The Sun. — London, England, 1865-06-13 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF LORDS—LAST EVENING. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at the usual hour. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a second time :—Bishop's Castle Railway (Deviations, &c.); Inverness and Pe . rth Junction, and Aberdeen Junction Railway Companies Surrey and Sussex Junction Railways ; Aberystwith and Welsh Coast Railway (Steamboats); Belfast Water ; Mold and Denbigh Junction (Extensions); Mold and Denbigh Junction Railway (Deviations); Cambrian Railways (Ad ditional Powers); Moroddy Railway; Talylin R a il wa y ; and Lugg Valley Railway. The Port Talbot Company Bill, the Whitehaven, Cleator, and Egremont Railway, and the Plymouth and Dartmoor Railway Bills (Amendment), were severally read a third time and passed. CHAIRMAN OF FISHERIES COMMISSIONERS. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE asked her Majesty's Ministers whether the Chairman of the Fisheries Commis sioners appointed under the act 26 and 27 Vict., cap. 114, was a clerk of the house of Commons, and whether her Majesty's Ministers would consent to the appointment of a committee to inquire into the working and the results of the act in question. UNION CHARGEABILITY BILL. Earl GRANVILLE presented petitions in favour of this bill from different parts of the country, including Hemel Hampstead, Bedford, Cambridge, Birmingham, City of London, Wallingford, Hereford, Croydon, Watlington, Great Shelford, Great Torrington, &c. THE UNITED STATES. The Earl of DERBY said that under the exist ing circumstances he felt bound to call the atten tion of their lordships to the critical state of affairs in America. The noble earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Earl Russell) had said that the ques tion as to when the belligerent rights of the Confederate States should come to an end would depend upon the United States Government. A proclamation had since been issued by that Government, in which they declared that the blockade of most of the ports should be raised, but that some should be kept closed, and that any merchants at tempting to enter them should be treated as pirates. He impressed upon the House the necessity of dealing with this question, which involved a subject intimately con nected with international law, the importance of which could not bo overestimated. (Hear, hear.) Earl RUSSELL said that Kirby Smith had surrendered on the same terms as General Lee. There was no objec tion on the part of her Majesty's Government to lay that letter on the table. UNION CHARGEABILITY BILL. Lord GRANVILLE, having presented several petitions in favour of the principle of a union rating, moved the second reading of the Union Chargeability Bill. He de scribed what had been the course of legislation on the re lief of the poor from the date of passing the new Poor Law Act, to prove that its tendency had always been to shorten the period of residence that gives a legal settlement, and to equalise the rating. He then noticed the chief objections made to the measure. It was alleged there ought to be further inquiry, but they had been inquiring into this sub ject for more than 30 years. They had done more ; they had legislated on the recommendations founded on those inquiries. It was now time to act more decidedly in the same direction. He admitted the formation of the present unions was not perfect, but it would not be expedient to delay the bill till the unions could be readjusted. Another objection to the measure was that less economy could be exercised in the management of large areas than in that of parishes. Experience, he believed, had shown the reverse to be the case. He urged the house to pass the bill, which would do away with the law of uniformity in the present system of poor law administration, by which one class of poor was relieved from one fund, a second class from another. The measure would complete the principle of the measure of 1834, according to the recommendation of the best authorities, among whom were Sir J. Graham and Sir G. C. Lewis. He could see no ground or reason for refer ring the bill to a select committee, and he believed the mo tion was irregular in itself. The reference to a committee could not bo proposed till the bill had been read a second time. In the next place, their lordships could not receive any alterations of the bill originating in that house. The reason for referring a bill to a committee generally was that its details were numerous and intricate. This was a measure of few clauses, and with no intricacy of detail. He hoped, therefore, the house would reject the motion and pass the bill, which he believed would ultimately prove beneficial to the interests of the owners of land. Lord BROUGHAM briefly supported the bill, the prin ciple of whichwas approved by the authors of the reform of the poor law he had himself advocated more than 30 years ago. The bill now proposed would complete what was left imperfect in that great measure. The Duke of RUTLAND then moved that the bill be referred to a Select Committee. He did so because he be lieved the measure would operate very unjustly in some He read a number of letters and documents to prove this position, and contended that on such a question the house ought to proceed with great caution. Ho argued further that the bill would create mischievous distinctions between town and country, and destroy the present com munity of feeling between employers and the employed. Lord SPENCER spoke in favour of the bill, and answered some of the objections made by the Duke of Rutland. He thought the measure was required. It might be necessary to make some readjustment of the pre sent Unions, but ho would not for that reason endanger the passing of the bill, which he believed would prove beneficial to the labouring classes and to the country at large. Lord St. MAUI addressed the house on the influence of the law of settlement and the law of removal in restricting the field of employment for the labouring class. The bill, by removing these restrictions, would improve the position of the labourer. Lord CARNAR VON would vote for the second reading, though he thought it would have been better had some pre liminary measure been introduced readjusting the present Unions. It appeared to him that on this question both parties had overrated the results of the measure. They would not be so formidable as the opponents of the bill predicted ; on the other hand, the supporters of the bill anticipated too many advantages from it. Lord GREY approved the bill, the principle of which was sound. Too much of the vicious administration of the old system survived the change introduced by the Act of 1834, and it was necessary to remove it. Ho should vote for the second reading. Lord REDESDALE doubted the policy of increasing the area of rating. Nor was a largo area conducive to the good administration of the Poor-law. It had been a failure in London because the officials had no knowledge of the poor they relieved. This was not the case in the country, where the law could be well administered. The house then divided on the question that the bil be referred to a select committee. The numbers were— Contents Non-contents Majority against the motion —62 The bill was then read a second time. Their lordships rose at a few minutes before ten. ~ 86 HOUSE OF COMMONS—LAST EVENING. The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a third time and passed : —Abergavenny and Monmouth Railway ; Blackpool and Layton with Warbrick Improvement ; Brean Down Har bour Railway ; Buto Docks, Cardiff (No. 2); Cale donian Railway (Additional Powers); Caledonian Railway (Bangholm Junction); Caledonian Railway (Cleland and Mid-Calder Railway and Branches); Carmarthen and Cardigan Railway (Branches) ; Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway (No. 1) ; Glasgow and South- Western, Maybole and Girvan, &c., Railway Companies ; Greenock Police and Improvement; Leamington Gas; Liver pool Gunpowder Regulation ; Monkland Railways ; Mon mouthshire Railway and Canal ; Moses Gate and Ringley Branch Road ; Nantlle Railway ; North British and Edin burgh and Glasgow (Bridge of Forth) Railways ; Northern Assurance Company ; Ross and Monmouth Railway ; St. Stephen's Green (Dublin) ; Severn Junction Railway ; West Yorkshire Railway ; and Witham Drainage. WESTMINSTER IMPROVEMENT BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this bill, Mr. A. SMITH moved that the bill be referred to a committee for further consideration. He thought that there ought to be some arrangement made for building dwelling houses for the poor. Mr. TITE opposed the motion. Mr, W. PATTEN thought the bill was entirely one of a p rivate nature, and for merely acquiring certain land, and therefore there was no need for adopting any different course to that usually pursued with respect to private bills. Mr. DODSON also was averse to the adoption of the course suggested by the hon. member (Mr. Smith). The motion wits withdrawn, and tho bill was read a second time. THE CASE OF MRS. GREY. :n3.orr he should l Colonel SYKES gave notice that to ask a question o f the Government as to whether ow been taken to obt ain com p ensation for Mrs. Grey, ood whose husband had been m urdered near the Ca p e of Good steps had T HE CHARITY COMMISSION. Hope. Mr. FERRAND gave notice that to-morrow he should ask her Majesty's Govrernment whether it was int en d e d to fill up the vacancy of one of the charity inspectors, c ause d by the death of Mr. J. Symonds, jun. SATURDAY HALFHOLIDAY. Mr. AYRTON asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether her Majesty's Gover nment would be pleased to extend to the officers and clerks of the Civil Service, who had presented a memorial, the Saturday half -holiday allowed in other establishments. Lord PALMERSTON said, as the Government were about to appoint a commission to ascertain how far the prayer of the memorial co u ld be granted without interfer ing with the public service ; he thought it desirable to grant what was asked, but until the inquiry had taken place to which he had alluded, he could not say what could be done in the matter. THE CUSTOMS. Mr. LYALL asked the Secretary to tho TreaFury why the Custom House authorities charge the merchants for the attendance of their officers on goods in transit after their arrival within the docks, as, in that case, the officer was immediately removed from the ship or lighter, but this charge continues to be made though no officer was em- ployed. Mr. F. PEEL said the privilege which merchants enjoyed of removing goods without examination was granted, on the understanding that they should pay all the expenses. When goods were removed from ships an officer was re- quired to watch, and it was for that the parties had to Mr. LYALL remarked that it only took one officer to watch the property taken from a great many ships. Mr. F. PEEL replied that the owners of those ships were the only parties charged. FOREIGN POSTAGE. Mr. CAVE asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether the postage of letters from France to the West Indies vita Southampton by the Royal Mail steamers amounted to eightpence, while that from England amounted to one shilling, and on what principle that charge was made. Mr. F. PEEL said the charge of is. the half oz. for letters to the West Indies was made in order t• make postage self-supporting. The French Government charge Bd. for the quarter oz., and ls. 4d. for the half oz., but he did not know upon what principle that rate was levied. The charge of Is. was made for all letters from France going by our packets. It would be desirable if some uni form rate was adopted. rftain LAW OF EVIDENCE BILL. Mr. SCULLY asked the hon. member for East Suffolk whether he intended to proceed with the Law of Evidence Bill this session ? Sir F. KELLY said he intended to proceed with the bill immediately the Government fulfilled the promise they had given to fix a day for the purpose. Sir G. GREY said he thought the hon. gentleman could proceed with tho bill immediately after the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer on Thursday next. EXECUTIONS WITHIN PRISONS. Mr. GOSCHEN asked the hon. member for Oldham whether he intended to proceed with his bill for legalising executions within the walls of the prisons. Mr. HIBBERT said it was not his intention to proceed with the bill at present. ROMAN CATHOLIC OATH BILL. The house went into committee on this bill. On clause 6 being proposed, Sir H. CAIRNS moved the restoration, in the form of oath contained in the bill, of the following words contained in the oath prescribed by Geo. 4, c. 7, s.2:—" I do swear that I will defend to the utmost of my power the settlement of property within this realm, as established by the laws ; and I do hereby disclaim, disavow, and solemnly abjure any intention to subvert the present Church establishment, as settled by law within this realm; and I do solemnly swear, that I never will exercise any privilege to which I am or may become entitled to disturb or weaken the Protestant Religion or Protestant Government in the United Kingdom." Mr. HUNT said he regretted to be obliged to oppose the motion of his right hon. friend. Ho hoped the bill would become law, and that the present expiring Parliament would distinguish itself by sweeping away that which had been a source of annoyance to her Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects. He could not agree with those who looked upon this oath as one of the bulwarks of the Church of England. On the contrary, he thought that such was not the case, and, that being so, he could not vote for the motion of his right hon. friend. Mr. DISRAELI referred to the history of the oaths and the passing of the Emancipation Act, and touched upon the question of the Irish Church. He was sure his colleagues in that house would believe him when he said he had no desire or wish to insult their religion ; on the contrary, he honoured their ancient faith ; but he must ask them to re collect the compact entered into thirty years ago between Roman Catholicism and Liberalism, the object of which was the destruction of the Established Church in Ireland. With respect to the matter under discussion, ho asked the Roman Catholics just to place themselves in the position of the Protestants, and he thought, then, they would hesitate to agree to such an alteration as was now proposed. He objected to the bill as it was originally brought forward by the honourable member for Limerick, because he felt that the Roman Catholic oath as it at pre- sent stood contained nothing which a gentleman of the highest honour and nicest feeling could not have taken, and he could not believe that any Roman Catholic gentle man would look upon it as a barrier between him and a seat in that house. He objectedalso to thesneasure because it had been brought forward by an individual member. The hon. and learned gentleman who had just addressed the house expressed his opinion that there should be no oath at all ; but he could not agree to any such proposition. He thought that oaths ought to be as rare as they were solemn, but it appeared to him that upon such a solemn oc casion as taking their seats in that house it was fitting that the Most High should be appealed to. The Secretary of State, who had addressed the house on the subject, sug gested that there sho Id only be the oath of allegiance. But if that limited and utilitarian view of affairs was to be taken, why have any oath at all ? The Throne would not be less secure if there was no oath of allegiance. The Queen reigned in the affections of her subjects, and if they sat in that house without any oath he did not suppose it would diminish her authority. (Hear.) But the experience of mankind had taught them that the order and proprieties of life were best secured by appealing on solemn occasions to the fundamental principles of the constitution. But why take the oath of allegiance as propcsed by the Secretary of State ? It was a mere legal form ; and so long as oaths were not discontinued the oathof allegiance was one which every one might take, and more especially to a sovereign who acknowledged her authority to be limited, and whose proudest boast was that she ruled by constitutional autho rity. But when they came to take an oath to the constitu tion under which they lived, the difficulty arose that part of the constitution was the Church, and he had himself contended against anything which could diminish the strength of the present constitutional system. He had been led to take that course not because the Church was in danger. He believed, if all the motions of hon. members below the gangway were carried, and the connection be tween Church and State terminated, the power and autho rity of the Church would not be diminished ; nay, if the Church held her property under a secure tenure, confis cation might not be so easily effected as hon. members imagined. He could not but believe that it was por- fectly possible to frame such an oath as all members of the house might fairly take ; but he thought that such an oath should be introduced by the responsible advisers of the Crown. The Government had undertaken something of the sort on a former occasion, but they failed to carry it through because they sought to effect another object by a side-wind, instead of at tempting it in an open manner. Under those circum stances, if the Cabinet of the Queen would not undertake the duty, it should be assigned to the cabinet of the House of Commons—a select committee ; and when he had asked for a morning sitting it was his intention to move that the bill should be so referred, with an in struction whether it might not be possible to substitute a new form of oath. But the bill had taken its course, and they were now in committee; and he therefore felt bound to consider how far they could meet the just claims of the Roman Catholic members, for if they took exception to some words at the commencement of the oath, he would not oppose the omission of them. Hon. members might suppose that the bull Ccena Domini was still in existence ; but, knowing as he did that assur ances of mutual kindness and goodwill had been ex changed between some of the Roman pontiffs and the Protestant sovereigns of this country, he had himself no feeling of alarm about the bull Ccena Domini. He was not one of those who believed the stability of the Esta blished Church in Ireland depended upon oaths. He could not agree that the Church was in a weak state; on the contrary, he believed it was a strong institution, and that the Established Church in England and Ire land would flourish and increase in influence and autho rity. If he were asked what would be the effect of Parliament • consenting to this measure, he believed it would be disastrous to the Roman Catholics themselves. He thought it was calculated to revive the religious as cerbity which they had been trying to remove for the last 30 years. Under those circumstances, be had no hesitation in supporting the motion of his hon. and learned friend for the introduction of words in accord ance with the institutions of the country ; for he feared, if the opinion went abroad that Parliament had renounced its allegiance to the Established Church in this country, that a sentiment of alarm, and perhaps of indignation, might be aroused by that policy, which would prove very prejudicial to the interests of the Roman Catholic body. For these reasons he begged to support the motion of his hon. and learned friend. (Hear, hear.) Sir G. GREY—I have stated the feelings I entertain with respect to the bill at great length on the second read ing, and therefore I shall trouble the house with very few observations. I shall not follow the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) into those topics which he has introduced into his speech, the discussion of which would only tend to divert us from the plain and simple issues which are now before th 3 house. The right hon. gentleman has raised the important questions of retaining the statement as to the temporal power of the Pope and the effect of the dis union of Church and State, but these questions are out of place on the present occasion. Neither will I enter into the question raised by the hon. member (Mr. Hunt) whether it would not be desirable to abolish all oaths and substitute a declaration. That is a question which, though well de serving consideration on a fitting occasion, is not at all raised by the bill now before the house. The real ques tion at issue is this. Our Roman Catholic fellow-subjects prefer a claim which I think is properly preferred by a member o f th at C hurch—(hear)—to sit in this house on termsof snbjects. The question equalit perfect yiswwithhetohuerr good d tes c t ame Protestant itealnlowhe shown why that claim should be refused. In one observa tion of the right ,hon. gentleman I entirely concur, viz., the remark he mad e as t o th e d i fferent spirit in which questions of this kind are treated now, as compared with the manner in which they were received some years ago. In 1854, the Government of Lord Aberdeen proposed a bill the effect of which would have been to substitute an uniform oath, precisely in the terms of the oath now sug gested in the bill before the house, to be taken by all members of Parliament. That bill was opposed by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) and the great party of which he is the head. Again, in 1859, a bill identical to the latter was proposed by the right hon. gentleman the then Attorney - General for Ireland. But parties were then so evenly balanced, that leave to introduce the bill was only given by a small majority of ten. That bill was also opposed by the right hon. gentleman and the whole party opposite. Now what do we see ? We see the bill proposed by my right hon. friend assented to, and the principle affirmed by a large majority on two occasions. Then Parliament refused to admit any alteration into the form of oath. Now Parliament admits that there are parts of that oath which it is desirable to expunge, and they limit opposition to the parts which are involved in the amend ment of the hon. and learned gentleman the member for Belfast. The result of our discussions has proved that these questions now are likely to be entertained in a spirit of greater fairness, greater moderation, and more Christian charity than on any former occasion. I come now to what the right hon. gentleman said at the close of his speech, _ _ that he apprehended that if those words in the oath which had reference to the settlement of property and the mainte nance of the Established Church in Ireland were omitted, that strong feeling might bo excited in this country disas- ,rous to the Roman Catholics themselves. Let me remind he right hon. gentleman of a fact to which I adverted on the second reading of the bill, that every denomination of Protestant Dissenters, whose zeal for Protestantism no one can doubt, and whose sympathy for the tenets and doctrine of the Church of Rome no one can suspect, have petitioned the house that the bill may pass ; they think that the prin- ciple which the bill contains is just and reasonable. - We come now to the only point at issue, whether we should retain or not the words with reference to the maintenance of property and the declaration that the Roman Catholic members should not attempt to subvert the Protestant Esta blished Church. It is needless to argue that this oath does not constitute any real defence of the Established Church. The right hon. gentleman has freely conceded that, but he seemed to imply that some other persons in this country might deem that it did constitute a bulwark of the Esta blished Church, and that its abolition might excite feelings detrimental to tho Roman Catholics themselves. I think we may well take our chance of such feelings as that arising. Will any one state now that thoy think that retaining this oath with regard to the Established Church is any bul- wark at all to that Church, or to the Protestant interests of this country ? I stated before that I thought the oath unnecessary and ambiguous, and that was a reason why, at all events, it should be modified. No one can attempt to deny that part of this oath is ambiguous in its terms, and that different interpretations have been put upon it; that it does operate in the sense that those who are anxious to re tain it desire that it should. Ido not know what the right hon. gentleman means by an alliance between the extreme Liberal party and the Roman Catholic members of this house for the subversion of the Established Church. It was very shortly after that oath was framed Lord Derby, then Secretary for Ireland, introduced the Church Tempo ralities Bill into this house—a bill which reduced the tem- poralities of the Irish Church by a large amount, and re• duced the number of archbishops and bishops ; but I never heard that any reproach attached to the Roman Catholic members of this house for supporting the Government of which Lord Derby was then the organ in introducing that bill. That bill was passed by a large majority, but no one ever said that it was introduced with the intention of sub verting the Established Church. Other measures have been since proposed, but certainly not with the intention of sub verting the Established Church. I say nothing of the mo tion of the hon. member for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn), to which reference has been made. He proposed his measure as a member of the Church of England, and that measure was supported by the Roman Catholic members of the house. But when the right hon. gentleman asks who is to be judge what are the questions on which Roman Catholic members are to vote, I say that a man's own conscience must be judge of his own acts. The difficulty with regard to this oath is that some feel that it is an obligation on their conscience, and some feel that it is not, and we have no right to think that either would act other than conscien tiously according to the uiows which they took. If the oath is liable to this ambiguous construction, that is a reason why it should not be maintained. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman says he desires to see one uniform oath for all members of Parliament, and hoped that we should come to that. He, however, asked the right hon. gentleman who introduced the bill (Mr. Monsell) to throw his bill over in order that another bill might be introduced. Nov I also think that it would be most desirable for one uniform oath to be established ; and if the present bill is passed, the difference between the oath taken by the Roman Catholic members and the Protestant members will be so small that I cannot conceive it possible that we should not soon come t • one uniform oath. On the other hand the amendment of the hon. and learned gentleman— (Sir Hugh Cairns) would raise an inseparable barrier against one uniform oath. The right hon. gentleman sup ports that amendment, and yet says that he desires to see one uniform oath established. Does he mean to say that he is about to propose an uniform oath, when it was one which would impose upon Protestant Dissenters the de claration which is now taken by Roman Catholics, that they will not attempt to subvert the Established Church ? Why, the very insertion of the words of the amendment is a declaration that he will not have one uniform oath, but that he wishes to perpetuate distinctions between Roman Catholic members—distinctions to which they attach no value, and which are no security to the Established Church. It is only those useless distinctions which we now wish to abolish. For these reasons I oppose the adoption of the amendment of the hon. and learned gentleman. I believe the best thing to do under the present circumstances is to pass the bill as proposed by the right hon. gentleman the member for Limerick, reserving for future consideration, which must soon come, whether there should not be one uniform oath taken by all members. This bill will be one important step towards the attainment of that object, and for that reason I shall give it my support.' Mr. WHITESIDE and Mr. HENLEY supported the amendment, which was opposed by Mr. IIoRsMAN, who denied that the existing oath was the result of any com pact entered into by the Roman Catholics in 1829, and quoted the language of the late Sir Robert Peel in proof of his assertion. Mr. NEWDEGATE said he had been assured by the late Mr. Goulburn that so far was Sir Robert Peel from underrating the security of the oath which had been adopted with the concurrence of the Irish Roman Catholic prelates, that to the day of his death ho had expressed his approval of it as a means of saving the country from those bitter controversies which it had always been his object to calm and prevent. The committee divided— For Sir H. Cairns' amendment 147 Against Majority against -19 The announcement of tho numbers was received wi cheers. The clause as originally proposed was then agreed to, and the preamble having also been agreed to, the Chairman was ordered to report the bill without amendments to the house. The house then resumed. RECORD OF TITLE (IRELAND) BILL. The bill passed through committee. POOR LAW BOARD CONTINUANCE BILL. Mr. VILLIERS, in moving that the Poor-law Board Continuance Bill be read a second time, explained that it did not effect any substantial change in the constitution of the commission, but simply continued it for the limited period of three years. The remainder of the provisions were founded upon the recommendations in the report of the select committee. Mr. HENLEY thought that as the bill was hased upon the report of a committee which had sat three or four sessions, it was rather hard upon the house that it should have been delayed until so late a period when the days of Parliament were numbered. A Cabinet Minister had issued his address to his constituents in view of the com ing election, and it was impossible to communicate with persons in the country upon the details. For example, the measure would sweep away the Gilbert unions without their having an opportunity of being heard in their de fence. He would not oppose the second reading, however, but reserve to himself perfect freedom - of action in com mittee for the purpose of limiting the continuance of the board to one year, leaving the other matters for the present untouched. Lord R. CECIL pointed out several provisions in the bill which were not recommended by the select committee, but had been introduced by the framer of the measure on his own responsibility. In his opinion the preferable course would be to pass a simple continuance bill for one year, reserving the question of a further continuance, or the permanent establishment of the board, until the meet ing of the new Parliament. Mr. KINNAIRD believed the Government would gain nothing by pressing forward the bill in its present shape, especially as it had only been in the hands of members since Friday last. Sir J. TROLLOPE and Mr. NEATE urged the President of the Poor-law Board to content himself with simply pro posing a continuance bill for ono year. The discussion was continued by Lord E. HowAnu, who expressed his surprise at the anxiety of hon. gentlemen to bring the session to a close and go down into the country, and by Mr. Davenport Bromley, Mr. A. Mills, Mr. Nowde gate, Mr. Hibbert, Mr. Hennessy, Sir J. Shelley, and Sir W. Jolliffe, all of whom pointed out some omissions and defects in the bill, which rendered any attempt to carry it through Parliament in its existing shape utterly futile. Mr. PAcKE moved, as an amendment, and Sir M. W. RIDLEY seconded it, that the bill read a second time on that day three months. In the course of hiS reply, Mr. VirraEns said that all the objections which had been raised against the second read ing were only so many reasons why the bill should be read a second time, and go into committee. He intimated his readiness, however, to withdraw some clauses of minor importance to which exception had been taken. the cond time. amendment was negatived by 76 to .11 69 p , o an n a d read d th iY e isi bi o ll n, a second Several other bills were also advanced a stage, and the house adjourned at twenty minutes to three o'clock. rHE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 13, 1865. THE UNITED STATES• (From a Correspondent of the Times.) PHILADELPHIA, May 30. On the 26th of May all the Confederate armies west of the Mississippi were surrendered by their commander, General E. Kirby Smith, to the Federal General Canby at New Orleans. The terms of surrender were similar to those given General Lee's army in Virginia ; all the officers and men are to give their paroles not to bear arms against the United States, and are to go home and engage in peaceful pursuits. The faith of the United States is guaranteed that they will not be molested so long as they obey their paroles. The num ber of men surrendered by Kirby Smith was about 25,000. Forty general officers were sur rendered ; among them Lieutenants - Generals S. B. Buckner, J. B. Hood, and Sterling Price ; Major-Generals Clark, Hindman, and Magru der ; and Brigadier-Generals Bee, Pike, Slaugh ter, and Prince Polignac. There is now no armed force of the Confederates east or west of the Missis sippi, and the war is ended. The last battle of the war was one at El Pasco del Chico, near Brownsville, Texas, between a Federal foraging party 300 strong and some Texan cavalry. The foragers were driven into Brownsville with a loss of 70, mostly prisoners. The war being thus officially and really ended the Federal Government is busily engaged upon the great questions involved in the reconstruction of the Union. The effect of Mr. Lincoln's assassination upon the public mind is entirely spent. The desire among the Northern people for reconciliation with the Southisuniversal. The friendly spirit so prevalent before Lincoln's death has returned. Orders have been issued for the unconditional pardon and release of all political prisoners confined in various parts of the country upon sentences by court-martial of im prisonment during the war. This is to be followed by an order for the release of all other political pri soners whose offences were not of a criminal nature. It is generally believed that by the middle of June there will be scarcely any State prisoners in confine ment. By various orders issued during the past month nearly 50,000 Confederate prisoners of war, confined in various parts of the North, have been released. :Almost all have been sent to their homes in the South. Yesterday, May 29, President Johnson issued his great amnesty proclamation. He grants to all persons who have directly or indirectly participated in the rebellion, excepting such as are hereafter specified, amnesty and pardon, with the restoration of all rights of property, except as to slaves, and except where legal proceedings for confiscation have begun, on condition that such persons take an oath. The oath is that the person who takes it will sup port, protect, and defend the Constitution and the Union of the States, and abide by all laws and pro clamations made during the war to secure emanci pation. The various classes of persons excepted from the benefits of the amnesty are the following— All civil and diplomatic officers of the Confederacy ; all who left judicial stations under the United States to aid the rebellion; Confederate military officers above the rank of colonel ; naval officers of higher grade than lieutenant ; all below those grades who resigned commissions in the United States' army or navy to aid the rebellion, or were educated at 'West Point or the Naval Academy; all persons who left seats in the Federal Congress or left their homes in the North to aid the rebellion ; all persons who treated Northern prisoners unlawfully, or engaged in privateering, or made raids from Canada ; all per sons who have been or are absentees from the United States for the purpose of aiding the rebellion ; all Governors of Southern States ; all who at the time they ask to take the amnesty oath are in custody, and all who participated in the rebellion and have taxable property worth more than $20,000. It is provided, however, that any one in these excepted classes may make special application for pardon to the President, " and such clemency will be liberally extended as may be consistent with the facts of the case and the peace and dignity of the United States." The great number of exceptions to the pardon is considered harsh, but the proviso somewhat miti gates this. The proclamation itself is considered as an evidence that Johnson wishes to restore the Union as perfectly as it can be done excepting slavery, so that the States may have the same rights as they enjoyed before the war. Many of the persons ex cepted will no doubt apply for pardon, but as every one, North and South, now seems anxious to restore the Union and return to peaceful pursuits, the pro clamation will soon become a dead letter. The ex ception of all persons whose property amounts to $20,000 savours a little of Johnson's " plebeian" ideas. The proclamation shows the triumph of the Conservatives, in the fact that no provision is made for negro suffrage in the South. A division in the Cabinet upon this point delayed its promulgation for over a week. The Attorney-General of the United States has decided that although the war is over the Confisca tion Acts are in full force. This is modified by the proclamation, however, and the law now seems to be that in all cases where confiscations have been made or legal pryceedings to that end are begun the Con fiscation Act is in force; but no new proceedings under it are to be instituted, except in case of sen tence for treason, and where owners of property refuse to take the amnesty oath. There are in the South many abandoned plantations, cultivated by emancipated negroes under the superintendence of the Freedmen's Bureau. General Howard, the head of this bereau, has issued an order that these plan tations cannot be restored to their owners unless the negroes be given the growing crops or compensation therefor. It looks very much as if these plantations would ultimately be restored to their owners, many of whom have already taken steps to reclaim them. Their cultivation by the United States has been found expensive and unprofitable, and in many cases has been given up. Among those who have applied for the restoration of their estate is Mrs. General Lee. Arlington, opposite Wash- She o cl n a . inis her estate at The reports that Jefferson Davis has been mana cled in his prison at Fortress Monroe has been con tradicted. Armed guards are constantly in his cell. Clement C. Clay is confined at Fortress Monroe. The families of these prisoners were refused permission to stay there, so as to be near them, and have been sent to Savannah. This rigour on the part of the Government does not meet with popular approval. By the request of the Government the grand jury of Washington have found true bills of indictment for treason against Davis and Breckenridge. The law on this subject is that no charge of treason shall be sustained unless supported by the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act. The overt act laid in the indictment is the Confederate raid into the district of Columbia in July, 1864, and Francis P. Blair, sen., General Hardin, and several other persons living in the suburbs of Washington, whose property was destroyed by the raid, are the witnesses. Under this indictment Davis has been demanded for trial by the District of Columbia Supreme Court, presided over by Judge Carter. Arrests are made almost daily of persons distin guished in the South. Ex-Governor Letcher, of Virginia, Governor Watts, of Alabama, James A. Seddon, Secretary of War, and Judge Campbell, of Alabama, have been taken into custody within the past few days. There are rumours that Gen. Lee is to be arrested, but nothing has yet been done that indicates it. On the 17th of May a small boat, con taining seven white men and a negro, was picked up off the Florida coast. They gave assumed names, but some of them are supposed to be distinguished Confederates. Two of them were afterwards dis covered to be Senator Harris, of Missouri, and Gen. Hamilton. They were trying to escape to Havannah. In almost every Southern State there are move ments looking to reconstruction. President Johnson has begun the work by a proclamation for recon struction in North Carolina. He appoints W. W. Holden Provisional Governor. Mr. holden will be remembered as a Union man who opposed Vance for Governor, and who is editor of a Union news paper at Raleigh. Mr. Holden is to prescribe rules and regulations for calling a State Convention as soon as may be, the Convention to have power to do every act necessary to restore the State to the Union. No person is to be a delegate in the Con vention or to be a voter at an election for delegates until he shall have taken the amnesty oath I have quoted above, and unless he is a voter qualified by the laws of North Carolina in force before the State seceded in 1861. This proclamation is another Conservative triumph, as it excludes negro suffrage. The State Convention is to prescribe the qualifica tions of electors and office-holders in North Caro lina. In addition to this the President's proclama tion directs that post-offices, tax collectors' offices, Custom-houses, &c., are to be re-opened in the State. This proclamation settles the principles upon which every State will be restored to the Union. It classes JOhnson with the State Rights party, and is in accordance with the views of the strictest school of that party. The Radicals of all classes are thoroughly discomfited. The proclamation will do more to pacificate the South than any act since Lee's surrender. Movements looking to reconstruc tion have begun in several States. The State Legis lature of Mississippi has met and passed resolutions instructing Governor Clark to appoint three com missioners to be sent at once to Washington to confer with President Johnson upon the practicabi lity of calling a State Convention to restore Missis sippi to the Union. Meetings advocating recon struction have been held in many parts of Georgia and Alabama. The people in all the States gene rally express a willingness to part with their slaves, if necessary to restore tranquillity. GovernorTier pont has established the new State Government of Virginia at Richmond. On the 25th of May an election was held, under an order of Pierpont's, to fill vacancies in the Legislature. Every voter took an oath of allegiance, and prominent Confederates were in all cases elected. The Legislature is strongly opposed to Pierpont, and there is some indication that the Federal Government will declare the elec tion void. Every one is so wrapped up in reconstruction that the foreign policy of the Government is almost neglected. There is a strong wish to be on friendly terms with England and France. The Government has discountenanced the enlistments for the Mexican Liberals, and the fever to go to Mexico has almost died away. A very economical fit has seized the people at Washington. They are retrenching expenditures in all quarters, and discharging employes by wholesale. The expense of foreign quarrels, if nothing else, and the generosity pro duced by a course of fortune just now, make the Government peculiarly placable towards its neigh bours. As Kirby Smith's army has surrendered, it is thought that Sheridan's Texas expedition will be abandoned. That officer is on his way to Baton Rouge, Louisiana, where the troops are assembling. 150,000 men, half infantry and half cavalry, were to have composed the expedition, but General Logan's army of the Tennessee-40,000 men, part of the force —has already been withdrawn, and sent to Louisville, Kentucky, to be disbanded. It is highly probable that the last military movements of this great war have been executed. Meade's and Sherman's armies at Washington are being prepared for disbanding, and in about two weeks the regiments will be sent to the various State capitals to be mustered out. The assassination trials continue in Washington Testimony is now being taken for the defence. As the criminals all appear to be guilty excepting Spangler, the stage carpenter of Ford's Theatre, the case does not attract the great attention it did some time since. No testimony has yet been published implicating Davis. There has been a frightful explosion at Mobile. The ordnance depot and powder magazine exploded on May 28. Eight blocks of buildings were de stroyed, and from 500 to 1,000 people are reported injured. The loss is estimated at $3,000,000. All the Northern prisoners, so far as is known, have been released from Southern prisons. The guerilla war in Virginia and North Carolina is at an end. Trade is opening with many parts of the South. The Custom-house at Savannah has been re-opened, and steamers run to all inland towns on the Savannah river. General Gilmore, at Charles ton, on May 26, removed all restrictions on trade in South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. Trade has opened on the Alabama river, between Mobile and Montgomery. The South is too poor, how ever, to buy much more than the necessaries of life. Telegraphic messages can now be sent to all parts of the South. A movement has been started in New York to pay off the national debt. The amount already subscribed is $2,375,000. The project is regarded merely as an experiment, however, and has received no official sanction. The course adopted by some Northern cities of expelling people who came from the South has been abandoned. President Johnson disapproves it. The gold premium still continues at from 135 to 138. Many transactions in trade, particularly in sugar and coffee, are now - made exclusively for gold. Texas will soon be opened to unrestricted trade. The Whitsuntide Procession of Roman Catholic Schools. (From the Manchester Guardian of Saturday.) Yesterday morning, the children connected with the Roman Catholic Sunday schools in this city walked in procession. They assembled at the New Cross, Oldham street, and started on the route about half-past nine o'clock. They were accompanied by many of their teachers and clergymen. The route was, as hitherto, through Great Ancoats-street, Bridge-street, Union-street, Ardwick Green, Rusholme-Road, to Oxford-street. The whole of the way was crowded with eager spectators. As the procession passed through Great Ancoats the streets were literally blocked by onlookers of all grades. The weather was exceedingly favourable, and the sight was imposing. A band of music headed each school, banners and symbols of the Catholic faith enlivened the scene, the girls smartly dressed in light attire, chanted sacred music, while at intervals, especially when the pro gress of the march was checked by a pressure of spectators, the lads rent the air with cheers. The order of the proces sion, with the names of the clergymen preceding the schools, and the number of children in them, was as follows : St. Alban's, John-street, Ancoats, preceded by the Rev. J. Gornall, St. John's Young Men's Society; boys, 160; girls, 227 ; and teachers, 40.. _ _ St. Ann's, Every-street, preceded by the Revs. T. Allen and W. Manby ; 500 boys, 1,000 girls, and 50 teachers. St. Augustine's, Granby-row, preceded by the Revs. Canon Willing, J. Tracy, and J. Snape ; boys, 600; girls, 900 ; and teachers, 90; irrespective of the Young Men's Society, of whom 70 were in the procession. St. Joseph's, Goulden-street, preceded by the Rev. W. Ma lone; 300 boys, 300 girls, and 30 teachers. St. Aloysus's, Ogden-street, preceded by the Revs. F. Ho gan and R. Power : 250 boys and 300 girls. St. Patrick's, Livesey-street, preceded by the Revs. Canon Cantwell, R. Liptrott, K. Bouleye, D. O'Brien, J. Scully, and Costallo ; 1,500 boys and 2,000 girls, besides 28 children belonging to a female orphange connected with the school. St. Chad's, Cheethani-hill-road, preceded by the Rev. W. J. Sheehan, J. Hayes, S. Clarkson, and Riley, and the Xaverian Brothers; 1,100 boys, 1,400 girls, and 50 teachers, besides several members of the Young Men's Society, which numbers 650. St. Mary's, Mulberry-street, preceded by the Revs. J. New ton and J. Gerard, and Mr. F. M'Carthy ; 550 boys, 650 girls, and 40 teachers. St. Wilfrid's, Bedford-street, Hulme, preceded by the Revs. Canon Toole, T. Billington, and P. Liptrott; numbering 1,400. As these particulars indicate, the procession was a very long one. Notwithstanding the crowded state of the thoroughfare excellent order was maintained by the police, who sprinkled along the route to prepare for the procession. On reaching Oxford-road, the children were dispersed and proceeded to their respective schools. THE HOLY FATHER has sent a gift of great value to M. Thiers as an acknowledgment of the services he has rendered the Catholic cause by the magnificent orations ha pronounced this session in the Chamber in defence of the temporal power. The Cardinal of Mechlin, who has left Rome a few days, is the bearer of this present, which is said to consist of a matchless collection of engravings of all the principal paintings on sacred subjects in the Vatican. M. Thiers's artistic tastes are well known, and the Pope was probably aware that he has the finest engravings avant la lettre in France. The oldest inhabitant of the Cher, M. Besson, has just expired on his property of Franchant. Ho last month entered on his 105th year. [ADVEUTISEMENT.]—HoIIoway's Ointment and Pills. — A Word of Promise.—All sufferers from sores, ulcers, scorbutic affections, and skin diseases may confidently commence the treatment of their several infirmities with these healing and cleansing remedies. Under Holloway's well-tried medicaments the worst cases will soon assume a kinder aspect, and in the progress of the cure the afflicted will neither be embarrassed by diffimilties nor disheartened by failures. A little perseverance and moderate attention to the " directions for use" enveloping every packet of oint ment and pills will enable every invalid to conduct his complaint to a successful issue ; and he may feel assured that, by following this simple but searching treatment, bis skin will be made sound, severe suffering spared, and health restored. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. TlMES.—Greatly to its credit, the House of Lords has declined to support the policy of that less rea sonable section of the Conservative party which opposes the Union Chargeability Bill. The motion of the Duke of Rutland to refer the bill to a Select Committee was rejected last night by a very large majority ; the bill was read a second time, and, we may presume, will now shortly become law. So many and conclusive have been the arguments urged in favour of this useful measure that it is difficult to imagine how any party could believe that it was doing the country service by delaying and hindering it. But there is hardly any feeling stronger than that of local jealousy and rivalry, the spirit which arms one petty district to resist the supposed aggres sion of another, and fills the heart of the suburban parishioner with indignation at the idea of being overreached by the vulgar and domineering town in his neighbourhood. To the inevitable hostility of borderers more than to any pecuniary self-seeking we must ascribe the fact that so large a number of English gentlemen have been found to oppose the measure. Happily, the resistance spent itself in the House of Commons. Before the bill came to its third reading the opposition to it had almost ceased, and it ultimately passed without a division. The neutrality, if we may so call it, of the Conservative chiefs has been imitated in the House of Lords. Last night the Duke of Rutland found only Lord Redesdale to speak on his side and 24 peers to sup port him. Neither Lord Derby nor any other leading politician of the Conservative party chose to make himself conspicuous by advising the virtual rejection of the bill. Indeed, it is hard to conceive that any enlightened politician should desire to place his party in the position of having defeated such a measure. Such a victory would be more dangerous than any defeat. To go to the hustings as the advocates of a system which has been condemned by a whole generation of economists, and the evils of which have been dwelt upon by practical observers in every part of the country, would be an excess of boldness.. Their own sagacity and good feeling, however, as well as their political prudence induced the Conservative leaders in the Lords to offer no opposition to the measure, which will, we trust, be one of the principal achievements of the Session of 1865. The course taken by the Duke of Rutland in moving that the bill be referred to a Select Com mittee had, indeed, nothing to recommend it. If ever there was a measure before Parliament simple in its provisions and thoroughly understood in all its details, it is the Union Chargeability Bill. It consists of only a few clauses, intended to carry out a large but well known and long canvassed change. All the information which Parliament can expect to have it has already. First, as to the opinions of those most conversant with the poor law and its working, it has been explained again and again, and was repeated by Lord Granville last night, that at the time of the introduction of the New Poor Law the Commissioners were unanimous in recommend- ing that the settlement and chargeability should be extended from the parishes to the unions. Lord Brougham was in his place to testify to this of his own memory, and to declare to the house that the Government of that day was only deterred from proposing such a change in the law by the fear that the interests arrayed against it would be too power ful to admit of its success. Five years after the Commissioners returned to the subject, and expressed their regret that the principle of union rating had not been embodied in the poor law. But what the Whigs could not accomplish in 1834 they certainly would have failed to do in 1839, and so the question slept for a time. The evils of the existing practice, however, were too much for the Government which followed. Sir J. Graham felt the necessity of abolish ing a system which was depressing and demoialising the labourer. But he failed. Two years in success sion he brought in a bill, but each time was obliged to drop it. From that time to the present there has hardly been a year that the principle of Union rating has not received the tribute of some able and thinking man's approval. Indeed, their lordships are aware from their own knowledge that the reports which have been made on this subject are no mere idle fictions. They under stand the grievance complained of, and the way that is proposed to remedy it, and if a Select Com mittee were to sit for a whole session through they could add little to the information of the house. The Duke of Rutland seems to have felt this, for his speech was really a speech against the bill, and not for inquiry into the subject. The argu ments he used are those with - which we have been familiar from the beginning of the discussion, and we cannot say that they are entirely without weight. The imposition on suburban agricultural parishes of a payment for the support the poor of a town is no doubt, at first sight, a legitimate grievance, and it may . in some cases operate unjustly. But wn it is considered how often the poor of agricultural parishes are driven into the neighbouring towns, there is not much reason to suppose that any great wrong will be done, and, if there - be any, it may easily be remedied by well-considered changes in the limits of the Unions. It will be, perhaps, a more un pleasant effect of the bill that a clergyman's rates will be doubled in such a case as the Duke mentions, where the parish has but 30 inhabitants and not a single pauper, or that a gentleman who has only five labourers on his property will have to pay £l3O a year. But these unhappy exceptions have, for the most part, gained their immunity by the extra bur dens that have been thrown on their less fortunate neighbours, and it is now time they should bear their fair part in relieving the general poverty of the country. With respect to the inequalities of the system of rating, and the injustice of forcing a farmer whose gains are small to pay as much as a tradesman who is making thousands but who is only rated on his house, they are very proper questions to engage the attention of the Legislature, but have nothing to do with the present bill. This deals only with one very pressing evil, which it will, we hope, tend to eradicate. If any subsequent measure be necessary for the improvement of the Poor-law and the esta blishment of just relations between the several orders of ratepayers, an appeal to Parliament will doubtless not be made in vain. In the meantime justice and humanity demand the passing of the present mea sure. POST.--It is but too true, as Lord Brougham has opportunely observed, that the corrupt practices which obtain in a general election tend to lower the character and the constitution of this country in the eyes of foreign nations. There are boroughsin which the state of the poll is determined by the purchase of a certain number of marketable votes. It is an immemorial custom, illicit and immemorial, no doubt, an offence in law, and a sin against society, but still an ancient usage, a tradition, a thing which everybody understands, and which nobody likes to put down. Lord Brougham would, indeed, make bribery a felony, punishable by the treadmill, but although the felonious intention might be legally inferred, all penal enactments depend a good deal on their social interpretation. There are innumer able objections to almost every remedial suggestion, and the one which is perhaps the most feasible has met with the least favourable reception. It may be all very proper to say that those who offer bribes, and those who supply the money, are primarily the guilty parties. We are not quite sure that this con tention will bear a close examination ; but, admit ting for the argument that it is so, it is next to im possible to procure the conviction of the chief offen ders. Onthe other hand, there is commonly no such difficulty with respect to the persons who take bribes; and if, on conviction, they were to be per manently disqualified from voting in any borough or county in the kingdom, the registers might be gradually weeded. Soon after the new House of Commons meets, the taverns in the neighbourhood of the Houses of Parliament will be filled with men who come prepared to state on oath that they were bribed by the agents of certain sitting members, and by their own depositionsthey could be convicted and disfranchised. Of course, as the immediate result, there might be fewer petitions, but eventually there would also be less corruption. This is going to the root of the evil, and compassing the purifica tion of the constituencies, whereas the chance of being called upon to pass a month or two on the treadmill might be calculated in bargaining for the vote ; and as for the plea of poverty and tempta tion, men who were not in a position to exercise the franchise independently could not complain if it was taken away from them. That, instead of extenuating their wrong, would rather go to show that the electoral qualification was likewise, to some extent, responsible. There are, however, two other propositions to which, now that the subject is under consideration, it may not be out of place to refer. That which is to be pressed upon the House of Commons this evening may be disposed of in a very few words. The ballot is a thoroughly exhausted hobby. All communities have been, are, and will be so long as they exist, subject to influences which no law can bind or loose. Rank, wealth, intellect, mutual relations, moral respect, and social depen dence will operate, more or less, in the conflict of political opinions. This is in the nature of things, and it is well that it is so. Undue influence is another matter. We believe that it is nearly ex tinct, and that where it does survive it is by no means without redeeming qualities. There may be relics of the feudal system in the agricultural coun ties, but that the legitimate influence of the land owners is, on the whole, exercised so as to degrade the yeomanry, or to prejudice tire representation of the people, does not appear. The clergy, again, are an influential body, but they could not, if they would, abuse their power with impunity. As to large manufacturers, they stand relatively much in the same position as the considerable landowners, while the strikes show clearly enough that the em ployed are not inclined to submit to the will of the employers. And, as regards the tradesmen in towns, who are facetiously supposed to be fascinated by their lady customers, if this were the case the answer is obvious. It is idle to attempt to gove rn the mind of man. You may say that a tradesman, for example, is not fit to be trusted with the fran chise because he thinks more of his till, or Ins bankers' account, than of the political principles of this or that candidate, but the Ballot would net make him forget interests that are tangibly repre sented by suburban villas and their pleasant ap pointments. It would be no protection to him, a nd if it were, he would be ashamed or afraid to av ail himself of it. Mr. Berkeley may make a House, and call for a division, but the Ballot has had its dap. No class desires to be placed in its equivocal shade, no individual asks for it on his own account. But while political influence must be left to the regulation of private morality and the checks of pub hc opinion, it seems desirable, in considering th e expediency of extending the franchise, to have re gard to the prevalence of bribery in the electoral body. Looking at things as they are, there can hardly be a doubt that the simple reduction of the actual qualification would, in many boroughs, in crease the number of the venal voters, whereas what should be desiderated is the infusion of a purer element for the purpose of leavening the subsisting corruption. It is evident that this idea is being thoughtfully matured by statesmen like Mr. Glad:- stone, who are capable of carrying it out ; and what Mr. Disraeli calls the " lateral" extension of the franchise would, it may be assumed, give votes to persons whose position precluded the offer or acceP" tance of a bribe. As a matter of fact, the represen tation cannot be said to have suffered much by ! 1 r existing venality. But when it is proposed to mon.Y a system expressly to get rid of its anomalies, its plain that corruption is the first thing tobe against, and, if possible, reduced ; and that whie' cannot be effected by means of pains and penalties may, it is hoped, be brought about by degr . ee s through the administration of a political alternative. The legal disfranchisement of the corrupted electort which, however just, would be deemed harsh . lull partial, can, it is believed, be virtually accomplish r. by neutralising their votes. The publicity, the frequency, and the impunity of the abuse of t h e , I franchise, point to the necessity of a remedy, bt l u they indicate even more cogently that it is indispen sable to provide against the spread of the contagion' If candidates were to agree, not formally as they del but frankly and honourably as between man an d man, neither to spend nor to countenance the expen diture of money for an illegal purpose, and if . thei could answer for their supporters, this nuisance. might be summarily abated. But the truth is tha i b the humble, bard-working voters, who are eloquent,lo described as standing in need of protection, are ti; d seducers. The pecuniary value of the franc hise all they care about. They trade with their voteSt and although some are so politically scrupulous th they will only vote for what they term their evl party, they nevertheless decline to vote unless p al e for taking the trouble. It may not, t h ere fore, L'u premature to submit that the evidence taken be fore the election committees of the next House of C° o ! mons will be admissible in the larger issue to yyhic we have adverted. COUNTRY MARKETS NORTHAMPTON.—JUNE 10. We had hardly an average supply of wheat at our oor i ii market to-day, and the quality of the grain was gens r ; e cl fair. In this district the wheat plant is very well reP ° . of and spring corn is making good progress. Gras"cv, abundant. The tone of the wheat trade to-day was ste 3 oo and Sellers for the most part succeeded in maintaining Ito, full prices of the week preceding. Barley little o r no alto' ration in prices. Oats only moderately represente d, the demand by no means brisk at last week's currel':;lo There was a meagre supply of beans, which brought 4 A 0 as much money. Peas a limited show, and una ltere' price. ola New white wheat, 39s to 42s ; new red, 395 to 40s - white, 40s to 43s ; old red, 38s to 41s per 36 stone. Vi a :, 30 for malting, 31s to 33s per qr. ; grinding, 26s to 31s r,;", t ie. stone. •Oats, old, 25s to 26s ; new, 18s to 24s per 24 o.„,wBsi Beans, old, 36s to 40s ; new, 35s to Ns per 38 stone . 33s to 38s per 36 stone. CLC-4mm 10. 0 4 To-day the show of H whea ESTER t was moderate. Business Iv limited, and quotations generally as last week. Beans ther in favour of the buyer. Peas unaltered in pn c° ' 0 Wheat, white 428 468 Beane, Mazagan...... 3 ? 40 1 red 3rs 426 Middle and small._ 3a 9 3 ,38 Barley ... ,, s 34s Peas, white. ......... 35,0, 388 Oats ........20s 25s grey..... ... - ••36° GRANTHAM—JUNE 10. e yt Old white wheat, 41s to 465; old red, 37 8 to 428; white, 40s to 44s ; new red, 37s to 40s per 86 stone. t ley for malting, 29s to 33s per qr. ; grinding, 24s to 28 8 ri} 30 stone. Oats, ol 25s to 27s ; now, 22s to 24$ Per,.oo. stone. Beans, old, 39s to .41s ; new, 36s to 38s per 38 6,' Peas, 34s to 36s per 36 stone. • CHELMSFO' At this market to-day the at about former rates. 3 84 Wheet, old white....4is 48s Peas, Partridge ...... 3 68 30 new .418 98s White ...... ..• . 3 ° 0 old red 408 925 B Hine . ...... 380 do new 3BB 41s Barley.... 2ss 325 Du d n it ... o 7:. n l e . w ... ... .......rs : v s - 4 („lievalier 268 33s Beans, Tick, old .•.... 0 i s .- Grind og Os e s new. • ••L s . Malt 61s 67s Barrow liclo..' -0 Chevalier &Is 688 neW. •• • --0 38! Oats dtD—JuNE 9. wheat trade was rather sl''''l ABERDEEN--JUNE 9. 10 At this day's market there was a goo d a tt e ndanc e ' business was inactive, and prices tending downwards' White wheat 35s Od to 38s Od i_ 621 b v bush el ' Red wheat 34s Od to 36s Odf I. Potato oats 20s Od to 21s Odt gab V bushel. Common oats 19s Od to 20s Odf 1. Bore 21s Od to 22s 04 5 311 v bus hel Barley 21s Od to 22s 6df 1,40 11) ' Oatmeal 15s 6d to 16s 6d 'fl b o ll of 280 0. Flour, fine 31s 6d to 32s Od V sac k 0f IRCALDY—urim 10. Small supplies of all kinds of grain, which sold 001 111 at prices rather in favour of sellers. Wheat. Barley. Oatel• First...— Hs Od I 258 Od 228 Od econd 38s Od --s Od 228 6d Thad 4os Od s Od 238 5d COAL MARKET. Price per ton at the close of the market. s , cl s. d. 1 7 3 Tunstall H ar tl e pool Walls End Haswell l7 6 Braddyell's lJetton.,,,••L 14 6 East Hartlepool Carway and Duffryn Hetton Ly0n5.......... 0 6 Malting 22 0 Hastings Hartley "•'' 1 6 0 Walls End Gosforth 15 6 Cowpen HartleY ..... 1 1 g Heugh Hall 'l6 9 Tanfield Moor ....... .. lb u ~. Hetton l7 6 South Kelloe ....... 16 Walker Primrose l3 3 Holywell Main ...•••"' Ships at market, 92 ; sold, 68. Foreign Mail Packet List. is. Australia and New Zealand, via Southampton .•••• s o 4. Ditto, via Marseilles Brazil and Cape Verde, by British packet........ Joe Ditto, by French packet Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St Helen; .. .. .. .......... lg 'China, Penang, and Singapore, via Southampton•• Ja e 11 " Ditto, via Marseilles Falkland Islands l5 Gibraltar, via Southampton .......... . ....... .• • • •••oie India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Southampton•••`:loo o , c• 5 Ditto, via Marseilles • ... • o fr g. India (Bombay), via Southampton.. .......... .. .... .. Ditto, via Marseilles ....................... 11. Mauritius, via Southampton 4„1. Ditto, via 3larseil ei .....................•••• .„„ge•:. 4 Newfoundland .......... :1;15, _.••• Portugal - Ditto, by private ship to Lisbon... ............ itri 6 United States and British North America , bY . joie tish packet ....... . ........... Ditto, by United States packet, via SouthaulP" ten ... . . ..6 Ditto, via C•Jrk ...... .. ................ • ' ...lo ne i l t Ditto, by Canadian packet, via Londonderrl..joy West Coast of Africa, Madeira, and Teneriffe .• • - b ' s, / 5, West Indies and Pacific (except Bahamas , Cu .June 0. and Mexico ............. ........ ............. • • • d ue% Bahamas, via New I ork. ................. ......... jail g Bermuda, ditto ..................... . ............. . Joao " Cuba and Mexico ........ . ....................... •_______// , ~ tf ,° ALDRIDGE.--On the 11th B in fr s t t h , s' at 17, Cad n g lii of lac e ' wife of Major Aldridge, of a . son. e HARTOPP.—On the 9th inst., at Knig gfere' htsbridg e / t r , 11 0 • Jo Captain Hartopp, Royal Horse Guar ds, of e" . .00 v LEGH.—On the 11th inst., at 37, Lown des-s' of Wm. J. Legh, Esq., M.P., of a daughter.' ro, WOOD.—On the 11th inst., at 10, Ry e-terra rye, Mrs. Henry Wood, of a daughter. '6l ~er. Marriages cf SIIV I V - ,' CARLISLE—TYRELL.—On the 10th inst., a t ''.' 50 , ' re ll 11, Paddington, John Carlisle, Esq., late Cartaill e is l:l lioferss,, Bristol -gardens, rodnelnys,damuagihdtae-rhoil twheestir•lir3:(osav,e4C WAGSTAFF—ARNOLD.—On tho 12th inst., at St.--0, Edo o Lothbury, Alfred, youngest son of JamesWoEsuote of. Brick-lane, Spitalfields, to Jane. second "' Robert Arnold, Esq., Spitalfields - na arket. ye ,c, Deaths. J C r°( ' 9 41 CHOCKER.—On the 9th inst., at Old Charlton, ; Esq., aged 78. GREEN. —On the 10th inst., at Islington, 'r e " aree-1 Ott 00 aged 83. , SO O LANGWORTHY.—On the 11th inst., at Ilrainai 0. fo r Vincent Trevannion Langworthy, Esq., ag e , aer o SCOTT.—On the 9th inst., Samuel Sing Scott, e' Ric h place, Brighton, aged 46. B' Pitycz.—On the 11th inst., at Gravesend, the s , fir. Ate Pryce, aged 85. WHITE.—On the 9th inst., at Upper llollowaY, tus White, aged 89. . 1 ~": ---- ALAN TO London : Printed and Published by WILIJA 0 , of of No. 112, Strand, Philter, at Tor. Snrt 01.c6001i Strand, in the Precinct of the Sa;oy, in th e Middlesex. —Tuesday, June 13, 1885. A Arid not( P o who/ T Of h % 1 ,At No t IYo eyo F a , Who, I, t ~~ar~i J ohn 11 011. red -ttAtz 11 0 6 It eB 4 s JOll4 to e k ki d( ti,:ti: I 4 - 17 ( nii titP, ko. - lamilmito00 10110 " Bel..