The Sun. — London, England, 1865-03-14 00:00:00

ThIPERIAL PAIIIIADLEITT HOUSE OF LORDS—LAST EVENING. The Lon]) CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Reading, Newport, and Yarmouth Railway Bill was read a second time. THE BRITISH MUSEUM. Earl STANHOPE said that he had given notice of his intention to bring forward a motion on the subject of the British Museum, and Mr. Walpole had given a similar motion in the other house. It appears, however, that the Government had devised a plan that would remedy the deficiencies in the present system of the management of the British Museum. Such being the case, it was considered advisable by the trustees of the institution that no discus sion should at present take place on this subject. His friend, Mr. Walpole, had withdrawn his motion, and he would follow his example. PUBLIC SCHOOLS BILL. On the motion of the Earl of CLARENDON this bill was read a third time. BRITISH KAFFRARLA. BILL. The Duke of ARGYLL, in moving the second reading of this bill, explained the circumstances which led to its being deemed advisable for the legislature to interfere. The Government of the Cape of Goo d Hope had impressed upon the British Government the necessity of dealing with the question of annexing Kaffraria to the Cape, and the object of the bill was to enable the Governor of the colony to take that course in the event of the legislature of the Cape of Good Hope not undertaking it themselves. However, before vesting that power in the Governor, it gave the le gislature of the Cape the authority to make the annexation themselves. Lord LYVEDEN approved of the bill in some particu lars, but he strongly objected giving the power proposed to the governor,land he believed the effect of annexing this m ilit a ry frontier would be to drive the Haffirs further into the country, and eventually lead to another Kaffir war. Earl TAUNTON also objected to the bill. The Duke of ARGYLL, in reply, said the time had arrived when legislation on this subject had become indis pensable, and it was impossible that matters could be allowed to remain in their present state. The bill was then read a second time. ELECTION PETITION ACTS (1848) AMENDMENT BILL. After a few words from the Marquis of CLANILICARDE, The bill was read a second time. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS—LAST EVENING. The SPPAR - PB took the chair at a quarter before four. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a third time and passed : —Glasgow City and Suburban Gas ; Colney Valley and Halstead Railway. The following bills were read a second time :—Bishop's Castle Railway (Deviations, &c.); Brecon and Merthyr Tydfil Junction Railway (various powers); Crystal Palace New Railways ; Lancashire and Yorkshire and Great Eastern Junction Railway ; London, Chatham, and Dove; and London and South Western Railway Companies ; and Manchester and Milford Railway. PETITIONS. CoL SYKES presented a petition from certain Indian officers, praying for a redress of their grievances. Mr. TrrE presented a petition from the Metropolitan Board of Works, praying for the removal of tolls on the metropolitan bridges. Mr. THEIrERNE presented a petition from one of the deposed Indian princes, praying for redress. Petitions were also presented by several members, pray ing for a reduction in the duty on fire insurances. HARBOURS OF REFUGE. Sir F. SMITH said that after Easter Monday he should move a resolution with respect to certain harbours of refuge recommended in the commission which sat in 1837 and 1859. POOR LAWS. Col. NORTH asked the Secretary to the Poor Law Board if, by article 115 of the General Consolidated Order of the Poor Law Board, dated July 24, 1847, any pauper suffering from small-pox or other infectious disorders could insist upon leaving the workhouse, in opposition to the opinion of the doctor, upon giving to the master, or, during his ab sence or inability to act, to the matron, a reasonable notice of his or her wish to do so. Viscount ENFIELD said neither master nor matron of any workhouse had power to compel any person to remain in the workhouse. THE BUDGET. In reply to Mr. J. WHITE, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he intended to bring forward his annual financial statement on the first day after Easter, that he thought would be Thursday, the 27th of April, Mr. WALPOLE said he should, under such circum stances, postpone bringing forward his measure relative to the British Museum - until after the Chancellor of ths Exche quer had made his statement. NAVAL CHAPLAINS, Mr. LEFROY asked the Secretary to the Admiralty if any steps had been taken during the recess to ascertain, through the Chaplain's quarterly returns, how far the chaplains have been able to comply with the Admiralty in structions directing clerical visits to be made to transports and small vessels of war not entitled to bear chaplains ; if the revised edition of the chaplain's instructions men tioned last session had been issued; and if there was any objection to the annual publication of .6 precis of the Chaplains' Quarterly Returns ? Mr. CHILDERS said no revised instructions had been issued, but ho might say the whole of the matter was under consideration. THE CASE OF MARY RYAN. Mr. SCULLY asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (with reference to certain official correspon dence as to the Irish nun, Miss Mary Ryan, called Sister Theresa), whether it was intended, on the part of the Government, to require that lady to be delivered up by the Belgian authorities. and whether he would lay before this house the case as to Miss Mary Ryan, submitted by his desire, in the month Of October last, to the Attorney and Solicitor-General for England, along with their opinion on it. Sir G. GREY said he believed there would be no objec tion on the part of the Belgian Government to deliver up the person of Mary Ryan, but in her present state of heal& it appeared unadvisable to press for such a demand. CAPTAIN BEALE. Mr. PEACOCKE asked the Under Seretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he would lay upon the table of the house all the papers relating to the extradition from the Canadian territory of Captain Beale, an officer in the ser vice of the Confederate States ? Mr. LAYARD said he was not aware that Captain Bealo had been surrendered by the Canadian Government. There wore no papers in the possession of the Goyern ment with respect to the matter. "OWL'S LIGHT." Mr. ROEBUCK drew the attention of the house to an alleged letter which appeared in the Times, headed " Owl's Light," from General Hutt, C. 8., in which it was stated that there was no truth in the report that he was to be appointed chief secretary of Chelsea Hospital, as such an appointment would be contrary to the Queen's warrant ; and, being an Indian officer, hewasineligible for the post ; and desiring a contra tradiction of that which involved a reflection on his brother's integrity ; and also to the actual appointment of General Hutt to the office. Mr. HUTT said that the letter in question was a fraud, and the signature a forgery, and had ema na t e d from some persons whom he would call scoundrels, who purs ue d dis honest purposes by disloyal means. He had the' ori g i na l letter to the Times in his possession, and he expected ;to be able to trace its author. General Hutt was not incapable by the Queen's warrant, or by the fact of his being an officer of the Indian army, from holding the place in question, as be possaasd all the necessary experience, and was an officer distinguished for his services, and had been named in the Gazette by Sir C. Napier and by the Duke of Wellington, recommending him for the honour of the order of the Bath for his services at Meanee and Hyderabad. THE DEFENCES OF CANADA. On the motion for going into committee of supply on the army estimates, Mr. S. FITZGERALD rose to call the attention of the house to the report of Colonel Jervois with reference to the defence of Canada, and also for the purpose of asking for certain information on the subject. The hon. gentleman, in his opening observations, said the matter was one of the greatest importance, and while ex pressing an opinion that there w a s no distinct intention on the o part of th e U n it e d St a t es to enter upon h os tilities with this e awe, in try„ yet he contended th a t c i rcums t an ces might readily Canada especially, which might bring about dif ferences of a very alarming description . After alluding to the pres en t position of affairs in the Canada, th e hon. en eman t 1 United States and g proceeded to refer to the steps that we re he asked, did the now Government proposed to be taken. What, l d intend to do ? and he be to supposed he sh ou ld that the intention was to carry out the recommendations that have , been made by Colonel Jervois after his inspection sio lle reminded th e h ouse th a t there had been a commission sent out to C ana d a i n 1862, with Colonel Gordon at its head ; and th e similar conclusionto that of Colonel Jervois the commission ers a y n et . vtehde at was very , c another down at such an enorjnoug figurethat another outlay w a s se t in commission Wil S sent out in 18G3, and 1864. Yet, after all the inquiry, what w proposed to be done by t h e Home G eve a rn s mn n°w ? Why, they only intended to under take the fortificatio n of of Quebec, and that they intended to set about by the ex penditure of £50,000. He should have thought that if the Government were convinced of the necessity of erecting these fortifications they would set about them in a more energetic manner than merely spending £50,000 for two or three years. He should have thought that the proper course to pursue would be to throw all their energies into the matter, and instead of doing the thing by driblets to effect all that was required in the speediest manner possible. He condemned the principle of the Government, and he could not see why they could object to do as much for Canada as they did for Sardinia during the Crimean war. T 1 ere were many things he desired information upon, and (ne of the questions he begged to put to the Government was wheth er they intended to put a naval force on L Lice OLtano. With regard to the reciprocity treaty that might have been ter minated in a moment of irritation, in consequence of the Confederate raids from Canada; but there again the course which the English Government should have taken was to have said, "Do not precipitately and entirely put an end to that treaty ; but assist us in modifying and amending it." In that case he believed the treaty would not have been terminated, and those numerous questions regarding fish eries and other subjects which had over and over again brought the two countries on the brink of war would not again be reopened. He acquitted the United States Go vernment and the educated portion of their people of any feeling of hostility towards this country. On the contrary, so far as the Government were concerned, within the last few months the feeling had greatly improved. He was happy to acknowled ge thi s ; an d it was owing to the wise, discreet, and prudent conduct that had always marked the American representative in this country, who had done more than any man to maintain the peace between the two countries, and had conferred equal obligations upon his own countrymen and on ours. At the same time it would be worse than folly to shut our eyes to what might possibly happen, and that under certain cir cumstances hostilities might occur, The Americans were a proud, high-spirited, and boastful race ; and when intoxi cated with success in their contest with the Southern Con federacy what wouldbe our position ? They would say that they had cause of complaint and just irritation against this country, for they had had their commerce swept from the seas. They had been told by their Government that the vital strength of the rebellion_ had been encouraged by the English. Government setting the example of acknowledging the belligerent rights of the South. Papers would be produced by their Government, telling them that in Canada they had an easy prey at their feet, and was it not likely that they would stretch out their hands and seize the prize ? That being so, the question we had to look to was set before us in the report of Col. Jervois on the defences of Canada, where the alternative was stated to be whether the British forces should be withdrawn to save them from defeat, or so increased as to constitute an effective defence for the province. As to the former alter native, he did not think there were five members in the house who were prepared to adopt a course so disastrous and disgraceful, Then the question was whether the ne cessary measures should be taken to enable the British forces in Canada to be of use for her defence. His belief was that if that country were independent to-morrow she would not run the slightest danger from the United States, owing to various impediments, financial, industrial, and political, and that the United States would be content to see her independent and growing up as a prosperous country side by side with themselves. But that was not now the position of Canada. She was united with England and wished to remain so. And we were bound to exert ourselves to the utmost of our power to prevent her being brought into danger in consequence of her connection with us. What then he wished to know were our preparations for her defence ? What steps were the Government taking to carry out the recommendations of Col. Jervois, by strengthening Quebec and Montreal, fortifying Kingstown, constructing earthworks, and pro viding an efficient force of gunboats on the lakes and the St. Lawrence ? Whilst the United States were actively engaged in making preparations for the worst, he feared that the Government of this country were taking the chance of the chapter of accidents, and that if we avoided a quarrel with the American people it would not be from the feeling on their part that we had put ourselves in a state of defence, but the lucky accident of their own forbearance, or there not arising at the particular moment any excuse for justi fying a war. Mr. W. E. FORSTER hoped the reply of the Govern ment would be full and frank, and that they would let the house and the country know whether there were really any urgent need to enter upon the defence of Canada against a possible invasion by America, or any reason to fear that peace between the contending sections of the United States meant war with this country, Canada and the ocean being the battle-fields. A fear, or rather suspi cion, of that sort he admitted to exist, but he believed it was utterly groundless, though the very expression of such a feeling tended to create the feeling we dreaded. The hon. member further inquired whether any despatch had been received changing the grounds on which the question of the Alabama stood as between the two Governments. Mr. CARDWEL L was able without reserve to give an assurance that the relations between this country and the United States were perfectly friendly, and with equal con fidence and pleasure that there were no papers in existence unknown to the house varying the principle on which the question of the Alabama stood. With regard to the convention limiting the number of vessels to be maintained on the lakes by each power in time of peace, the Foreign Secretary had communicated to the United States Minister his desire to substitute another agreement for the old one ; and as soon as the notice to terminate the Reciprocity Treaty had been given no time would be lost by Govern ment in endeavouring to open negotiations on a subject of such vital importance. As to the defences of Canada for the last three years the Imperial Government had been pressing upon her the necessity of making preparations in her own behalf ; and the reason they had not acted sooner was that, so long as Canada made no exertion and showed no readiness to come forward, it would have been wrong in her Majesty's Government to ask the house for Imperial money to defend her. The mo ment, however, that she manifested the proper spirit, that moment it became their duty to invite the house to enable them to give her assistance. Quebec and Montreal being cardinal points in any system of defence, the English Go vernment had engaged to undertake the works of the for mer and the province those of the latter, but the armour of both places would be provided for by the Imperial Exche quer. Earthworks would be raised in the course of the first year, and the sum of £50,000, as part of the sum of £200,000, was as much as could be properly expended dur ing the working period of the year. The first step towards the defence of the lakes was to have a port. fcr coaling and repairing, and that was a question for the colonial, not the Imperial Government. What was contemplated in any future contingency he declined to state ; but if the time ever came that Canada was at war, war with Canada would be war with England. The Imperial defence would be brought to her aid, and wherever that defence would be most effective in destroying the power of the enemy there -it would be exerted. The defence of Canada must consist of British forces as a nucleus, but supplemented by the military power of Canada herself ; and he had the satisfaction of stating that efforts were now being made in a cordial spirit; that large bodies of officers had been already trained to take command of the militia in an bmergency ; that the number of military schools had been increased, and that prepara tions were making for bringing a largo portion of the militia to a condition for active service. He thought, there fore, that a fair and just preparation was being made for the defence of the colony. Mr. DISRAELI—Sir, I do not think that her Majesty's Government, after placing the report of Colonel Jervois upon the table, could have expected that the subject of the defences of Canada would have been altogether unnoticed by the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) And, sir, I think it could notihave been brought forward to-night in a manner more distinguished by its moderation, clearn ess, and accuracy than it has been by my hon. friend. I am sorry that the hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Forster) should have considered that that statement and that expression of opi nion on his part favourably contrasted with another expres sion of opinion which he referred to as having been made in another place. I am myself totally at a loss—speaking of course from the memory of the moment—to recal to recol lection any expression of opinion in another place by the individual to whom he referred, which at all justified the criticisms of the hon. gentleman. On that occasion, if I re member aright, r eca lli ng t o the recollection of those whom addressed the great irritation that occurred at the time of the affair of the Trent, now four years ago, that indi vidual naturally argued, " Why have you allowed four years to pass away without making those preparations which you now confess are necessary ?" and, sir, it appears to be an argument very difficult' meet. (hear, statesman upon With regard to the opinion of that eminent the general subject of American affairs—living naine ha as I do with him in the most perfect confidence, an having expressed in this house sentiments in reference to it— that in those sentiments he fully and completely shared. only say am not myself conscious at this moment of ranking among g I those mortified and baffled prophets—(a laugh)—toawmr the hon. gentleman (Mr. Forster) referred, and I can only ora say that I have expressed no opinion upon American affairs in this house which has not been entirely shared and con curred in by Lord Derby, nor do I think that throughout those four years it is possible to adduce any expression that has ever fallen from the lips of that eminent man which could in any way justify the allusions and references of the hon. gentleman. Sir, I am not here to-night to impugn, and I have never impugned, the conduct of the Govern ment of the United States throughout this struggle. I am prepared to say now, with increased experience of their be haviour, that it appears to me—as I indeed stated two years ago—that under circumstances of almost unprece dented difficulty, that Government has conducted itself with great energy and great discretion. (Hear.) Nor, sir, am I at all of opinion that we are in any immediate danger, in case the war between the Northern and Southern States terminates, of being placed in collision with the Govern ment of the United States, from our connection with Canada. I do not pretend now to express any opinion upon what may be the termination of the present contest. That appears to me to be perfectly unnecessary to the discussion of tho subject which is under our consideration to-night. But even assuming the result to be such as the hon. gentle man the member for Bradford supposes, I do not myself conclude that the citi zens o f th e U n it e d St a t es —of the North —if entirely and compl e t e l y v i c t or i ous , w ill f ee l i nc lined im mediatelyl to enter into another struggle with a power not inferior in dote 'nation and resources to the Southern States of North America. (Hear, hear.) Sir, I have formed that opinion becauseit.a.Ppears to me that th e p e ople of the United States arere insensible a sagac i ous peop l e. I d on 't a think that they amble to the glory of great dominion and extended empire. I give them full credit for being andin fluencedseizeut nations beingth emao sagacioustt a h e a n t t e o n f j o e enjoy e a oa s pu t lso ate o nd f oa s g rn not e a ht t et b f o r ei one ekd most thatmospt fluenced by the passions which actuate man ki n d genera ll y , t art f h a e v i y elli oura w aa. or b il ly l d e ; to the prosecution of an enterprise requiring great resources and immense exertions. (Hear, hear.) Sir, there are other reasons, too, which induce me to adopt that opinion. I have not been influenced in forming a judgment on such grave matters by that sort of rowdy rhetoric which is expressed in public meetings and public journals, and from which, I fear, in this country is formed too rapidly our opinion of the character and possible conduct of the American people, I look upon this expression of opinion as something like those strong and fantastic drinks which we hear of, and which are such favourites on the other side of the Atlantic. I would as soon suppose that this kind of rowdy rhetoric to which I refer is a symbol of the real character of the Ame rican people as that those potations are symbols of the ali ment and nutrition of their bodies. Sir, there is also another reason which very much influences my opinion that these violent courses which are apprehended might occur, and the hon. member (Mr. Forster) has already alluded to the cause upon which it is founded. The democracy of America must not be confounded with the democracies of old Europe. It is not the scum of turbulent cities ; nor is it even a mere section of the excited middle classes, who speculate in shares, and consider that progress. (Laughter.) It is a territorial democracy, if I may use that epithet without offending honourable gentlemen opposite. (Renewed laughter.) Aristotle, who has taught us most of the wise things we know, never said a wiser thing than that the cultivators of the soil are the class least inclined to sedition and to Violent courses. Now, being a territorial democracy, their character has been formed and influenced by the sort of property with which they are connected and the nature of the pursuits they follow. There is a sense of the responsibility arising from the reality of their posi tion that very much influences their political conduct. At the present moment I believe they are much more inclined to welcome the return of labourers to their fields, and, being a very domestic people, again to see assembled round their hearths to which they have long been accustomed the household in whose lot they are so much interested, than to indulge in schemes, and plans, and dreams of invading the dependency of her Majesty. (Hear, hear.) But, sir, although these are my opinions generally upon this imme diate point, still I cannot conceal from myself the fact, that very great changes have taken place in America ; and I am inclined to believe that in this house, they are not rated at their sufficient importance. What has happened in America —whatever may be the consequence of the present struggle —does not appear to me to be less than a revolution. I would ask hon. gentlemen to recal to their recollection what was the state of North America when we met in this house only four years ago. Why, North America was then divided among what I may call three great powers. There were the United States of America, the colonies, settlements, and dependencies of our own sovereign, and there was a country which certainly did not possess great political power, but which, in extent of resources, fertility of soil and mineral treasures, is perhaps not equalled in the world—Mexico Now, North America was divided under these three heads, and in reference to every one of them you will find that there have been immense changes. In the United States of North America civil war has raged and is still raging, and even if it terminate (I myself give no opinion as to its termination) as the hon. member for Bradford sup poses, I cannot myself believe that you will see the same society and form of government established—certainly not in spirit, though it may be in mere form—as existed before the civil war was commenced. Because we must remember this, that even if the Federal Govern ment is triumphant it will now have to deal with a perplexing and discontented population. I will not dwell much upon the population that will then represent the Southern communities, but look to the slave population no longer slaves. You would have several millions of another race emancipated; legally in the full enjoyment of the rights of freemen, so far as the letter of the law is con cerned, placed upon an equality with the Saxon race, with whom they can possibly have no sympathy. But whatever may be the letter of the law, we know from experience that in practice there will be a difference, and a marked difference, between those recently emancipated and—l will not call it the superior race, because I may offend some gentlemen opposite—(laughter)—l will not say the inferior race—but I say the race which certainly is not identical. Well, nothing tends more to the discontent of a people than that they should be in possession of privileges and rights which really and practically they find are not recognised, and which they do not enjoy. These are elements of poli tical discontent, and, therefore, if the United States be triumphant they will have to deal with what they had not before, great masses of discontented population. Then you must have a strong Government, and what does a strong Government mean ? It means a central Government, and the United States of late in all their troubles and emergen cies have had recourse to the centralising principle. The central Government then will have an army at command for the purpose of maintaining that order and unity which it is their duty to uphold. Well, sir, I therefore think that there are elements which will produce a very great differ ence in the condition of the United States, even if they come triumphantly out of this struggle. Now, what is the condition of the colonies, settlements, and dependen cies of her Majesty ? Before this struggle, four years ago , there was very little common sympathy amongst them The tie to this country was one almost of formality ; and yet what has been the consequence of this great change in North America ? Why, you have already developed a powerful federation with the element of nationality strongly evinced in it. They have counted their popu lation ; they feel that they are numbered by millions ; they are conscious that they have amongst the posses sions of the Queen in North America a district of ter ritory which in fertility and extent is equal to the unap propriated-resources of the United States. These are ele ments of power and prognostics of new influences which will very much change the character of that country. Nor is there any reason to suppose that they are less influenced by the ambition natural to free communities than the United States themselves. Perhaps they may foresee that they may become the Russia, I will say, for example, of the new world. But what is the condition of Mexico ? Before this civil war commenced Mexico was a republic with a very weak government. She is no longer a republic, but an empire, and she has become an empire by the interposi tion of two of the most powerful and ancient States of Europe, France, and Germany. When we see all these immense changes, it is impossible to deny that in North America a great revolution is occurring, and when these struggles are over, and when peace may again appear, when tranquillity in all these departments may be again established, you will find communities governed by very different influences and aiming at very different objects to what they have hitherto recognised and avowed. (Hear, hear.) Sir, I have often heard in this house statesmen, even distinguished statesmen, mumbling over what they call the balance of power in Europe. It appeared to me always to be a great mistake when we look to the distribu tion of power to confine our consideration merely to Euro pean elements, that the time must come, and speedily come, when we shall find that other influences from other quarters of the globe will very much interfere with all those calculations which are now become obsolete. I think that this war in America has rapidly precipitated the re cognition of a new definition of the balance of power, not as a system of small and great States leaving all the strongest positions in the hands of the weakest, but, on the contrary, that the proper meaning of the balance of power is security for communities in general against the predominance of any particular power. I think when you have to consider the balance of power in future you will have to take into consideration States and influences which cannot be counted among European Powers. It is impossible, not withstanding what hon. gentlemen may Any with regard to the character of the United States, to conceal from our selves•that there is a feeling among those influential land owners to whom the hon. member for Bradford has referred with reference to Europe which is of a peculiar nature. I will not say that the United States, for example, look to old Europe with feelings of jealousy or vindictiveness, because epithets or words of that kind ought not unnecessarily to be used with respect to the relations between nations ; but it is certainly undeniable that the United States look to old Europe with a want of sympathy. They have no sympathy with countries which have been created and which are sustained by tradition. The only part of old Europe that they do sympathise with is that part which is new, and that you will always observe in their course of conduct. If then am at all justified in these views, it is quite clear that we must make up our minds to blow what our relations really shall be with her Majesty's dependencies on the other side of the Atlantic. We are upon the eve—l don't mean that it will be to-morrow, or next year, but taking those large views that become the House of Commons we may be soon upon the eve of events in which our relations with our American dependencies must be clearly apprehended and acted upon by this country. (Hear.) Is this country prepared to re nounce our American colonies and dependencies or to main tain them ? Sir, I am perfectly willing to admit that if they express a wish to sever that connection—if those views which have often been mentioned in this house, that they prefer to be absorbed by the United States, as wo heard years ago, be well founded—then wo might terminate that connection with dignity and without disaster. But if, on the other hand, those views which are now more generally accepted are just, if there be on the part of the Canadas and of the other North American colonies a sincere and deep desire to forma consi • derable state, to develope their resources with the patronage and aid of England until that mature hour has arrived when we may loose, perhaps, our dependency to gain permanent allies and friends, then I say it would be one of the greatest political blunders con ceivable for us in any way to renounce, relinquish, or avoid the responsibility of upholding and maintaining their inte rests at the present moment. I am sure, sir, that if from any consideration of expense we were to quit the position we now occupy in North - America, it would ultimately be, as regards the sources of our wealth, as fatal and disastrous a step as a nation could take—that our abject prosperity would not long be a consolation for us, and that wo should then indeed have to prepare perhaps for the invasion of our country and the subjugation of our people. I infer, from what has been stated, that hon. gentlemen below the gangway do not themselves uph old those views which I regret have been expressed in other places and in other quarters. But they take what I hope is the sound and truly English view of theisubject—not to enforce our con nection upon any dependency ; but if, at a moment like the present—a moment, as I maintain, of revolution in North America—we find the English colonies asserting the prin ciple of their nationality, and foreseeing, perhaps, a glo rious future, still depending, until the moment of their en tire emancipation arrives, upon the faithful and affectionate assistance of the mother country, it would be the most short-sighted as it would be the most spiritless, conduct in the eyes of the world to shrink from the duty which Providence had assigned to us to fulfil. (Cheers.) Well, sir, under these circumstances, what is the course we ought to adopt ? 1 cannot doubt that the course we ought to pursue is to place our North American provinces in a state of defence. (Hear.) When we are told that it is impossible to defend a frontier of 1,500 miles, I ask who has ever re quested you to defend such a frontier ? What we recom mend and require—and I am not speaking for this side of the house particularly, but for those who take the view that lam feebly expressing—is that her Majesty's troops in Canada should not be placed, for example, in a position in which the utmost bravery and skill would be of no avail but that they should defend the country according to the military conditions upon which all great countries are de fended. You do not defend hundreds of miles of frontier. Austria has an immense frontier, but Austria does not de fend it all. She takes care that when she is invaded there shall be points round which her troops can rally for her defence ; that is all that we wish to see. We wish to see Canada placed in such a condition that if she is de fended by her own countrymen, assisted by her Majesty's troops, that they should at least have fair play which troops have a right to count upon, and the ad vantage of those fortifications which, defended with sufficient skill, double the strength of armies, and lead to the success of campaigns. (Hear, hear.) That is what is required, and what I trust her Majesty's Government have resolved to give. I confess myself that these four years needed not to be lost. Ido not think that rom the first affairs in America have been considered of that importance to which they have now attained, and which, indeed, I myself felt that they must attain. My complaint against the Government is that they did not consider from the very first the affairs of America of the great importance which they have now attained, or which it was felt they must at tain. I formed that opinion—l do not wish to avail myself of any taunts—but I formed that opinion from expressions which fell from the Government during the last four years. Those opinions of the Government, from the nature of the struggle in America, and the probable consequences, and the general result which might be brought about, have been most inconsistent. One day we have been told by an eminent member of the Government that the South, might be considered to have completed her independence ; and very shortly after that another great authority—lost now to this house, and whose loss no one more regrets than I do, Sir George CornewallLewis—said he did not recognise that any single element of independence had been accom plished by the South. These two opinions perplexed the country ; one day they were ready to believe from the Go vernment that there was on their part the utmost sympathy with those who were struggling in the Southern States, while on the other hand the Minister of the Government who had to pass a judgment upon these matters, and whose position give peculiar weight to his opinions, expressed conclusions of a totally different character. I do not blame the Government, in a position of extreme difficulty, for forming opinions in a period of revolution ; but what I do regret is these discordant opinions on their part, and that all this time the colonies of this country have not been prepared for defence as they should have been. After the loss of four years we are now about to commence an effort upon a small scale and with very limited results. But these are after all little matters, provided that they are formed upon a sound principle. If the Parliament of England has determined to maintain the colonies of her Majesty, founded upon the un equivocal expression on their part that to that connection they cling with feelings and sentiments of a character which shows that the national sentiment is wholly unimpaired—if they prove that those reports and rumours which have been circulated of late years in regard to the feelings of the colonists are unfounded, that they are proud of their con nection with the mother country, and that they are resolved to maintain it until they rival us in our great career and have become our allies and our friends—then I shall not regret anything which has been done. It appears to me that there are two consequences which have resulted from public opinion being of late agitated upon these topics— the one, that we are conscious now of what our duty is to the colonies, and that we are prepared to fulfil that duty in a manner which will produce confidence and strengthen and maintain the British empire. (Hear, hear.) Mr. LOWE said he should confine himself to the simple question, what this country ought to do and was bound to do. Suppose we were actually at war with the United States, Col. Jervois stated that our troops would be obliged to flee to their ships, and therefore we should make fortifica tions. But if we had fortifications the troops would be driven into them. There was no conceivable disparity of numbers which the Americans might not bring to overwhelm them. No fortifications could be held against this force aided by modern artillery, so that if our troops were driven into the fortifications it would be impossible for them to escape. The question was, what should be done if Canada was the battle-ground in case of war. The most effectual course in such an event would be to concentrate a force upon some other point. His conclusion, therefore, was that it would be unwise to retain any force worth speaking of in Canada. Then, if we should not keep troops there in time of war, why in time of peace? We had better let Canada know the truth, and not buoy her up with false expectations, while we provoked America by a standing menace. The wisest course would be at once to withdraw our troops. After observations by Sir J. FERGUSSON and Mr. J. WHITE, Mr. C. FORTESCUE said the British North American Colonies being desirous to remain attached to England, and being able and willing to exert themselves in their own defence, her Majesty's Government deemed it their duty to make propositions to the house to enable them to perform their part in assisting in the defence. He combated the arguments and conclusions of Mr. Lowe. Sir F. SMITH thought the ho - use ought to have a full statement of what the whole cost of the fortifications and their armaments would be, and of the number of British tioops that would be abstracted from the general force and retained in Canada. Mr. WATKIN observed that the way to prevent a war with America was not to talk of abandoning Canada, but to declare that it was a part of the British empire, and that we were prepared to defend it. Sir M. FARQUHAR dwelt upon the importance of the North American Colonies to England, and the large amount of capital there in which British subjects were more or less interested. Lord ELCIIO said, having listened to the debate, the impression upon his mind was that the speech which con tained most practical sense and hit the right nail on the head was that of Mr. Lowe, that the course he suggested was a practical and sensible one. Mr. AYRTON considered the course taken by the Go vernment most extraordinary and unsatisfactory. lie complained of the entire want of information upon a variety of essential points, which ought to be brought clearly before the house, and without which it would be premature to form any judgment. The best way to protect Canada, he remarked, was to preserve proper relations with the United States, instead of, whifll causes of irritation had arisen. Lord R. CECIL, after remarking that this debate would operate against the interests of this country, observed that the ambiguity about th 3 defence of Canada was more dangerous to the honour of England than any other course that could bo adopted. Mr. BRIGHT said he hoped the debate would bo use ful ; and although he was obliged to admit the importance of the question before them, he thought it was likewise one of some delicacy. Its importance was clear, because it referred to the possibility of war between this country and the United States ; and its delicacy arose from this, that it was very difficult to discuss such a subject without saying things which tended rather in the direction of war than of peace. There was an extensive dependency of this coun try lying along the frontiers of the United States, and if there was a war party in the United States—a party hostile to this country—that circumstance afforded to it a strong temptation to enter into a war with England, because through Canada they could inflict a great humiliation upon England. At the same time, it was perfectly well known to all intelligent men —especially to the statesmen of the United States—it was well known to them as to:English men, that it was not in the power of the United Kingdom to defend Canada successfully against the power of the United States of America. (Hear, hear.) Now, the noble lord and his Government were responsible for compelling this discussion. If a vote was to be asked for it was clearly a duty to bring the subject under discussion. But he thought such a vote was particularly inopportune at that moment, and for many reasons ; especially, however, because they had heard from the Governor-General of Canada that the Northern provinces of America were about to call into 'existence a new nationality. Now, he should object to the taxes of this country being needlessly expended upon any nationality except our own. (Hear, hear.) What he should ask the house first of all was, would Canada attack the United States ? Clearly not. Well, then, would the United States attack Canada ? Clearly not. There was probably not a man in the United States whose advice or opinion would have the smallest weight in Anietlog,'who would re commend or desire that an attack shouldrbe made upon Ca nada with a view to its forcible annexation to the Union. But the people of Canada have been no wiser politicians than some members of that house, or than many of the richgr classes in this country, and when the refugees of the South—he did not mean those respectable and honourable men who'left their country in these troubles, and for whom he felt the greatest commiseration, but he referred to those ruffians of the South w h o i n large numbers had retreated to Canada, and had employed themselves there in a cou r se of policy likely to emb ro il E ng land with the United States —he maintained the people of Canada had treated these o of open hostility to a cou ntr y q uite persons with mu c h t oo grea t conc iliation when they gave utterance to pinions close to them. He would not go into the deta ils of the recent raid across the American frontier, and of other transactions with a similar tendency. Suffice it to say that all those things took place, and yet the Canadian Go vernment made scarcely a sign. A year ago application was made to the noble lord at the head of the Foreign-office to stimulate the Canadian Government into taking certain steps ; but, with that sort of negligence which had been so much seen, nothing was done until the American Govern ment and people became aroused, and showed that they would not put up with these things any longer. He had heard that Lord Monck had conducted his Government in a manner very serviceable to Canada, and with the greatest possible propriety, as the representative of her Majesty. Lord Monck had likewise been very favourable to the United States, as had also been his Cabinet and the most important newspaper in Canada ; still for a long time nothing was done. Now, however, when this trouble arose, everything was done—possibly the raiders would be sur rendered, and the Canadian Chancellor of the Exchequer had proposed a vote to restore to the persons at St. Albans the money that was taken from them. What was the state of things now ? Why, a state of the greatest possible calm. People had returned to their right mind, and there was not a man in Canada who had any kind of idea that the United States Government had the smallest notion of attacking them. It was with the greatest de light, too, that he noticed the changed tone in that house with respect to the American question. He did not believe that there was any one out of Bedlam, or at least any one who ought to be out of it—(laughter)—who was in favour of England going to war with the United States. He would say that we were a wiser and a better people in these respects. We ought to regard war with the United States, if needlessly entered into, as even a greater crime than war with almost any other country in the world. (Hear.) Our Government had preserved neutrality during this great struggle, although they had committed many blunders. Bad men of various classes, agents of the Rich mond conspiracy, and persons who were said to be influen tial from France, were reported to have brought their in fluence to bear upon the noble lord at the head of the Go vernment and his colleagues with a view to induce them to take some part in this quarrel. But our neutrality had not been broken. It might therefore fairly be inferred that this country was not in favour of war, and that if any dif ficulty arose from which Canada would suffer it would not proceed from this country. Would it, then, come from the United States ? The noble lord the member for Stamford (Lord R. Cecil) had a lurking idea that it would come from that quarter. (Hear, and laughter.) If they could have at the bar of the House Earl Russell as representing her Ma jesty's Government, and Mr. Adams as representing the Government of President' Lincoln, and if their opinions were asked, they would say that the relations between the two countries were perfectly amicable, and that they had been growing more and more amicable for many months past. He (Mr. Bright) would take the liberty of expressing an opinion that there had never been an Administration in the' United States since the time of the revolutionary war up to this hour more entirely favourable to peace with all foreign countries, and more especially with England, than the Government of which President Lincoln was the head. The most exact investigator would not be able to point to a single word which Mr. Lincoln had said, to a line he had written, or an act he had done, which betrayed anger against this country, or any of that passion or feeling which were thought by some persons in this country to occupy the breast of the President and his Cabinet. If Ca nada and England and the United States were not for war, whence was the war to come? He should like to ask whence came the anxiety on this subject which undoubtedly to some extent prevailed ? It might, indeed, even be as sumed that the Government were not altogether free from it, as they had shown in a ludicrous manner by proposing a vote of £50,000 for the defence of Quebec. (Laughter.) Then it was said that the newspapers had got into a slight panic. Well, they could do that any night between 6 o'clock and 12. (Laughter.) It was also said that the City was alarmed. He never knew the City to be right. (Laughter.) Men who were deep in great mone tary transactions, and perhaps steeped to the lips in peril ous speculations, were not able to take a broad and dispas sionate view of political questions of this nature. (Hear, hear.) Then as to the newspapers, he agreed with his hon. friend the member for Bradford (Mr. W. E. Forster) that the course of one newspaper, in particular, was indicated by a wish to cover its own confusion, and he should imagine that, after an uninterrupted publication of lies with regard to America for four years, it had done much to destroy its influence on foreign questions for ever. (Cheers.) But there was a higher authority than the newspapers—that Of the peers. He was glad the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Dis raeli) had endeavoured to excuse his chief, and he was also glad to acknowledge that not one syllable had fallen from the right hon. gentleman's lips which was likely to create difficulty between this country and the United States ; and the chief, as well as many of his followers, might learn something from his example. (Cheers.) Now, how was it that any man in this country had more anxiety at this mo ment with regard to the preservation of peace with the United States than he had four years ago ? Was there not a consciousness that we had not behaved generously to our neighbour ? (Cries of no, no.) Did we not feel the prick ing of conscience ? (Nd, no, and hear, hear.) And did not that conscience tend to make us cowards at this particular juncture ? (No, no.) He would not review past transactions with anger, but with a feeling of sorrow ; for he maintained that no generous and high-minded Englishman could look back upon the transactions of the last four years without a feeling of sorrow at the course which had been pursued on some particular occasions ; and as he was wishful to speak with a view to a better state of feeling both in this country andthe United States, ho would take the liberty to refer to two or three of those transactions which he thought, though not in the main greatly wrong, yet in some circumstances were so far unfortunate as to create the irritation which people at this moment regretted. The time and the manner in which her Majesty's Government acknowledged the belligerent rights of the South, could not fail to produce considerable irritation in the North. Then, again, the conduct of the Government in the affair of the Trent was unduly hasty and precipitate, and the menace against the United States was altogether needless and uncalled-for. With regard to the Alabama he did not complain of the hon. member for Birkenhead (Mr. Laird) for having contracted a friendship with Capt. Semmes, of whom it might be said, " He was the mildest mannered man that ever scuttled ship"— (laughter)—but he complained that a county magistrate, a deputy lieutenant--whatever that might be—(laughter)— a representative of a constituency, and, as such, having a seat in that honourable assembly, should have been con cerned in building and equipping this ship, and breaking the law of his country. (Cries of "No, no.") As to the press—(laughter)—as to the press, he thought it unneces sary to say much about that, because he believed those un fortunate writers were endeavouring to back out, and he could only hope their power for evil would in future be lessened by the stupendous exhibitions of ignorance and folly which they had made to the world. He would say that the chance of war was not only uncertain but impro bable. As to the claims of the United States upon this country, and the claims of this country upon the United States, they would probably not exceed half a million ster ling, and he did not see why the two Governments could not arrange such a matter, for it was not more difficult than the question with Brazil, which was being settled by negotiation, (Hear, hear.) He recollected at the begin ning of the war that a member, whose name he would not mention, alluded to it as the bursting of the - bubble repub lic, but that member was rebuked by Lord Russell, who then sat in that house for the City, in a manner worthy of his name and great reputation. He (Mr. Bright) believed that a great many bubbles would burst before it. Why should this country fear a great republic on the American continent ? Some people believed a great republic was aggressive ; but the character of a nation did not de pend upon its size, but upon the civilisation and morals of its people. This country feared the supremacy of the sea would pass away, and that " Rule, Britannia," would become an old song ; but if it meant anything inthe way of arrogant menace, the sooner it became obsolete the better. He did not think that any nation should vaunt itself upon the supremacy of the sea, and he believed the time was coming when a more just policy would guide the Christian nations of the world. But, said the hon. member, nature will not be baffled because we are jealous of the United States. The people of the United States are not less than 35- millions of souls. When the next Parliament shall be as old as the present, the population of the United States will be 40 millions, and you may calculate that the increase will be more than one million per year. You can not, by any snarling, reduce their 40 millions to your 30 millions, nor increase your 30 millions to their 40 millions, and the sooner you give up such a notion the better will it be for the interests of the country. On the other hand, I believe the American people will be willing to bury in oblivion transactions that have given them much pain, and probably they will make allowance that people in this country, even though high in rank and distinguished for culture, have a very inadequate knowledge of the trans actions which have taken place since the beginning of the war. It was on record, when the author of the " Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire " was beginning to write his work, that David Hume wrote to him not to employ the French but the English language, because of the establishment of America and the greater stability of the English language. How much that pro phesy has been fulfilled we have seen in part ; but I be lieve that as centuries pass it will be the boast and pride of England that from her loins have sprung 100 millions or 200 millions of people, who dwell and prosper in that con tinent which the old Genoese gave to Europe. (Cheers.) If the sentiments I have uttered to-night are the senti ments of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, I trust it may also influence the policy of the United States ; and, notwithstanding some irritation at the present, I have faith in ourselves and in them, and I believe that these two nations will march on, the parents and guardians of freedom and justice, wherever their langurge shall be spoken and their power shall extend. (Cheers.) Lord PALMERS T ON—Sir, however long this discussion has been, I for one cannot regret that it has taken place for I think two opinions have been expressed by the majority of tho members of this house which cannot fail to impress all who have heard them. The first is that which has been peculiarly dwelt upon by the hon. member who has just sat down, namely, the earnest desire that the most friendly relations should be maintained-between Great Britain and the United States. (Hear, hear.) And the other opinion is that the connection between tho provinces of North America, so long as they are desirous of it, with the mother country, shall be maintained. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member has made what in one respect man appear to be a paradox, but what I think, according to the principles of human nature, may be conciliatory to the United States ; for though the hon. member went through a long course of events showing that the United States had been illtreated by this country, yet I cannot agree with him in any one of his points. (Hear, hear.) But it is a principle of human nature that you cannot better please any man, or set of men, than by telling them that they have been exceedingly illused. (Laughter.) I will not follow the hon. gentleman in his discussion of the Trent affair, and the other cases which have been disposed of, nor will I discuss the posi tion of Canada and the United States, because the hon. member admits himself that the conduct of the Canadian Government has been acknowledged to have been that of a friendly neighbour. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman says there exists a jealousy between this country and the United States. But I utterly deny it. (Hear, hear.) There is not only no jealousy, but on the contrary every English man must feel proud at seeing arise upon the other side of the Atlantic a people of the highest civilisation, and ob taining not only a very great degree of power, but of wealth also. (Hear, hear.) I deny therefore that any feeling of jealousy exiets between this country andthe United States. Undoubtedly there are gentlemen who entertain different views to the hon. member upon the form of government in that country, and who feel' that that government is not the best that could bo established. (Hear, hear.) But that is quite a different thing to the feeling which he says exists. (Hear.) No doubt there has been expressed and felt both in the North and in the South a feeling of irri tation against this country, but that has beon caused by the natural course of two parties in a quarrel complaining that the third party, who was expected to take part in it, did not espouse either side. This has given rise to some sort of complaint and ill-feeling against this country. (Hear.) The North wished us to declare on their side, the South wanted us to declare on theirs, and as we maintained perfect neu- trality between the two it was not unnatural that on both sides some slight degree of irritation should arise. But I am equally persuaded with the hon. member who, has just sat down that in the great bulk of the people of the United States there are feelings deeper than that irritation— (" Hear, hear," from Mr. Bright)—feelings of goodwill to wards the country of their ancestors ; and I am satisfied that when that unfortunate contest shall cease, in whatever way the termination shall come on—l am persuaded that when that contest is over those natural feelings of good will and relationship which ought to prevail between kin dred nations will take the place of any feeling of temporary irritation to which the circumstances of war may have led. I am quite satisfied, also, that England will not give the United States any just cause of complaint ; that war will not proceed from our side ; and if war does not proceed from our side, and if, as the hon. gentleman thinks will be the case, it does not proceed from theirs, then I think we have a well founded justification for believing that in spite of any adverse appearances of the moment, in spite of the prognostications of many, the friendly relations between this country and the United States will not be in any real danger of being interrupted. But that is no reason why we should not use the means in our power to place our fellow citizens, if I may so call them, in Canada in a state of defence, in the event of their being attacked. (Hear, hear.) Sir, there is no better security for peace than strength to resist attack if it should come. That is no proviication ; it is an abuse of terms to say that when you employ men to prevent danger, if it should arise, you are provoking that danger and irritating the party against whom precautions may be taken. If no animosity exists those iprecautions can have no effect except that of inspiring confidence in the party in whose favour they are made ; if there be a disposition to attack it is sure to be les sened in proportion as the chance of success may be dimi nished. (Hear, hear.) Now, I cannot concur with my right hon. friend the member for Caine (Mr. Lowe) in thinking, whatever difficulties there may be, and difficulties undoubtedly there may be in successfully resisting an attack if it should be made by America on Canada, that the defence of Canada is an attempt which we could not suc ceed in accomplishing. I think, on the contrary, that Canada may bo defended. (Hear, hear.) I also feel that the honour of England and the good faith which is due to our loyal fellow-countrymen, and those northern provinces, require at all events that we should make the attempt to defend them. (Cheers.) And, therefore, Ido not concur in the argument of my right hon. friend that Canada can not be defended, and least of all can I concur in the con clusion, assuming that defence to be impossible, then we shall forthwith draw our troops from Canada. I neither admit this urgent nor assent to his conclusion. If there can be any doubt on the subject, I am anxious there should be no mistake. I am bound to say that it is not the intention of her Majesty's Government to follow the advice of my right hon. friend, and withdraw our troops from Canada. (Cheers.) On the contrary, I feel that the honour of England and the duty of the Government point to our doing everything that it may be possible to do ; and 1 am persuaded that it would be the will of the British nation that we should do our best to defend our fellow-countrymen in Canada if attacked. Sir, as I said before, I am persuaded that the tone of moderation which has prevailed in this debate will be useful both in Canada and in the United States. No doubt there are those who have endeavoured to persuade the people and the Government of the United States that there exists in this country a spirit of hostility towards them, and a looking out for grounds of quarrel. There can be no real and just grounds between us and them. (Hear, hear.) We certainly shall not seek such grounds—we shall not create them—and if the hon. member who has just sat down is a true and faithful exponent, as I have no doubt he is, of the sentiments of the people of the United States, then, I say, there can be no well-grounded apprehension that the peace which happily prevails between us and them should be interrupted ; and I can only confirm the state ment of my right hon. friend, that the relations between the two Governments at the present time are perfectly friendly and satisfactory. (Cheers.) We have no com plaint to make of the conduct of the Government of the United States. They have acted in a fair and honourable manner towards us in all matters which have arisen between us. No doubt we have claims upon them which we do, not bring forward at present, but which we have announced as admissible that they at some future time be discussed. But I trust that the two Governments will feel that it is for the interest—aye, and for the honour of both, to preserve friendship and peace between them, and I trust that matters of this sort are capable of friendly adjustment. All I can say is, that as long as the Govern ment shall continue to be chargeable with the conduct of affairs they will do everything which the honour and in terest of the country require them to do, to maintain in violate the relations of peace and friendship. (Loud cheers.) The subject then dropped. CONVENTUAL ESTABLISHMENTS—PERSONAL EXPLANATION. Mr. HENNESSY, who had given notice of his intention to put a question to the hon. member for North Warwick shire,tsaid that since the debate whichihad taken place upon his motion relating to the inspection of convents the hon. gentleman had published a letter written in answer to one which he had received from Bishop Ullathorne. The hon. gentleman was entitled, if he thought fit, to hold, and even to publish, the opinion that "the direct action of the Romish hierarchy through or upon the Roman Catholic members of the House had been obvious to every member taking an interest in such questions as were debated" on the occasion referred to. But his letter went on to say : • " When I stated these facts as connected with this con vent, the facts were denied by some Roman Catholic mem bers in the House, but the impression produced by the statement of them, taken together with the other facts at that time alleged, could have had little weight with the house, for the majority seemed to think, with the late Mr. Drummond, that the power of denial on the part of some Roman Catholic members of the house on these subjects was so wonderful tnat the house decided to consider a mea sure for testing these denials by the establishment of an inspection of convents." This sentence was somewhat involved, but there could not be the slightest doubt that it conveyed an imputation and charge against Roman Catholic members to which no gen tleman should submit. Heretofore, the hon. member for North Warwickshire had adopted the prudent policy of at taking women or treating ecclesiastics with very scant courtesy, and it did not need a very courageous heart to strike a blow at those whose sex or sacerdotal character rendered them incapable of self-defence. But deviating for the first time from his old course, the hon. gentleman by penning that sentence had placed himself for the first time face to face with those who had power andlikewise the de termination to require a strict account for the language thus made use of. He wished the hon. gentleman to tell the house distinctly what he meant by that sentence, and whe ther in his place in the house he was prepared to adopt it. The charge implied in the sentence was only insinuated, and on that account was all the more offensive. He wished to ask the hon. gentlemanwhether he wasprepared to prove that charge, and if he were not able to do so, then to call upon him to give to those whom by the insinuation he had insulted an ample and full apology. (Hear. hear.) Mr. NEWDEGATE was glad the house had afforded the hon. member for King's County an opportunity of ex plaining the offence which he fancied had been committed. On last Friday evening he received a note from that hon member stating that he intended to call attention to seri ous statements made in the letter written in reply to that from Dr. Ullathorne ; but, as it was impossible for him then to be present on that occasion, the matter stood over till the present occasion. Dr. Ullathorne thought fit to deny in the most explicit terms statements which he had made when bringing forward his motion, and, not choosing that allegations of falsehood should be circulated in the district which he had the honour to represent, he wrote the letter from which an extract had been read by the hon. member for the King's County. He extremely regretted that in the copy from which that passage was taken an error had crept in. The language, as it ought to read, was in the following terms : " When I stated these facts as connected with this convent in the debate in 1853 the facts were denied by some Roman Catholic members in the house, but the impression pro duced by the statement of them, taken together with the otherfacts at that time alleged, was such that these denials could have but little weight with the house. for the majority seemed to think, with the late Mr. Drummond, that the power of denial on the part of the Roman Catholic members of the house was on these subjects so wonderful that the house decided to consider a measure for testing these denials by the establishment of an inspection of eonvents. The house would perceive that reference was there made exclusively to the debate of 1853, and in vindication of the statement he would quote one or two passages. The motion before the House on that occasion was one by Mr. Glianabers • for leave to introduce a bill for the inspection of convents, and one of the cases connected with this subject which attracted most attention at the time, was that of Miss 9 - 141 : bot, a relative of Mr. Craven Berkeley, then a member a the house. She was a postulant of a convent at Bristol, and Mr. Berkeley having applied for permission to see hi ° stepdaughter was refused the necessary permission unless the interview took place in the presence of the superioress In the course of the debate which took plaee on that rao" tion of Mr. Chambers the following episode occurred. gr Craven Berkeley said— " Not only was it the fact that in the convents of Eng" land a lady having once taken the veil was prevented fro) seeing her friends unless in the presence of the sup lady abbess--[Sir G. Bowyer.—No, no.] The hon• nil learned gentleman might cry No, no ;' but no amount 0 contradiction could alter a fact of which he (Mr. C. 13 e r " keley) had personal cognizance. It had happened to 1 10 : self, in his own person, to be refused an interview, exec? under such circumstances as he was stating. He had been refused permission to see his nearest and dearest relative in a convent, unless in presence of the superioress. That WI not alone the case with ladies who had taken the veil , bu veil be also with postulants, or persons who took the white fore taking the black." super or The late Mr. Drummond said : " Hon. gentlemen opposite might dissent from th at opinion ; the power of denial in some hon. gentlemen could most marvellous ; and the only way in which he account for it was by supposing that Dr. Wiseman was cor rect when he stated in a recent number of the Dublin co r rect that Catholic laymen knew very much better than t ° read books they had no business to read. They were„,rl,l allowed to know anything about the matter—not allou" —not allowed." He cited these two passages to show the house that, notwith standing the flat denials given by the hon. member for DW I ' dalk and other members of the Roman Catholic persuasion to the facts alleged in support of the bill for the Insp e et ieu of Nunneries, and in reference to the escape of a nun hi the convent at Atherstone, the house felt that that course ° proceeding was not right, and thought proper to sanction the measure. These were historical facts, and ho had reason to believe that if the house had consented to have the facts he adduced tested by a committee it would have been proved, that the denial of them was as little worth on the Past A°: - Dr. Ullathorne as the denial given to the statements may,. during the debate of 1853. The hon. member said sonle thing about the want of courage on his part in attaeld e g ladies and ecclesiastics ; but did the hon. membe r eve ; know him shrink from stating his opinion in that house (Hear, hear.) What he thought it his duty to ass er t, he would defend whenever called upon to do so. Ili' Dr. Ullathorne had been alluded to, he begged to reran' the house that if he singled out his name he did so be cause Dr. Ullathorne in his own letter claimed to be the Superi °r —that is, the governor, of all the three convents he hal named. He held him responsible for any oppression earr i i, e : on there, for forcing back these unhappy ladies aft er attempt to escape, first from the convent at Ath erstoae, and next from the convent at Colwich. Yesterday h e re : ceived a letter from the Protestant clergyman at A tli stone, supporting his allegations, by a conversation llama with the Catholic priest, who said that one inmate Was troublesome (that was the nun who attempted to make her o escape) that they were obliged to have her removed. to the Protestant clergyman at Atherstone ready to s 1 1 1 3; port on the authority of the Catholic priest the s tateme , li re to which Dr. Ullathorne gave a flat denial. The se 1% , 0 some of the witnesses he would have pro d u ced he 1;•e ; the committee, had it been granted. Dr. Ullathorne „ his first letter talked about nuns confined in cha in ' s ; c e was perfectly true that that statement was in the °vie° e from which he read extracts ; but how came Dr. Ullathorn° to know this evidence, which was' never quoted to Oa house ? Dr. Ullathorne was perfectly aware of the fat4l,o and he could only attribute the doctor's flat denial g' ll' a e to the sworn evidence to this circumstance who knew the organisation of the Roman Catholic afar:, in respect to convents was aware that Dr. Ullathorne t's•iof under sworn obligation to maintain inviolate the seeroera those convents, and to resist all attempts of any unnaire, nun to leave, except permissu superiorum. There der' Ullathorne thought that by propagating a mien- fla t standing of these facts among the public, an d 11 bi 3 denials of sworn evidence, he was performing „ r , duty to a power superior to the laws of this coun','t•O which it was his (Mr. Newdegate's) object vi edi a (' is• not only as a member of that house, but as a „ILL' trate acting for the county which he represented. 11'4 Dr. Ullathorne might think it a duty to keep Ittl ea ' l rtblit cerated against their wills, yet, for his part, he tho u P" as a magistrate it was his business to seek in fer/113 jar within the sphere of his jurisdiction in all cases of false d be prisonment or the practice of undue severity ; to should be wanting in his duty if he did not endeave""tri, bring the authors of such offences before the p roper o , bunals of the country. Therefore, as respected Dr' five thorne and himself, there was a conflict in their resPe2Bl sense of duty. He regretted that any ecclesiastic 00, minister of religion should have thought fit to Venture flat denials of sworn evidence. (Hear, hear.) , r for The O'DONOGHUE thought that the hon. memberto King's County was entitled to much credit for affording.ti the hon. member for North Warwickshire an opportneiro, to express his regret for what had taken place, and t° r v a raise to be more careful in future. If the hon. member as not thought fit to avail himself of the opportunity, that Iv f his own fault. Having had considerable opportunities of watching the hon. member, he had watched his rnov e ,T,„ fi to with peculiar interest, and yet he had never been au', a , decide, notwithstanding the extreme gravity of the "s ,os member's demeanour, whether he rea lly believed the stor he told about the Jesuits or about the convents, oleo. making his ridiculous attacks on th a t system. If the hteo,ri member did, then his case was really alarming, but he i l l i4 often thought that the hon. member would, after some 0 . 1 , 0 gravest speeches, rush into some lonely place , and e nne r hearty laugh. What was the position of the hon• at the end of so many years during which he h ad bo° at ing the house that inquiry was his object, and th oit great attempt was to see with his own eyes those loeicslie, v if and bars behind which he had tried to persu ade Peo Pnieo not by assertion, at least by insinuation, that some ht a de ladies were confined ? The hon. member ask ed for ae'ruseci of inquiry which he knew he could not obtain, an d 4 1 10 that mode of inquiry which he cou ld obtain, an d W•• • „,: l ' a yare ought to have accepted if he were sincere, and if the had to of the inmates of convents was really the object he beer r Dis view. The House refused to grant the hon. ni eni ra e committee for sufficient reasons. One was that t he 4, o ar no ground for a committee ; and the other was that,:a cooly pointment of a committee and its proceedings IV ell i be tend to perpetuate religious discords, which it Was pof terest and wish of the house to terminate. Th e Vi ,a e s s ci Y l3l , Birmingham had not been treated with ordinary con' ' to fat , the hon. member. Dr. Ullathorne gave the hon. meriti Pre; permission to enter his convents and bring with 'll.Ol, to testant gentlemen of recognised honesty and integrl4o, the hon. member had availed himself of this Perini% con' would have found no locks, bolts, and bars in tli a ° l arj a ; vents except such as were used to keep out thieV e ',,' a 0 3 bonds, and spies ; but he would have dise ever iatt i° , the convents were the abodes of peace and charity' r eaeo n d mode of inquiry would not suit the hon. member P r iv , s tee which all could comprehend. The hon. Ine mber ;te' l good a tactician not to know that an inquiry so con' tan the presence of honourable men would not fail t°bPatici t he , end to all false charges. Then the hon. gentleman o f O P hardihood to take the Roman Catholic metap er° „ l3 loi tt r house to task for not assisting him to obtai n a e-,01 which could only prove a source of inconven ielle o e ;nao noyance to the inmates of convents, and -which , P f eart a- to addition, might gratify the morbid suspicions bee ern! persons whom the hon. gentleman was doing 11',„,e delude. Perhaps it was too much to expec t that I , _m of C on: , gentleman would desist from worrying the in raat 74 1 f ee vents, or to hope that he would allow them t o 'Olives 1/ 0 , sue those pious lives which they had selected ..o,ooturaci, voted to prayer and to the good of their fellow' a p o e , j But it was not too much to expect, after what byvbicb after the hon. member had refused the inclui r Y,„ l ber been offered him, and which every hon• ru e- 0 0 '4 feel was amply sufficient to satisfy every sincere and man able man, that the house and the country W e ea tlel e o , how to estimate the statements which the 1 1 ° 11 * g e to c ° might think fit in future to make with refe r og to vents. (Hear, hear.) -oce ed Dr Mr. NEWDEGATE rose again, and was P 1 „ e a bi n o explain that he had declined the inquiry P r° P °' c i Nfi tij i et Ullathorne because it would have been arn le , Or tl authority, when he was interrupted by cries of order," which induced him to resume his seat' agt°' The subject then dropped. o f, t 11 ' The other orders of the day were disposed _ _ im ps some further business the house adjourn ed at ils`' V e ' Births. of ar i lel;6 BERESFORD.—On the 11th inst., at 30, uPP .,e the wife of Denis W. Pack Beresford, o'll daughter. Hamilton_p:tarer.7oBt, BAUER.—On the 9th inst., at 4, Kensington wife of M. L. Bauer, Esq.. of a son. HILL.—On the 12th inst., at 7, the wife of Sir John Hill, Bart., of a daug",.oo,olo - the 11th inst., at 25, C l ` Lady Frances Tremayne, of a son. St. t i° Marriages. t o ely DAWKINS—SRACKLADY.—On the 11th ins 0111 itt la Groat Ilford, Saml. Dawkins o f Stapleftoirissly, Emily, eldest daughter of ' Mr. John 5 ,1 ' ,_ OO Heath Farm, Essex. a t St• 6te l egt al); WRITMORE—SMITIL—On the 11th late P a an Paddington, Major George S. Whitmore, willte• to Isabella, youngest daughter of the late Esq., of Roxeth, Harrow. Deaths. en, Comm.—On the 12th inst., at Palmer's-gre Cuthbert Coiling, Esq., aged 67. E zra e9t7 1 .3 ' EA j o LE ro s n .— er, O a n ge th d e 6 l l. lth inst., at Bedford, ELLIs.—On the 10th inst., at Old Claarlyi,.: ag ed ter fo General Sir Samuel Burdon Ellis, L ( j" L ' unt y SS r t' HELY.—At Rockfield, near Cappoq 00 , Pierce Hely, Esq., J.P. and D.L., age HILLMAN.—On the 11th inst., at 1, Ara 1 7 1 '- Hillman, Esq., aged. 81. llis, Esq" WALLIS.—On the 12th inst., Wm. - a 72 • 0 borough-road, St. John's-wood, ag ed -- cif ' , i g, - y of .14.D' v plo o f London : Printed and Published by VC ,„ u ptl of No. 112, Strand, Printer , at TAB $ 11 ::. the id o Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy , 11 ' Middlesex. —Tuesday, March lit 1805 ' - 11-stre et ' ittt,il" rfiE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 14, 1865.