided individuals, manifesting itself by all the excesses of the press and all the violences of language ; it is no longer even the work of the factious seeking to rouse opinion and to provoke disorder ; it is assassination, elevated to doctrine, preached openly, practised in repeated attemp ts, the most recen t of which just struck Europe with a gs. Is hospitality g in islation to contributeamazement. Ought, th en , th e r i g ht ? And can it con ti nue to shelter persons who by their flagrant acts p lace t h emse l v ,s r to ln a m s s ta t l o sl se p ii nr r sodt?eescoitgunsgushcatinitdha the English ni t ig e . li o i:l f ahn t ls h e beyond the pale of commo n o t ri g ht, and under the ban of hu mani y ?" od t to favour asylum s It no answer has been given to that despatch, it is an admission, by silence, tbat with our eyes open we have sheltered assassins, and that we have actually favonied their designs. But is that true I sir ; it is not. As my hon. friend the rnemberfor Sheffield truly said, Eng land abhers assassination as much as any nation on the face of the earth ; and if assassins have lived in this country it is by no fault of ours. We have murderers of our own, we have robbers of our own—they are not deterred by the severity of our criminal law from com mitting crimes, but is that a reason for saying that Eng land is a country which shelters such criminals, and which favours their designs ? The insinuation of Count Waleweki against the laws and policy of this country is unkind and unjust, and it was the bounden duty of the executive Government to have repelled such aii in sinuation by a firm and dignified answer to this de spatch. lam sorry to see the indifference which is manifested by some members of the Government to the great principles of liberty which undoubtedly lie at, the foundation of English policy, and which regulate this right of asylum. I was sorry to see the readiness with which Lord Clarendon, at the Conferences of Pa is, silentlyaccoiesced in a resolution condemning the liberty of the press. Not (ally did he sty nothing—so far as we may judge from the protoculs—in defence of the liberty of the peas, which is so dear to us all, but he actually signed his name to a resolution condemnatory of it. The only answer which the noble lord gave when called upon to explain this circumstance wa- , , " Would you have had Lord Clarendon make a scene—they were al! so harmonious together (a laugh) —why not let these matters, which may lead to dangerous controversy, p iss by unnoticed ?" is the same sort of thing now. This solemn an important de , patch of Count Wale wski's is not to be answered, because the answer may lead to un pleasant controversy. But in defence of the honour of England and the principles of our laws we must risk an unpleasant controversy, if we wish to maintain our position among the nations of the world. (Ctr,ers.) That despatch ought to have been answered. It may be hell that it was difficult to answer it (a laugh), but I will quote a pa sage from the speech of the right hon. gentle man the member for Wiltshire, who sits near me, which shows that there are those who would be ready to answer it " I frankly own," said the right lon. gentleman, " I never read a despatch which was more tempting to a Minister to answer thal this one," (liear.) That looks as if there would have been no dif ti,mlty experienced in the mind of somebody at any rate in answering it. There was a very imp)rtant view of this question ►hrowu ont incidentally by the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucks, when he spoke on the first reading of the Bill, He said : " If we had the despatch of Count Walowski on the table, and at the same time the answer of the Britisli Minister worthy of the opportun•ty, in my opinion the Government would have met with no difficulty, and the feelings of the two nations woul 1. have been discussed in the temper which wo all do- There is great force in that observation, and I have no doubt whatever, it Count Wale meki's despatch hal been laid before us, accompanied by a becoming answer on the part of our Government, that, without any idea of menace or ittimidation, we should have cordially act to work on this attempt to endeavour to find a remedy for any defect which may exist in our law. We shoul , l have approached the subject in a batter frame of mind, to t,PI , the least of it. (ti ear.) I think that is a consi• deration which ought to weigh with hon. gerviemen in support of my motion, and which ought t•o bring , house to their minds the relevancy of it to the bill now under discussion. The words which I h :re ventured to propose to the house are these : " That this house cannot but regret that her Majesty's Go. vernment, previously to inviting the house to amend the law of conspiracy at the p es nt time, hav„, not felt it to be their duty to reply to the important despatch received from the French Government, dated Paris, Jan, 20, 1858,' which has been laid before Parlia vent." I want to call the noble lord's attention t) the course which he has been in the habit of taking in reference to making what are called friendly communi , ations, or ceutrounications in a friendly spirit, on the subj •ct of the state of their own internal laws. There is no man h n e a t i h p e o r li hecy policy. found (Laugh ter.)other countries prepa red to take friendl y advice of this in this house, or perhap s in Europe, who has had greater experiencem the erode of makin g friendl y communicationsto ether countries as to the condition of th eir laws anti the rt t = I w s ictuy would d f a a s h k Ie ng e n i o n bo t i lie l i o r r i d ntc: sort witheuli replying to it ? (Cheers ) I think he will find that even the Government with which he has not very long ago carried on a very interesting correspondence —I mean the Government of Naples—set a very good example as to how you should behave when friendly advice is offered to 3on by a f ereign nation in reference to a change in your law. (Hear.) I once read in some newspaper a foo li s h idea, thrown out, I suppose, by some eccentric character, about assassinating the King of Naples ; but if the King of Naples hai called the noble lord's attention to that incitement t o as „ s6 i na . Lion, I have 110 doubt he would have got a very sharp lecture for his pains oi. the artof good government —(mughter)—a_ ja he would have pointed out to hie. that the way to avoid these dangers would be h' doing justice, PO a,-; to produce contentment arnooeg his suljecte. (H e ar.) In May, 1856, Lord Claren on wrote a despatch to the Neapolitan Government which was of a similar nature to this despatch of Count Wa lewitki. It was addre. Qeed to the British Minister at Naples, with a request that he would read it to the Mini-ter of the King of Naples, and it was so read. In it Lord Clarendon stated "that the British Government were actuated by a friendly feeling' in ' offering adxile for the regulation of the internal affairs of Naples,' and for the adoptien of a system of administration which would relieve Europe from anxiety,"' The Neapolitan Minisier replied that he would communioatethe despatch to the King, but said that "the King could nut consist ently with his dignity allow any foreign Power to inter fere with the internal government of his country." He was not content with this conversational mode of trans acting business, hat 01 " 7 " t , v l e j,,, I Ling, and ue *lent a forwel de.pa:ch to the Neapolitan Minister here to be communicated to the British Go vernment. The despatch ran thus : " From the enclosed copy of the despatch, her Britannia Majesty's Government has assumed the purpose of showing itself uneasy in regard to the internal condition of the domi nions of the King, our Sovereign, in order to give advice tending to suggest thoughts of a necessity of a change iu our admiuistratiou, at the same time teat it recognises the value of the principleAltat no foreign Power has a rightto mix itself with the internal affairs of a foreign State." " The English Government must be convinced that the Go vernment of the Two Sioilies, scrupulous in respecting the independence of others, does not admit in any other a right of interference in the internal administration of the Royal States, and still less that of censuring the acts and the admi nistration of justice. " He cannot have recourse to the changes suggested until the welfare of the States and his own dignity indicate the occasion and the propriety of the same to his Royal mind. The advice of friendly powers will always be received with gra titude, but they will easily comprehend that what suits one State may not be equally applicable to another." (Cheer?.) I should have thilight that the noble lord, with his experience of the system of making friendly conamu nicatrons to foreign Powers, would be the fir.t to make one of those dignified replies for which I alma he has been sometimes remarkable, and which, I think. was especially called fur on t• e recent occasion. The question bef we the house, be it iibserved, is simply between tyi and our own executive Government. It is not a question between the Patliarnent of Erglend and the G vern merit of France. ([leer.) We are now exercising oer legitimate right of criticising the manner in which the servants of this country have fulfilled their dutiee, acrd of ascertaining whether they have properly defended the honour and reputation and Jignity of England. (Cheers ) Now, I, like the rest of the world, frequently form my (pinions—in fact, we all de it, without being a a are of it —from reading tho newspapers. We rosy not be very willing to admit it, but I undertake to say that the newspapers of this country—such a jeuenal, for instar.c, as the Tieees —have a very considcrah'e influence, for a short period at least, informine; the apinien of the people, I Lave been a reader of the Tirfies,aud my opinions have often been very much influenced by what I have read in that journal ; and, Kith the permission of the house, I will take the Tiber y cf readirig a brief extiact from the Times smith reference to the policy of the noble lord at the head of the Government, which seems to me to be aimed with wonderful accuracy and with a very &seri minating appreciation of his real character, and of the character of his foreign policy. Now, what says the Times? (Cries from members, "Of what date ?") lam about to quote from the Times of _the 22d cf June, 1850. (Laughter.) I don't suppose that at bin period of tile the noble lord at the head of the Government bee changed materially shoe June, 1850—(" hear," and a laugh)—and I believe the Times newspaper is conducted by the same persona—(laughter)—and has the same THE SeN LONDON, SATURDAY VEN 1 NG, FEBRUARY_ 20, 1858 head. (" Hour, hear," and laughter.) Well, the Times says of the noble lord that— " There is no constituted authority in Europe with which Lord Palmerston has not quarreled—(a laugh)—there is no insurrection that he has not betrayed. The arilrnt parti sans cf Sicilian, Italian, ri.id Hungarian inde e enienc3 have certainly no especial cause for gratitude to a Minister who gave them abundance of verbal encouragement and then aba cloned them to their fate." (Hear ' hear.) "On the other hand "—mark this—" when Lord Palmerston has made up his mind to court the good-will of a foreign Power no sacrifice of principle or of interest is too great for him." (Laughter and cheers.) The passage concludes in these emphatic terms : From first to last his character has been the want 'of a firm and lofty adherence to the known interests of England, and it is precisely from a want of such guiding laws of con duct that our foreign policy has degenerated into a tissue of caprices, machinations, petty contentions, and everlasting disputes." (Carers and laughter.) It is because I think the mode in which this affair has been conducted is of all others the most calculated to occasion disputes with France that I take the liberty of que , tioning the discretion which has been exercised by her Majesty's Government. I agree with the noble -nember for the city of London that the irritating discussions that have taken place in this house might have been avoided had a more judicious policy been pursued. I believe that if a proper ree ly had been sent to the despatch of C met Wa ewski it i possible that we might never have been called upon to legislate upon this subject ; and, the sympathies of t' is country having been expressed for the unfortunate cir cumstances that had taken place in Paris it is very probable that when the excitement hal passed away the matter might have ended without the necessity cf involving the House of Commons in any controversy with reference to the Emperor of the French, and the views of the French nation. I, for one, feel entirely precluded from offering any opinion whatever with re spect to the Government of the Emperer of the French. That is a matter for the French people. I am for non interference, and therefore I soall not set the example of entering into any discussion as to the mode in which the Government of France is carried on. The noble lord has told us that the Government of France rests on the voice of the people ; there is undoubtedly a Frei ch As sembly elected, as it is said, by universal suffrage and vote by ballot—(cheering and general laughter)—and it is not therefore for me to call in question the mode in which the government of France is administered. I confine myself to my legitimate duty, which is to ques tion the discretion that bas been exk reim--d by the execu tive Government of this country. I now beg, sir, to place my amendment in your hands. I believe that I am only discharging a legitimate and consti tit onal duly. (Cheers.) I believe that I have taken a fining opportunity for discharging that duty ; and I have only to thank the house for the kindness and attention with which they have hear i me. (Continued cheering.) The right hon. gentleman concluded by moving, as an a mendment, "That this house hears with much concern that it is alleged that recent attempts upon the life of the Emperor of the French have been devised in England, and expresses its detestation of such guilty enterprises ; that this house is ready at all times to assist in remedying any defects in the criminal law which, after due investigation, aro proved to exist, yet it cannot but r gret that her Majesty's Government, previously to inviting the house to amend the law of conspi racy by the second reading of this bill at the present time, has not felt it to be their duty to make some re;ly to the ins portant despatch receivedfrom the French G vern ',cut, dated Paris, Jan. 20, 1858, and which has been laid before Parlia ment." Sir J. V. SHELLEY having seconded the amend meat, Mr. BRINES said he would c fret. but a few observa tions on the questions that had been raised. The main question he took to be this—first, whether the measure now proposed on the part of the Government was right in itself ; and secondly, if so, whether there was any valid reason why it ghoul t not he immediately proceeded with in that house. The ea jets of the right honour able gentleman's amendment would clearly be this, to interpose an obstacle to proceeding with the measure, which, he submitted, was in every way worthy of its ac ceptance, and which ought to pass into law with as little delay as possible. He could assure the right hon. gentle. man that the bill had not for its object to change alum:a of the constitutional principles to which the people of this country were so strongly attached. If that were its object, be would not for a moment give it his support. Tne bill did no more than to assign to an offence of a particularly dangerous - and malignant character such a punishment as leech an offence deserved. That was the object of the bill. It created no difference whatever in the tribunals before which such offences would be trie 1, for tuch eases would be tried in exactly the game ma.cne r as ordinary offences, and precisely in the same manner as at present. There would be the same securities of grand jury, petty jury, and the ordinary formalities of law. Therefore, he said, as far as regarded the constitu tional principles of our jurisprudence, the bill left them exactly where they were. The present state of the law in reference to cases for which the proposed bill would provide was moat incongruous and inconsistent. In Eng land the offence was looked upon as a misdemeanour, punishable only as a common assault or a common nuis ance, while iu Ireland it was visited with the punishment of death. It might be said that the provisions of the bill might be right in themselves, but this was not the pro per time to introduce them ; but he thought that if the principle was ri i ,ht, it was unreasonable to offer any ob jection on the score of time. tie could not help think ing a great deal of the hostility to the bill was owing to a prejudice whine was indulged in before its provi sions became known, and when an opinion prevailed that it was to off :et some imp irtant change iu the prin ciples cf our jerisprudence, but that was an error which he had hoped might now have pass-el away. If this bill were rej ?acid he did not see how we should ever he safe from conspiracies to murder, for this bill applied not to fereigoers alone, hat to or ry man, woman, and child in England. (Hear.) It had been said that the Givernment ought to refrain from taking steps with regard to this bill, because an improper time tied bseu taken by the French in -peaking of tee attempt on the life of their Enperor. Tne Eneesor of ;he French wa', as had been truly seid, the spontaneous choice of ti e French people, arid he had been in all respects an hon ourable and faithful way of th s country. (Cheers.) It certainly ought nut to be urged that, on account of some extravagant phrases used by some perso is in France, the English Government ought to refrain fsom pausing law which was called for by truth and justice. He thought that very great allowance ought to be made for the language o exesperation which had been used by the French in consequence of the dastardly attempt on the Emperor's life. Let those who thought differently look back upon the history of our own country ; let them remember what was done when there were attempts on the lives of Queen Elizabeth, James 1., and William 111. Did our ancestors on those occas.ions conduct themselves in that temperate manner which was now • scoected of the French ? Was there no intemperance of manner, no violence of conduct, no rashness of legis lation ? (Cheers.) Well, then, let them make some allowanoe for the excited feelings of the Frei] , h people when a cowardly attempt was made on the life of their Emperor, to which he believed they were ready attached. (Cheers.) He had never known it need before as an argument in that house that if a measure was right in principle it should not be granted on account of the r aed indecorous manner in which it was asked for Everybody knew that petitions sometimes press nted to that house were couched in language of downrieht in solence, and their petitions were rejected on teat ae c mut ; but it was never urgei that on account of their intemperate language a measure which the Parliament o msidrred right in principle should be rejected. (Hear ) Under these circumstances, lie considered that there was no reason for a jectirg this bill, which was called far upon every consideration of truth and justice. (Caeers ) Mr. WALPOLE said he had hoped that something would have fallen from the right hon. gentleman alio had just sat down which would have induced him to continue the vote in favour of the introduction of this b 11, by voting for its second reading, which he should have done if he !had found that the Ministry intended to vindicate the honour of the country. But the right bor. gentleman, in a woerce pser e e e i nt e to le s a reply to that of the iee.sr ei tee amendment, hail not made a single allusion to the principles which were now really under consideration. Tee mover of the amendment had expressed hie views with great temper, and had stated more than once that it was far from his inlention to wish to break np the relations between the two countries, adding most distinctly that this was a questi so as be tween the House of Commons representing the people and the Executive Government neglecting their duty. (Cheers.) If this were simply a discussion of the merits of the bill, as the right bon. gentleman( Baines) had diecueted without adverting in one single syllable to the real question at issue—if there were no other question before them but the propriety of the bill itself—he (alr. Walpol , ) would have supported the alteration in the law which, he believed, to be ueces.ary, because he thought that round principles should be laid down in law, and that things shculd be called by their right names. Great questions had been raised in this discus sion—the cause of freedom, the right of humanity, and the honour of England. Tetra was nothing in thi • bill to impeach the right of asylum which tkis count-y had always offered to foreign political refagees, whether crowned heads or peasants. In the misuse of c mellow humanity the bill might be supported when it was proved to the house that a conspiracy had been concocted in this country. He would support the bill on this ground, but he would not do se unless the h ieour of England was previously vindicated. Referring to the despatch of Count Walewski, he found this pusage, with reference to the alleged encouragement afforded in this country to the conspiracies to commit the crime of as-assination "It is no longer the hostility of erring parta s mani fasting itself by all the excesses of the press and every violence of language ; it is no longer even the labour of tie factions seeking to agitate opinion and to provoke eisorder ; it is assassination reduced tea d ctrine preached openly, practised in repeated attempt., tho inset recent of which has just struck Eerope wan slope faction. Ought, then, the right of asylum to protect such a state of things ? Is hospitality due to assassins ? Should place themselves by flagrant acts outside the pale of the rn ee English ln h e .a s : s a l a n t d i o c n a E n t i r t v e co t 7 o ) t f i a , q u o e u trotheir de protect i amidns persons their ,h,) common law, and expose themselves to the ban of hu manity l' In submitting these questions to her Britannic &hanky's Government, the Government of the Emperor does not merely discharge a duty towards itself, it re echoes the sentiment of the country, which, under the itselfalders iss n o c c u l r e r a e r z c e o n of all nations a e t entitled influence of the most legitimat e anxiety, calls upon it, to do so, and which, in a matter where the common interest among England. The repetition a nd the wickedness of thee, guilty enterprises e xpose France t o a danger against whin we are bound to pro vide. Her Britannic Majesty'e Government can assist us i n avertin g it ay affording us a upon the co guarantee of security wh i c h no State can refuse to a toiilsned and to all re ck g L ve u r p nul n neighbouring State, and which we are authorised to ex pect from au ally. Fully relying, moreover, on the high sense of the English Cabinet, we refrain from indicating in any way the measures which it may see fit to take in order to comply with this wish." This requisition was made by Count Walewski upon a stateaisnt which was utterly and c.mpletely unfounded in fact. To pass any such bill as that before the house with this despatch, im puting to the English legislation that it favoured assas sination, still unanswered, would be seriou'ly to affect the honour of this country. He e new it had been said that tie reason why this despatch hail not been received was because the mind of the people of France was agitated at the attempt which had been made on the life of the sovereign of their country. But was not something due to the agitated feelings of this country, and had not the people of England a right to demand that such charges as those coctaiaed in the despatch of Count Walewski sh .u'd not be wade upon the branding them as advocates of aeiasssination. (Hear.) The Government of this country might have adopted the same course as that which had been, taken by Lord Hawkesbury, when a similar demand was made by the French Government respecting the conduct of foreign refugees. It was most improbable that her Majesty's Government should have refrained-from tak ing such a step, and especially so as the matter had been pressed upon the attention at an early period of the debate on the introduction of the bill. They did not wish to vote against a bill wkick he believed to be right in Well on principle, but at the same time he diffnet wish to assist in passing a bill which would seriously affect the honour of this country. He did not kne, whether the Government would even now adopt the course which had been suggested, of answering in a proper manner this despatch of Count Waleweki. Notice of this amendment was given some days since, and the Government had had ample time to act upon the sue gestion. No vindication of the honour of the country bad been attempted, and the people of England would require from its Parliament that it should not take one single step further in passing this measure until there was a public and as authentic a record as that which contained the libel upon England—a complete vindice ton and justificatiou of our honour. (Hear.) When that was d mne, the House of Commons must consider whether the bill soould be proceeded with ; but until this was done, he hoped they woul I not incur that which the noble lord at the head of the Government imputed to them in oeptsing the introduction of this bill, namely, the imputation of being humiliated and disgraced. Sir G. GREY said that the boa. and iearne.l member having approved of the principle of the till, and ex pressed his determination to support it, in the event of a certain course being adopted, it was, therefore, unne cessary for him to discuss the principle of the bill. He was surprised to hear that the hon. member should have insinuated anything like an indifference to the honour of the country on the part of her Majesty's Government. On a previous occasion it had been. stated that her Majesty's Government bad flstly refused to deal in any manner with the refugees in this country except in accordance with the law of the land. Although no i rural despatch had been written on this subject, it bad been fully and distinctly understood what was the course which her Majesty's Government had decided upon adopting. It would have been 'very easy for his noble friend at tLe bead of the Foreign- ffice to have written a despatch on the model of that of Lord Ha wkes. bury ; and this, no doubt, would have been popular with a great part of the country, but it might not have tended to improve the relations bet • een the two countries, or in the least degree to diminish the difficult.es with which tae question was surrounded. The paragraph in the despatch to which allusion bad been made charging the preaching lute a d tctrine of the crime of assassina tion, did not, he contended, refer to the people of Eng land, but to some foreigners resident in this country who were well kn twn to have acted in a manner described by Count Waleweki, and such as every En e lfshinan must abhor and detest. He cautioned the house against sup posing that it woul I have been quite so easy to have penned a despatch in reply to that referred to without appearing to impute to the French Government that it hal unjustly libelled the people of this country. Be sides, it was well known that there were persons residing in this country who were actually conspiring against the life of the Emperor, and her Majesty's Government could not in consequence take that lofty tone on the subject which might have been wished. Then, too, if a complaint had been made on the subject of this despatch, it would have been necessary to have referred to the publication of the addresses of the army in the Moniteur. Bo it was certainly very much better that the Governmenthad not done so, and thus avoided placing on record an acknow ledgment of their existence, while they received from the Government of France the ex, ression of a regret thatthose addresses had been permitted to appear. After this bill was passed there could be no objection to the House of Commons placing on record the reasons which' had induced it to abstain in any degree from infringing the right of asylum, or asking for an extraordinary power to be applied by the Government in dealing with foreign refugees, in accordance with the suggestion c )n -tained in the despatch of Count Waleweki. That might be a course when it would be fitting and dignified to adopt, and which the eliff,rences which existed between British subjects and foreigners, relative to the crime of conspiracy to murder, it might be done with consider able effect, inasmuch as they might state with truth that in this matter the foreigner was upon precisely the same footing as our own subjects. Reference had been made to the despatch written by Lord Hawkesbury, and it had been a-ked why had not the,Goveratnent adopted a course. But the circumstances were very different from chose wl existed in the present day, and the teo Governments were on the eve of a war, while we were now in a state of eose and intimate alliance. But Lo. d Hawkesbury had in fact consented at the dictation of the French Government s to send to Canada some persons whose names had been mentioned in the French dr-. spa'cle, to which that of Lord Hawkesbury was an ans.ver. Was that the dignified c curse which the house was prepared to recommend as a model for her Majesty's Government in the pr• sent day. (Cheers ?) If the pron e-pie of the present bill was affitined e the Go vernment might then with truth nod dignity inform Count. Wale 'saki that there was no difference whatever in the law between the British subject and foreign refugees respecting conspiracies against foreign powers. At pre sent they could not say that such was the state of things in this country. Asa proof of this there was one British subject for whose apprehension a warrant bad beer. issued on the capital offence of being accem ory to a murder in France, while a foreign refugee arrested for the same offence was only charged with a misdemea nour. He believed that the bid was a useful one, and if passed would place us upon an unassailable footing as regarded the charges which might be brought against us by foreign countries. He trusted, therefore, that the house would not recede from the position which it had taken on the introduction of the bill. (Hear, hear ) Mr. M'MAHON thought that the opinion of the judges ought to have been taken on the state of the law of conspiracy, and if it had been found to have been inefficient the Government might then have brought, forward a bill to remedy the law. But he contended that the existing law was amply sufficient to punish the offence of conspiring to maunder. In support of hie opi nion he referred to Mr. Greaves, who, in his new edi- tion of " Hawkins's Pleas of the Cravirs," described the nature, of the punishment awarded for such offences. Thi. he (Mr. Nl:Mahon) contended was mere severe and enure effective than that provided by the bill before the house. Under the present law, in addition to impri sonment, the judge had the power of calling upon the offenders to find securities for their future conduct. The bill, while it did not increase the severity of the punishment would greatly increase the difficulty of conviction, inasmuch as under the new bill the crime would be changed from felony to misdemeanour, and the party charged, if a foreigner, would be entitled to a jury consieting of one-halt aliens, and would have the right of challenge of twenty of the jurore. The experience of Ire'and was against the Introduction of the bill. The only object of the bill therefore was to give the Government a power of espionage over the re fugees, which they could not possess as Ime as the oil net roivained a misdemeanour. Make the offence a felony, and the police had at once given a power to search houses and examine papers merely on suspicion. Hapeily in England there was no one interested in abusing the powers of the law ; but it was notorious that foreign Governments would resort to any means to hunt obnoxious retugtes out of the country. It would be better for them at once to proclaim to refugees that England could no longer harbour them, and that it would be safer for them to leave the country than remain to be made the victims of a foreign police. Mr. BYNG said, that although he ould yield to no one in his detestation of the horrible machinations against the life of the Emperor of the French, he in tended to vote for the amend eat messed by the right hon. member for Ashton. He would add that he thought much - of the language that had been used in that house with reference to the bill ought at once to be deprecated ; while, on the other hand, a great deal ten much hal been made of ore the language adopted by thand he French military ofdicsrs, m especially after the some apology which had been offered for that language. (Hear.) Bathe could not help thinking that both the time was ill-chosen tor he introduction of such a change, as well as the change it t ,elf unnec- , ssary. Had England :ever refused to put the exi-ting law in motion 3 Ou the contrary, there were three signal instances in whi c h tae law had been remarkably enforced. A.; the same i ne, he feared this measure, if passed into law, would not produce either in France or on the Continent the effect which was desired : while, on the other hand, he coeld not perceive that the consequence of such legislation all over Europe must be to lower the reputation of England. He thought that an answer ought to have been sent to I the despatch of Count Waiewiski, and believed that the sagacious man at the head of the French empire would have been greatly appeased by the general expression of sympathy evinced by the people of Ecgland at his escape from asseseina i n. The v( t i which he was about to give might n• t be sumssful, but most certainly it would be given with sincerity. Fie bad lived to be made to love Engli h laws, and not seeing any necessity f .r the el-ens now asked for, he should vote for the amendment of the right hon. member for Ashton.. Mr. SPOONED was glad that no answer had been sent to this dessatcb, which would have iccreased the irritation between the two countries. If such a despatch had been sent it could only have been a full one, which would have entered upon dangerous subjects. He would have thorn pass the bill, and then do what the Home Secretary had proposed—place our opinions on record as to the sine tity of asylum. The mode of meeting the bill by the pre posed resolution was neither fair nor Parliamentary. He defended the bill as good, just, and necessary. Lord H. VANE expressed his regret that the despatch had not been answered, but could not consider that we bad been insulted by the French Government after the apology we had received. He should support the second reading - of the bill. Mr. BENTINCK said that the adoption of the resolu tion would place us in a most difficult position with regard to France. - Let them deal with the bi ) without referenes to extraneous matter or the opinion of foreign nations, To place it upon record that we declined a measure which we knew to be just on account of what would be said of us abroad, was to place the country in the lowest state of de sr,- d .tion. The accusation of preaching assassination con tained in the despatch, was meant, not of the people of England, but of the refugees. Sir R. PEEL-I contented myself with a silent vote on the introduction of this measure, but now, after having had an opportunity of reading it s provisions, I am anxious to give some explanation of the feelings which I entertain upon a subject so important and so interesting. (Hear.) I have listened with great attention'to the speech of the Prime Mi nister, and also to that of the right bon. gentleman the late member for Manchester -(langhter)-I mean the member for Ashton, and I must say that I agree with the hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Bentinck), who characterised the speech of the right hon. gentleman as a most able and mode rate statement; but, on the other hand, I think the speech of the noble lord the Prime Minister tended to lead us astray from the direct question at issue. (Hear.) I think the ques tion is one of verylreat importance, and one which, while it should in no way be exaggerated, should at the same time be considered calmly and dispassionately. lam este- Inished that the head of a Liberal Governm en t sho uld pro pose a bill to Parliament which is opposed by all the most distinguished Liberals in this house. (Cries of " No, no !") Well, almost all the most distinguished Liberals have . spoken against it ; while, on the other hand, those who are the political opponents of the noble viscount have given it that modest support in which eloquence gives the pas to acts. (A. laugh.) The noble lord the member for London has made a manly and patriotic speech against the bill, and . , the eloquence of the bon, and lest ned member for Sheffield on the same side, may be taken as an accurate interpreta tion of the public feeling (Hear, heat.) It is true that the Solicitor-General, who is certainly not the man to hazard such an opinion, has raid that the speech of the hon. and learned member for Sheffield was not very power ful in point of argument, yet the house and the country think otherwise, as is proved by the impression which that speech has everywhere produced. (Hear, bear.) The ques tion before the house involves two important considera tions, one relating to the change to be introduced into our law, and the other to the occasion which has sug gested the introduction of the present bill. We have heard the legal part of the subject discussed in all its bearings, I do not pretend to assert that the treatment of aliens or foreigners residing in England should not be subordinate to the interests of our own community ; but I do say that no obscure or definite resttiotions should be placed upon refugees, so long as, irrespective of the suggestions of foreign policy, they obey our laws, do not interfere with the policy of our Government, or abuse that sacred right of asylum which we are, proud to extend to them when fleeing from persecution in the land of their birth. The asylum which we gave them is liable to abuse, as every enactment we can frame, no matter how stringent its pro visions, is liable to be eva leg' or transgressed, The noble viscount seems to think otherwise, for he is calling upon us to increase the penalty attaching to conspiracy to mur der, in order, as he says, to prevent the commission of that offence. If you do pass such a law let it, I implore you, be so clear and precise that it may be intelligible to all. The present bill does not fulfil that condition. If the noble viscount had described it as an alteration of the law re quired by the exigencies of the times, or as a measure of legal reform which he had long known to be necessary, we might have been prepared to adopt it. Could he prove to us that the low in its existing state favours the commission of crimes such as that recently attempted in Paris, I would be one of the first to say "let us amend it." But the re verse is the fact. The Home Secretary the other i ight passed a severe censure upon the Lord Chief Justice for having ventured to express an opinion as to the sufficiency of the present law, but we are bound to respect the dicta of our highest legal authorities, and when two such men as Lord Brougham and Lord Campbell agree in saying that' the existing law is adequate for all necessary purposes we must suffer ourselves to be influenced by such powerful tes timony. The Solicitor-General, it is true, has expressed a different opinion, but he did not throw much light upon the question -(a laugh)-and I have not yet heard the Attorney-General, though I have been waiting anx ously to see him jump to his feet. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) If he told us that the bill was absolutely necessary, he might induce us, with his placid manner and persuasive eloquence -(a laugh)-to support it; but as yet nothing lies been said to show that the existing law requires amendment. We have been told that: a reward of 2001. has been offered for the capture of Mr. Allsop, and that a Frenchman named Bernard has besn apprehended upon a warrant of the Treasury. (No, no.) Well, the mistake is trivial. Upon a warrant of the Home Office; at all events, M. Bernard has been taken tip. (A. laugh.) What happened at his examination before Mr. Jardine, the police magistrate, on Monday last? Mr. Bodkin -(great laughter, caused by the contemptuous tone in' which the hon. baronet pronounced the name of the well known barrister) -who said that he appeared to conduct the case against the prisoner on behalf of the Treasury, concluded his opening speech with the following curious remarks :-" It has been decided that persons guilty of labels against a foreign Sovereign can be indicted in this country, and it would be strange," continued lawyer Bodkin-(laughter)-" if under the same law it was not an offence to conspire to commit murder on the person of an individual holding that position," Now, the Home Secretary has distinctly told us that the attention of the Government was called to a defect in the law, and yet we are informed by Mr. Bodkin that the law is amply suffi cient to accomplish the object which it is intended to servo (Hear.) Our authorities differ, but I am disposed to believe that the law is adequate, seeing that you can seize M. Ber nard and have a reward of 2001. offered for the capture of Mr. Allsop. (A. laugh.) I could not help smiling the other night at the strauge doctrine laid down by the noble viscount at the head of the Government. From the year 1822, when Sir James Macintosh moved a resolution to the effect that the efficiency of our criminal laws was to be in- Icreased by an abatement of their undue rigour, up to the present time the chief aim of the Legislature has been to render our code leas severe. Now, however, in 183 ti, the noble viscount proposes to increase the penalty attaching to a particular offence, with the view of making the law more efficient for its purpose, thus reversing the practise of Parliament for the last, 35 years. (Hear.) But, after all, to come to the real gist of the question, the bill of the. noble viscount, though degrading to the country, is a mere sh tm. The truth is that under cover of an alteration of the law a bill has been submitted to Parliament at the dic tation of a foreign Government. (Cheers.) I am sur prised that the noble viscount should have allowed such an, unwarra .table interference. If he can refute the reports which are abroad let him do so at once, for I must say that nothing could be more insulting to us, or more de grading to our sense of criminal justice, than to be told that because six or eight attempts have been made against the life of Leuis ?Tapoleon we must consider ourselves re sponsible for them. (Hear, hear.) In common with all my countrymen, I abhor and detest assassination, not only because of its atrocity, but on account also of its cowardice. (Cheers.) Observe, however, the extreme uufairoess which has characterised the conduct of the French Government in the present instance. Au attempt is wale against the life of Louis Napoleon, and straightway Count Walewski accues Mazzini, Ledru Rollin, and Campanella of being implicated in the plot. These persons are residing in this country ; no evidence whatever has been brought Aga i n st them-(hear, hear) -but they are Republicans, a nd there fore are charged with complicity in the recent attempt in France. Lot us change the persons. Louis N a poleon has himself resided in England, a pretender to the throne of France, and during the period of his stay here several at tempts were made against - the life of Louis Philippe. (Hear, hear.) No honourable man can suppose that Louis Napoleon or Count Persigny, who also at that time en joyed the hospitality of England, had anything to do with those attempts, and yet, if Mazzini, Ledru Rollin, and ! Campanella are chargeable with the recent enterprise in .1 Paris, the present Emperor of the French may fairly be held responsible for the attempts against Louis Philipp& (Hear.) The question now before us is both delicate and dangerous ; it has many aspects, and is differently judged at different times by the same men. We all know that Count Persigny himself, a very amiable gentleman, was at one time a legitimist of the first class, the friend of the Duchesse de Berri, • while it is equally notorious that in 1849 H. Beroche declared himselt a Republican de la vieile. (Hear.) And new those persons cqme forward and tell us we must not harbour men who so long as they reside in this country and do not commit any crime against the laws have a right of asylum in it. (Hear.) Does this house forgot that in 1818 the odious doctrine was openly preached in France that kings and queens are all robbers of t'll people's rights ? Did we protest against that ? (E fer. ,l .6 Did we say anything about their press at that time ? 03" e yet M. Walewski, forsooth, now talks about tho license of the English press. Sir, I think he is one of the last who should have dared to say onto insinuate anything against the liberty of the press in this country. (Cheers.) List us look at this letter of M. Walewski for a moment ; but, before doing so, permit me to say that, while I regret ex ceedingly that no sufficient answer was made to this docu ment by her Majesty's Government, I never read a diplo-, matic despatch so shallow or so destitute of point. (Hear.) The attempt which led to the writing of this despatch oc curred on the 14th •of January, and six days aft at the erward's Count Walewski writes to M. Persigny to say French Government find fault with the . s ystemgeiM.. 9e °l2 , here and beg for some alteration. No answ er has " h sent, but the right lion. gentleman (Sir G. Grey) -as told us to-night that if we pass the second reading of this bill an answer will be sent. (Cheers.) Sir, I must say that this is about the most undignified proceeding I ever heard of and one most unworthy of the decision which ought to have cbaracteiized the conduct of the Govern- ment. This despatch is signed by Count Walewski and the man who reals England this lesson 25 years ago was him self a member of the revolutionary committee in Poland. (Laugh.) This is the gentleman who now tells us "It was in England that Piante i formed the design of attacking the Emperor ; it was from London that, in an affair the crecol lection of which is still fresh, Mazzini, Ledru Rollin , an d Campenella directed the hired bravoes whose hand they l ae armed." Let me make a remark in reference to that BsA , i t. meet. Twomen who weie teken up in France for 91 ! - 1 , i2 tempt, or for being supposed to have been implicated a i l so attempt on the life of Louis Napoleon, were examie s in , to the supposed complicity of Mazzini and Ledru It:" ,- but the answers they gave on that occasion were so utt Ft; absurd as to be wholly useless f. a. the purpose to which t pi i examination. was directed. Again, M. Walewski talks this being the country " where the authors of the la te ; cons pir a cy pret ared at leisure their means of action' studied and fabricated the instruments of destruotioll°;', which they made use, and thence started to executed long plan." With respect to that I would only say that Out I°"' r W l ' as these men reside in this country they obey ou be it is only when they go to Belgium and France that t , i , concoct these schemes of assassination which fill the inin it u r, of all honourable men with horror and indignation. (Er s i„ hear.) Then he talks of " the hostility of misgui te l Is r s' as viduals, manifesting itself by all the excesses of the P.., and all the violences of language," adding that assuiri._ios lion is elevated as a doctrine and openly p re ached i s country. Now, I will say that never wee; an assertion l'u wore . of unfair than that. (Cheers.) To tell us that, the doctrine siur, assassination is openly pi eached in this country ! Wl3l',,ice is there a man out of France who would n ot scorn to tt o f e edit to such a foul insiuuatiou ? (Cheers.) The wla"_ . ! r e this despatch throughout is one that I have read Nita,vV great regret, seriously aggravated as the tenour of 1 1 ", ch it the unworthy insienaticus against this country which contains. But it is said an rap 'logy has been male• c PI - '„ o e may think that apology adequate, but I for oneorin admit that it is, seeing that after an assertion was . _ e a ce v ice tibtsaitnpfnarrmt onftinthne f p r u ora blic K p n r ig e h ss ts w b h r i i c d h g ,t,3 that supposedais t N o ev r p.o;?,ee onat and his G o vernment regretted the insertion of the 1 9 2: te . l a nguage that had been held towards this country, 4, 0 ents of the Most severe and unseemly kind hav e e " state m n3 ade in that paper. (Hear, hear.) And thee ___ „4o o manta appeared after it was supposed that " an eeerCd t° had been made for the insults that had , m b a e y en th o ese 10. : this country. (Hear, hear.) 0u e said ' ~ el e able murderers, the hired agents of black deed, , e M ot e the punishment which is their desert in that repatriitiozi,h -(loud laughter) -and may that infe rnal den_i 1;0..0. those assassinations are hatched be destrot i no ble lo rd , (A laugh.) I muss say 1 ki eal d with regret t sire."