The Sun. — London, England, 1865-05-10 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF LORDS—LAST EVENING. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. ROYAL COMMISSION. The Royal assent was given by commission to the fol lowing bills :—An Act for Amending the Law of Evidence and Practice in Criminal Trials ; East India Governer- Generals' Powers, &c. ; Batc and Insolvency (Ireland) Act Amendment Metropolitan Drainage Extension; Enclosure of Lands ; Herring Fisheries (Scotland) ; Land Drainage Supplemental ; Local Govern ment Supplemental ; Local Government Supplemental (No. 2) ; Rossendale Union Gas; Mistley, Thorpe, and Walton Railway; Brighton, Hove, and Preston; Constant Service Water; Leicester Lunatic Asylum and Improve ment ; Limerick Embankment and Reclamation ; Oswastry Local Board ; Holston Road ; Ramsbottom Gas ; and Bol ton Improvement. The Royal Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, Viscount Sydney, and Earl St. Germans. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a second time :—Glasgow and South-Western Railway (Kilmarnock Direct); Neath Water; Glasgow and South-Western Railway (City of Glasgow Union); Great Torrington Roads ; Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway and Lancashire Union Railways Companies ; Preston and Wyre Railway, Harbour, and Dock; North London Railway; and Luddenden Valley Railway. The following bills were read a third time and passed : Bath Gas, West Worthing Improvement, and Bristol Water. THE REVISED CODE. Earl GRANVILLE laid on the table certain papers relative to the Revised Code, but his lordship was quite inaudible in the reporters' gallery. RECORD OF TITLES IRELAND BILL. On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, this bill went through committee. SHEEP AND CATTLE BILL. This bill went through committee. MARRIAGES (LAMBOURNE) BILL. On the motion of the Bishop of OXFORD, this bill was read a second time. UNION OFFICERS (IRELAND) S UPERANNIJATION _ _ _ _ BILL. Earl ST. GERMANS, in moving the second reading of this bill, explained its provisions at some length. Earl of DONOUGHMORE moved as an amendment that the bill should be read a second time that day six months, which gave riso to some discussion, in which the Earl of Enniskillen and the Earl of Leitrim took part. The Earl of DERBY drew attention to the fact that the noble lord the mover of the bill had not received the support of Irish peers in that house, and if the motion went to a division he would vote for the amendment. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE supported the mo tion for the second reading of the bill. The house then divided, and there appeared— Contents 73 Non-content Majority —27 The bill was then read a second time. THE EDMUND'S CASE. Lord WYNFORD rose to present a petition from Mr. Edmunds, but it was ruled that it would be out of order for him to do so. Lord REDESDALE then moved that the following pas- sage from the report of the select committee on the resig nation by Mr. Edmunds of certain offices, and on the pension granted to him by that house, be read :—" The committee have examined the chairman of committees as to the know• ledge by the members of the select committee (which he attended) of any circumstances which might disentitle Mr. Edmunds to a pension." He stated that there was a general knowledge or impression on the part of most of the mem bers of the committee that, in consequence of certain pecu niary transactions in which Mr. Edmunds had been con cerned in the Patent Office, he had resigned his appoint ment in it. " But," he added, " the petition was presented to the house without observation, and no order was made directing the committee to inquire into it. We had only the facts stated in the petition which wore referred to us, and upon these facts we had to inquire what pension Mr. Edmunds should bo considered entitled to. It is to be re gretted that the committee did not feel it to be their duty, under the circumstances, to act upon their general know ledge or impression so far as to interpose some delay before the question was finally disposed of in form of a pension, which, had the circumstances been fully known, would probably not have been recommended." Tho passage in question having been read by Mr. ELINGSBY BETHELL, Lord REDESDALE then moved : "1. That the petition of Mr. Edmunds stating that, after having served the house seventeen years as reading clerk and clerk of the private committees, he desired to retire, and praying the house to grant him such allowance as to their lord ships may seem fit, having been presented on Tuesday, Feb. 14, by the Lord Chancellor, without any comment being made thereon by him or any other member of the Government present ont that occasion, and referred to the select committee on the office of clerk of the patents, with out any special order or instruction in relation thereto, that committee, when they met on Thursday, Feb. 1(3 (Mr. Edmunds's resignation having been already accepted by the house), had no question to determine on the petition so referred to them but the amount of retiring pension to which he was entitled, and would have exceeded their duty if, without special instruction from the house, they had pro ceeded to inquire into his conduct in any matter uncon nected with his duties in that house. 2. That the report having been presented on Friday, Feb. 17, was ordered to be laid on the table, and was not agreed to till Friday, Feb. 24, whereby sufficient delay was interposed before the question was fully disposed of in favour of the pension, for any lord acquainted with the circumstances, which ought to have been known to the house, to have brought the same under the consideration of the house." He desired to keep himself clear from entering into Mr. Edmunds's case, and to confine himself exclusively to the question of the con duct of the standing committee of their lordships' house. Part of the observations contained in the report of the late committee referred to himself, and part to the conduct of the standing committee generally. He had no reason to sup pose that any member of the committee desired to state any thing but what was perfectly fair to himself ; but he must say that the words attributed to him in the passage which had been used were not his words, but the words of a ques tion put to him by the Postmaster-General. He did not ac cept words of that question, nor did he say that he knew that Mr. Edmunds had been obliged to resign the patent office. He wished the committee had given his answers to other questions which did state fully and fairly the know ledge possessed by the committee on the subject. In answer to one question he had said that there was no dis cussion in the committee on the reason of Mr. Edmunds's resignation ; but that certain things were talked of. The impression on his mind at the time was, Mr. Edmunds had been called upon to pay up money -which he ought to have paid before, and that he had paid a larger sum than was demanded. As to the quastion whether the fact of his non-payment of moneys had anything to do with his re signation of the office of reading clerk, the committee might have thought that this had more or less to do with it ; but at the same time they fully believed that Mr. Edmunds had fully satisfied all claims made against him. Nor did they know that there was anything in the irregu larities of which Mr. Edmtmds had been guilty at the Patent Office which should have prevented his continuing to hold the position of reading clerk at the table of the House of Lords. Under these circumstances it could not be expected that he should raise any objection to the grant of a pension to a gentleman whom he had known for some years, and who had always discharged his duties well. The committee naturally took into consideration, in coming to a decision on the grant of a pension, the fact that they had received no communication from the Government,who knew most about Mr. Edmund's conduct. In the absence of such a communication, they were justified in concluding that, in the opinion of the Government, there was nothing in the conduct of that gentleman which could disqualify him from the receipt of a pension ; and they were further justified in recommending the grant of such a pension. The committee having no information from those who were capable of af fording it, were warranted in assuming that there existed none which would, if they possessed it, prevent their re commendingthe grant of a pension. It must be recollecte d that the committee had nothing whatever to do with the resignation of Mr. Edmunds. That had been previously accepted by the house,which had authorised his retirement, and the only question the committee had to decide upon was s pension. as to the am ount of th on Then it was said, in the report of the late committee, ' s that it was to be regretted that the standing Committee did not interpose somo delaybefore the question was finally disposed of by the grant of a pen sion to Mr. Edm un d s ; but he maintained that there was no undue haste on their Their report took some time in drawing up, and it l ay on the table of the house for a week before it was act e d upon. I was given of its consideration, bu t was t b it e t true that no notice wasr if usual to do so, although, perhaps, it would be better practice. At the same time it must o ne knew anything of the matter except tbe recollected the such Government.w that er e the no They and they alone could have communicated to the h o use such information as would have induced them to w ithhold a Pension from Mr. Edmunds. The d e l ay of a week which too k place between the layin g o f the report of the standing committee on the table and the grant of the pension, was perfectly sufficient to have afforded the Go vernment an opportunity for doing so, had they b een in clined to do so. They did not take that course,",and for the consequences of their not having done so—for the grant of the pension—they and not the standing committee were re sponsible. The noble lord concluded by repeating that at the time he suggested the grant of the pension to Mr. Ed munds in the standing committee, he was not aware that he had anything:which necessitated his retirement from office of reading clerk, although he might have been guilty of irregularities in another office which might render it ex pedient that as a matter of delicacy he should withdraw from his position at their table. At all events he must dis claim, on his own part; and on that of the standing com mittee, the slightest intention to stifle inquiry, or to grant a pension to a person whose conduct disentitled him to it. Earl GRANVILLE said that the composition of the recent committee had been impugned, but he never worked with a body of men less inclined to appeal to ,rieir preconceived notions, or to do anything but search :or the exact truth, and, when they had found it, to ex- press it simply and plainly. The recent committee had not the slightest desire to censure the conduct of the standing committee or to enter unnecessarily into their conduct. But it was utterly impossible that they could abstain from inquiring into the conduct of that committee when they looked at the terms of the reference under which they wore acting. At the very time that the matter was re ferred to the late committee the noble lord (Lord Bodes dale) had objected to the terms of the order of reference, because it would compel the committee to sit in judgment upon that over which he presided. And in the course of the discussion which took place on the appointment:of the late committee, the Earl of Derby had expressly stated that the standing committee of their Lordships' House was one of the parties who ought to be on their trial. But he must say that he could not understand what ground there was for finding fault with the passage in the committee's report which had been complained of. If that committee had censured the standing committee, something might have been said. But they had not done so ; thoy had confined themselves to expressing regret that the standing com mittee had not interposed some delay in the grant of a pension—a delay which Lord Redesdale had himself re gretted did not take place. With regard to the conduct of the Government, the committee had already expressed their regret at the error of judgment committed by the Lord Chancellor in not laying the reports of Messrs. Hindmarch and Greenwood before the standing committee; but he denied that either the Lord Chancellor or himself (Earl Granville) could have been expected personally to attend the committee. Ho thought that the standing committee had acted with some precipitancy in the grant to Mr. Edmunds of a pension larger in proportion to his salary than was usual in the case of civil servants. He believed that it would have been fax better that they should have interposed some delay before coming to a final decision. He objected to the resolution now submitted to the house, because it was in tended as a reply to the report of the late committee, and one not justified by the facts. He also objected to the last paragraph of the resolution, because it declared that the standing committee had nothing to do but to inquire _ _ _ into the amount of the pension. On the contrary, it was their duty to inquire both whether a pension should be granted, and to what amount. With regard to the second resolution, he could not assent to that. If the report of the standing committee, after laying on the table for a week, was assented to in silence, and without any one knowing anything about, or expressing any opinion upon it, that was theault of Lord Redesdale himself. Having laid the report of the standing committee on the table, the noble lord allowed it to remain there for a week, and then, with- out giving any notice of his intention, he moved its adop tion when hardly any one was present, and no one heard him. He thought it was desirable that the members of the standing committee should have the opportunity of ox- plaining the facts of the case, and of their own conduct, which was given by this resolution. But he hoped that the resolutions would not be pressed to a division, for if .. . they were the members of the late committee would be obliged to adhere to their report, and they would thus be placed in the unpleasant position of appearing to censure the standing committee. At present that had not been done, and he should regret that there should be the slightest appearance of imputing such a censure. The Earl of HARDWICKE thought that it was the fault of the Government, and not of the chairman of committees, that the report of the standing committee, recommending the grant of a pension to Mr. Edmunds, was not brought under the notice of the house before it was acted upon. He did not think that the recent committee were justified in sitting in judgment upon the conduct of the Parliament office committee. Lorn EVERSLEY thought that the recent committee were justified by the order of reference under which they acted in inquiring into the conduct of the standing com mittee. But ho did not know that there had hitherto been any instance of one committee censuring another, because the latter had not acted in a manner directly contrary to the rules and orders of the house. Now, under the order of reference to the Parliament office committee, all that they had to inquire into—all that' they could inquire into —was the amount of the pension to be given to Mr. Ed munds. They would have acted irregularly had they taken any other course than that which they did—a course which was strictly consistent with precedent. He must say that he thought the Parliament office committee were not fairly dealt with by those two of their members who were conversant with the facts as to Mr. Edmunds's conduct having absented themselves from the committee, and having thus withheld from them the information which they must have given had they been present ; for, if they had been present, it was utterly impossible that they should have allowed the commmittee to recommend the grant of a pension to Mr. Edmunds without at least in forming them of his conduct at the Patent Office. The Earl of WICKLOW severely censured the Lord Chancellor for not having communicated to the Parliament office committee the information of which he was in pos session in reference to Mr. Edmunds's conduct. Lord LYVEDEN objected to that part of the first reso lution which implied that when the question of the grant of a pension was referred to a committee, that committee had nothing to consider but the amount of pension. It was clearly the duty of such a committee to inquire into the conduct and character of the person applying for a pen sion, and to decide whether it was or was not expedient that any person at all should be granted. The Earl of DERBY expressed a hope that the resolu- tions would not be pressed to a division. If they wore, he certainly could not assent to the doctrine that the Parlia ment office committee would have exceeded their duty if they had inquired into Mr. Edmunds's conduct, and into the propriety of his receiving any pension at all. The pe- Mien of that gentleman having been referred to the Par liament office committee, it was surely competent to them to inquire into all the circumstances connected with Mr. Edmunds, and whether, under the circumstances, he was entitled to a pension. The late committee did not say that it was the positive duty of the Parliament office com mittee to make such inquiry ; all that was said was that it was competent to them to do so, and he could not understand how this could be disputed. He did not see how the late committee could be accused of censuring the Parliament office committee in the passage in their report to which attention had been called. Regret was no doubt expressed that the committee, with the general knowledge that they possessed on the subject, did not interpose some delay in the grant of a pension. But how was it that the committee granted a pension at all? Because they were kept in ignorance of circumstances that they should have known. And if the late committee regretted that the stand ing committee had not inquired into the conduct of Mr. Edmunds, they regretted still more that they had been fur nished with no information on the subject. The petition praying for the grant of that pension was presented to the house by the Lord Chancellor, with the knowledge of the Government, who were the onlypersons who possessed any knowledge on the subject. It was presented without sword of explanation, or a hintby the noble and learned lord that there was anything unusual; and for that conduct he must hold the noble and learned lord and the Government re sponsible. During the week which elapsed subsequently to the report of the committee, neither the noble and learned lord on the woolsack nor any other member of the Govern ment called the attention of the house to the fact that that report had been drawn up in ignorance of the real circum stances of the case. All the circumstances were known to the noble lord, and it was essential that they should be laid before the house, in order that it might be able to deter mine whether Mr. Edmunds were entitled to receivea pen sion or not. He (Lord Derby) thought there could be no stronger proof than the discussion which had just taken place of the embarrassment and difficulty in which the house was now placed in consequence of the circumstances being withheld from the committee. The withholding of those circumstances was the first and primary cause of all this embarrassment, and the house was bound to express its opinion that the committee ought to have been put into possession of all the circumstances before the pension was granted. It was the bounden duty of her Majesty's Govern ment, after the committee had made its report, to have put the house in possession of the facts, and to have stated that the committee made the recommendation on imperfect in formation. (Hear, hear.) But during the time which in tervened between the presentation of the report of the com mittee and its sanction by the house, neither the noble lord on the woolsack nor her Majesty's Government gave any information on the subject to the house, which consequently, being ignorant of the real facts, sanctioned as a matter of course the recommendation of the committee. He thought the terms in which they had characterised the committee were not such as ought to create any painful feeling. They had expressed their regret that, in ignorance of the circum stances, the committee ha recommended the granting of a pension to Mr. Edmunds, and they expressed still more strongly their condemnation of the course pursued by the noble lord on the woolsac k, in not putting the committee in possession of the facts. (Hear, hear.) He hoped that they would not be called upon on the present occasion to affirm a resolution, the terms o f which went so far that it would be impossible for him to endorse it, and he thought the course most consistent with t he honour and dignity of the house would be—if his noble friend and the noble lord opposite would consent to it—to move the previous ques tion upon this resolution. (Hear, hear.) Earl RUSSELL (who was almostinaudible in the gallery) was understood to say that there could be no doubt that the committee which had been appointed was of a judicial kind, and there could hardly be any doubt in that house that the committee had performed its duties most impartially with very great ability, and presented every clearreport. But there was a further question which the noble lord had brought for ward ward in this resolution, as to how the difficulty arose in re forard ondto the grant o f a pens i on t o M r. Ed mun d s . Th e n oble ca se of Mr. the w E o d o m ls u a n ek ds h t a o d t t h ru e l c y a s b ta in te e d t, that and he mentioned ecnatbioinneetd thede cided that s i would ctin g a t i b e h t int h hb e . tßa duty ulto o o f t fh t he questionhouse, e that Lord tto Chancellor, phreotdh produce the papersEdmunds re appeared3lr Edmunds ought to receive ap ens i on, without anyinterven tionr 3,1 r or objection on the part of the Government, wasue put to the Cabinet at all. One or more of the members of the Cabinet may have spoken of it, but the question was never formally put to the Cabinet, and he was decidedly of opinion that, if it had been put, the Cabinet would have been of opinion that before a pension was granted all the papers relating to Mr. Edmunds ought to be laid upon the table of the house. (Hear, hear.) Now came the question as to the conduct of the committee which recommended the pension, in regard to which the noble lord(Redesdale) had proposed his resolution. He (Lord Russell) thought very great inconvenience would result if the house adopted all the propositions contained in that resolution, for it would, if carried, tend to lessen the responsibility of a committee of this kind. He agreed, therefore, with the noble lord who had last spoken, that it would be better not to come to any resolution at all in regard to this matter. In conclusion, ho might be allowed to remark that business in theirlordships' house was not transacted in so orderly and methodical a manner as it was in the House of Commons (hear, hear, and laughter), and to express a hope that in some matters their lordships would assimilate their mode of conducting business to that followed in the latter assembly. The Marquis of BATH said the whole question really turned upon this, was the case that was referred to the committee of an ordinary or of a special kind ? If the inquiry were of an ordinary kind, then the duty of the pension committee would consist simply of inquiring into the length of Mr. Edmunds's services, and the amount of pension to which he was entitled. But it had been said that in this case there were special circum stances, but they were mere rumours, and rumours of the most vague and general kind. He himself had heard so long ago as last Christmas that Mr. Edmunds was an indolent, stupid man, who was perfectly honest, but that he had got the accounts of the Patent Office into disorder, and that advantage was being taken of the circumstance to force him out of his office. He thought, when the Lord Chancellor sent the petition to the committee, and stated no circumstances injurious to Mr. Edmunds, it was their duty to grant the pension. The noble earl the Presldent of the Council had said that he did not blame the committee for granting the pension, but for not delaying the inquiry. But if the committee de layed the inquiry, they would be justifying the rumours that had been in circulation against Mr. Edmunds. The noble lord the Chairman of Committees had been entirely misunderstood. At the beginning the noble lord took the precaution of saying it was a financial question, and that it would be necessary to have some member of the Cabinet present. He therefore contended the committee were justified in every step they took, and that if they were in any way to blame, the house was equally liable to blame. They prepared the reports according to the information they pos sessed, and the house had before it all the information which had been afforded the committee, and it was the house, and not the committee, that granted the pension. The fact was, that it was now sought to make tho com mittee the scapegoat, instead of certain members of the Government. The Earl of HARROWBY thought there was one matter upon which the noble lords who spoke from the Ministerial bench were not sufficiently explicit, and that was, why no member of the Cabinet, possessing a knowledge of the charges against Mr. Edmunds, had not, after the Lord Chancellor referred the petition to the committee, inter posed, and recommended them to delay the matter. He really could not understand why some member of the Go vernment had not taken that course. The Duke of SOMERSET said he knew nothing more than that there had been some defalcations, and that the law officers of the Crown stated there were no grounds for a criminal prosecution. Lord CHELMSFORD wished to correct a misapprehen sion on the part of the noble duke. The law officers of the Crown stated that a prosecution could be instituted, but they afterwards recited certain circumstances which ren dered it undesirable to resort to criminal proceedings. Lord REDESDALE replied. Ho agreed with the noble marquis that the committee would be casting censure upon Mr. Edmunds if they delayed the inquiry. He felt the force of what had been said by the noble earl, and he was now willing to let the matter pass away. He was satisfied with way in which the question had been settled by the house. (Hear, hear.) The previous question was then carried without a divi sion, and the resolutions were not put. Lord WYNFORD presented a petition from Mr.Edmunds, which he read to the house. The petitioner stated ho was willing to take any steps in his power towards making re paration ; that throughout the whole of the inquiry he had not been allowed the assistance of counsel ; and that ho threw himself upon the mercy of the house, praying their lordships to take his long services into their charitable consideration. He had the honour of presenting that peti tion from Mr. Edmunds. Ho hoped and believed that the justice of the house would be tempered with mercy, and that they would bear in mind that, whatever had been the errors of that gentleman, he had withheld no information which it was in his power to give, but ho had, as he stated in that petition, made admissions which, if he had legal advice, would hardly have been counselled. Earl GRANVILLE then moved "that they rescind the resolution of the house of February 24, agreeing to the re port of the committee on the office of clerk of the patents, and the office of gentleman usher of the black rod on Feb ruary 17, so far as relates to the recommendation of the said committee that a retiring provision of £BOO per annum shall be allowed to Leonard Edmund; Esq." Anxious as ho was to extend all possible leniency to Mr. Edmunds he was of opinion that the facts could not be controverted by any professional assistance that could have been obtained. There were three charges against Mr. Ed/Minds of having improperly under his control sums which he ought to have paid into her Majesty's Exchequer, and there could be no doubt, from the inquiries that had taken place, and still more from the admissions Mr. Edmunds himself had made, that he had been guilty of misappropriation of the public money. He wished to say as little as possible of the charge against that unfortunate gentleman, but it was duo to the honour of the house that they should now proceed to re scind, under the circumstances he had described, the pen sion of £BOO a year. Lord REDESDALE reminded the house that Mr. Ed munds had himself been a witness against himself, and ho should think it was reasonable that something should be heard in his behalf. Their lordships should remember that they were dealing with a man unheard. If he had been prosecuted, he would have had the advantage of the speeches of counsel in his favour; but if he were dealt with in this way, the house would be taking a step which could hardly be considered quite fair. The Earl of DONOUGHMORE expressed his commise ration on the unfortunate position of Mr. Edmunds, but he was of opinion that with the information they had before them the house had but one course to pursue, and that was to rescind the resolution. Lord TAUNTON said, after the investigation that had taken place, no one could have the slightest doubt that this unfortunate gentleman ought not to remain in the re ceipt of a pension from the House of Lords. The Marquis of BATH, wishing the house to stand well with the public, entreated their lordships to pause before they passed this resolution. Mr. Edmunds was not the only person who had been animadverted upon by this com mittee and by the publication of the evidence. They had not had the evidence more than forty-eight hours in their possession, and it would, he thought, be very hard to deny to Mr. Edmunds that justice which was given to the com monest criminal that was brought to the bar. It would be said by the country that this wretched man had been sent to poverty and ruin, and that ho had been made the victim while others were allowed to pass. Lord REDESDALE asked the opinion of some noble and learned lord as to the right of Mr. Edmunds to be heard according to the prayer of his petition. Lord CRANWORTII, having been in constant commu nication with Mr. Edmunds, felt it most painful to be mixed up in this matter ; but ho was bound to say that as Mr. Edmunds had been heard before the committee, he was not entitled to be heard again. The resolution was then agreed to without dissent, and the pension granted to Mr. Edmunds rescinded. The house adjourned at nine o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS—LAST EVENING. The SPEAR= took the chair at four o'clock. NEW MEMBER. Alderman J. C. LAWRENCE took, the oaths and his seal for Lambeth. ROYAL COMMISSION. The Usher of the Black Rod appeared at the table, and summoned the house to the House of Peers to hear the Royal assent given by commission to several bills. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a third time and passed:— Glasgow Bridges ; Glasgow Corporation Water ; White haven and Furness Junction Railway ; and Whitehaven, Cleator, and Egremont Railway. GRIEVANCES OF INDIAN OFFICERS. Lord PROBYN, the Controller of the Royal Household, brought up her Majesty's answer to the address with re spect to the grievances under which certain Indian officers were said to labour. Her Majesty's answer was to the effect that she would give directions that the case of these officers be inquired into, and if it was found that ample redress had not been granted, she would direct that such steps might be taken as the case required. TESTING CABLES. In reply to a question from Mr. LAmn, Mr. M. GIBSON said the duty of the Board of Trade under the Chain Cable Act was to give effect to its pro visions, and not to its omissions, and also that if any per son applied to take out a license under the act, to see and report that the machine for which the license was required was a proper one, and sufficient for the purpose intended. Thero was no power to give direc tions to inquire whether persons so applying are manufac turers or not. There had been three applications for licences, one of which was from Messrs. Lennox, Brown, and Co., and as their machine seemed perfect for the pur pose a license was granted. It was somewhat strange that the standard machine, known as Lloyd's machine, had been found defective and not to be relied on. However, he had no doubt that immediate alterations would be made in re spect to the requirements pointed out. VOLUNTEER PROMOTIONS. Col. SYKES asked the Under Secretary of State for War whether a letter dated Aberdeen, Feb. 17, 1865, and signed by five captains, four lieutenants, and two ensigns of the Ist Aberdeenshire Volunteer Rifle Corps against the appointment of Lieut. Wm. Jopp, a supernumerary lieute nant in the 10th Aberdeenshire or Inverary Rifle Corps of Volunteers, to a majority in the let Aberdeenshire Rifle THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MAY 10, 1865. Corps, had been received at the War-once; and, whether the Secretary of State for War has apl ?roved of the super cession of the captains of the regiment. The Marquis of HARTTNGTON s, sid the letter referred to by the hon. and gallant member had been received, but it had been returned to the senior officer in command, with an intimation that any commumication of that nature ought to be made through the Lord Lieutenant. The greatest irregularity would undoubtedly arise if the usual prac tice was to be departed from. With respect to the latter part of the question, ho had to state that the appointment had received the sanction of the Lord Lieutenant, and, consequently, it had been approved by the Secretary of State for War. THE ROAD 3VIRDER. Mr. WHALLEY called the attention of the house to the confession of Constance Kent, and to the part taken in the matter under the .seal of confession by the Rev. Mr. Wagner, and the Lady superioress of St. Mary's ; and ho asked whether it was the intention of the Go vernment to bring in a bill to prevent persons holding such opinions from becoming membe rs of the Church of Eng land ? Sir G. GREY said the Government had no intention of proposing such a bill to Parliament. (Hear, hear.) The matter had been investigated before a very full bench of magistrates, and it did not appear that any person abso lutely refused to answer any material question, as enough had been elicited to commit the prisoner for trial. (Hear.) ARMSTRONG AND WEL ITWORTH GUNS. Mr. H. BAILLIE asked th© Under Secretary of State for War whether the special c.Dmmittee upon Armstrong and Whitworth guns had made, any report in reference to the 12-pounders ; and, if so, wl lother he had any objection to lay it upon the table of the house ? The Marquis of HARTING' roN said the first part of the report with reference to the .12-pounder guns had been received, but the second part had not been received. As the matter was in an unfinished spate he could not consent to lay the portion of report recei vcd on the table of the house. BANKRUT T CY. Mr. PAULL asked the Attorney-General whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Government, at the earliest possible period, to submit to Parliament a measure for the amendment and consolidation of the bankruptcy laws ; and if so, whether such measure would provide for the aboli tion of the power of imprisonment of debtors, to compel the payment of money under any judgment or order of any court, including county courts, and other courts for the recovery of small debts. Tho ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was intended, at the earliest possible period, to submit a measure for the amendment and consolidation of the bankruptcy laws, but ho feared it could not be done during the present session. The committee had, as the hon. gentleman no doubt was aware, recommended the abolition of imprisonment for debt. The whole of the recommendations would be well considered by the Government, but he could not anticipate the conclusion to which the Government would come. An Hos. MEMBER asked whether the motion which stood on the paper for to-morrow would be proceeded with ? Mr PAULL in reply said ho should to-morrow move tho discharge of the order. THE ELECTION AT OXFORD. Sir R. CLIFTON asked whether the notification issued by a committee at Oxford promoting the re-election of a prominent member of her Majesty's Government, that the election wouldtake place in the second week in July next, had been made on the authority of any member of her Majesty's Government. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in the absence of his noble friend, would take the liberty of answering the question. He presumed ho (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was " the prominent member of her Ma jesty's Government"—(hear, hear, and laughter.)—a com pliment for which he begged to return his best acknow ledgments to the hon. baronet. (Laughter.) The notifi cation had not been issued with the concurrence of the Government of which he was a prominent member. (Laughter.) IRRIGATION WORKS IN INDIA. Mr. LIDDELL asked the Secretary of State for India, whether there was any objection to lay upon the table of of the house a copy of his own despatches of Bth August last, and of the minute of Lieut.-Colonel Strachey, late Secretary of Public Works, upon the policy of the Govern ment undertaking the construction of the necessary irriga tion works in India, in preference to entrusting their con struction to private companies. Sir C. WOOD said the letter had been received, but as it had not yet been fully considered and answered he could not, until that was done, lay a copy of the communication on the table. WRITS REGISTRATION BILL. Mr. LESLIE asked the hon. member for Greenock whether or not he intended to proceed with the Writs Registration, &c. (Scotland) Bill on Wednesday. Mr. DUNLOP said it was his intention to proceed with the bill on that day. MR. EDMUNDS'S RESIGNATION. Mr. BOUVERIE . moved that a messago bo sent to tho Lords for a copy of report of their Lordships' Committee on the resignation by Mr. Edmunds of certain offices. The motion was agreed to. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE—THE AJEEM JAH PETITION. The AT TORNEY-GENEUAL moved that the order of the day be read for resuming the adjourned debate on this matter. Having stated the reasons that led him to move the adjournment of the debate last night on the motion of Mr. Foster to commit one of the parties to prison, and the others to the custody of the Ser geant-at-arms for affixing fictitious signatures to some petitions that had been presented to that house in favour of the case of Ajeem Jah. After the fullest consi deration he had come to the conclusion that it would be better, as Mitchell said he bad evidence to meet that given against him, and when ho had not had an opportunity before the extreme step was taken, to refer the matter back to the committee, when the evi dence Mitchell said ho had could be produced. After a few observations from Mr. HENNESSY, Mr. DENMAN said ho thought it right that everything connected with this matter should come out. It might be there were other persons, much the superior of Mitchell, concerned in the matter, and, therefore, he thought it would be well to allow Mitchell the privilege of cross examination, as by that means tho real offender would more than likely be reached. The motion that the report of the committee be re-com- mitted was agreed to. On the motion of Mr. AYRTON a select committee was appointed to inquire into the complaints of the coal miners of Great Britain. The house adjourned at a quarter before eight. RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE. GREAT NORTHERN. A special general meeting of this company was held yesterday at the King's-cross station, to can sider certain bills now before Parliament Colonel Packe, M.P., in the chair. The CHAIRMAN said that the first bill he had to submit was to authorise the Great Northern Rail way Company to construct a railway from Hornsey to their Hertford, Luton, and D unstable line, near Hertford. It was of great importance to the com pany, as it would give them a loop line to take off traffic from the main line between London and Hitchin. Mr. LEECH, the solicitor, read the heads of the bill. The capital was £650,000 in shares and £216,000 by borrowing. The new line would start from the Wood-green station, passing through Southgate, Winchmore-hill, Enfield, and other places to the company's line near Hertford. A formal resolution approving the bill was carried unanimously. The next was a bill to authorise the Great North ern Railway Company to construct a railway from Sleaford to Bourn. It would be a single line, and enable the company to fill up the gap between those points. The capital was £190,000 in shares, with power to borrow £63,000. • The bill was approved. The CHAIRMAN said the next was a bill to autho riie the Edgware, Highgate, and London Railway Company to construct two short lines of railway to connect their railway with the Tottenham and Hampstead Junction Railway. The Solicitor read the heads of the bill, which authorised the company to raise £72,000 and to borrow £24,000. The Great Northern Company were authorised to subscribe £50,000 in shares to wards the undertaking, to work the traffic on the line, and to purchase or lease the undertaking. The bill was approved, as was also one for the further improvement of the drainage and navigation of the river Witham. The CHAIRMAN then moved a formal resolution approving a billfor making railways from the North London Railway to Alexandra-park, and to the Edgware, Highgate, and London Railway. The motion approving the bill was carried unani mously, and the meeting was adjourned to that day fortnight to consider any of the remaining 22 bills on the list that might then be ready. LONDON AND fLACKWALL• A special general meeting of this company was held yesterday at the London Tavern, to consider two bills now before Parliament—Mr. Daniell in the chair. The Solicitor read the heads of a bill to enable the London and Blackwall Railway Company to lease their undertaking to the Great Eastern Rail way Company. The CHAIRMAN, in moving a formal resolution, approving the bill, said there could be no doubt of the advantage to the shareholders of leasing the line at 4i per cent. for 999 years. A formal resolution approving the bill was car ried unanimously. The Solicitor read the heads of a bill authorising the London and Blackwall Railway Company to extend their line to Millwall. In reply to questions by Mr. Broomhall and Mr. Jeggins, it was stated that the Great Eastern Com pany would bear all the expenses of carrying out the new line, and the rental would be 41 per cent. net. The bill was unanimously approved, and a vote of thanks to the chairman and directors concluded the proceedings. TEIGN VALLEY. A special meeting was held on Saturday at Tor quay—Mr. E. Gulson presided. The meeting was called to consider two bills now before Parliament, one for authorising the Teign Valley Railway Com pany to raise further moneys, and the other to em power the South Devon Railway Company to make a branch railway to Exeter, &c. Resolutions ap proving the bills were passed. EXETER AND EXMOUTH. A special meeting was held in Exeter on Friday, Mr. R. Brent in the chair, to consider a bill now before Parliament, promoted by the London and South Western Company, for the amalgamation with that company of the Exeter and Exmouth Railway, and for increasing the capital. A resolution approving the bill was carried, and the proceedings terminated. LYNN AND SUTTON. A special meeting of this company was held yes terday at the office, Great Queen-street, Westmin ster, Mr. Tootal in the chair, to consider a bill em powering the company to make and maintain a dock at King's Lynn. The chairman having explained the object of the bill, and the great benefit to be de rived from its adoption, a resolution approving it was unanimously agreed to. BREAN DOWN HARBOUR. A special general meeting of this company was held on Monday at the offices, Victoria-street, Westminster ; Sir J. E. Wilmot in the chair. Mr. Radcliffe, the solicitor, read the heads of a bill for making a railway to connect the Brean Down Harbour with existing railways in the county of Somerset. It authorised the company to raise ad ditional capital of £51,000 by the issue of new shares and to borrow £17,000. Power was given the'Bristol and Exeter Company to provide money outof existing funds for the undertaking. The railway would be 3-.1- miles in length, and be constructed on the' mixed gauge. The CHAIRMAN explained that the object of laying down the mixed gauge on their line from Brean Down Harbour in the Bristol Channel was to con nect it with the broad - and narrow gauge lines of railway by means of its junction with the Bristol and Exeter Railway, and also by means of the nal , : row-gauge lines to be laid on the Bristol and Exeter Railway from its junction at Bleaclon to Glastonbury, a distance of about 8 miles, where it would form a junction with the Somerset and Dorset narrow gauge railway, and thence to the South-Western, also on the narrow-gauge. Brean Down Harbour was being constructed in connection with a line of defensive works across the Bristol Channel by means of the high and flat holmes in the Channel and a promontory on the Welsh coast, where fortifications would be erected. The Brean Down Harbour could be considerably enlarged by other works than those at present contemplated by the company. He con cluded by moving a formal resolution approving the bill, which was unanimously adopted, and the pro ceedings terminated. RAILWAY BILLS. In committees of . the Lords, the Mumbles and the Waterford and Limerick Bills were withdrawn, and the New Brunswick and Canada Bill was rejected. Before the referees, in Court B, in the case of the North British and Edinburgh and Glasgow (Bridge of Forth) Bill, the objections of the promoters to the locus standi of the Scottish Central and others were not admitted. In group 8, the preamble of the West Hartlepool, the Cleveland, and the North-Eastern Amalgamation Bill was proved. In group 10, the case of the Midland (New Lines, &c.) Bill was proceeded with. In group 11, the preamble of the Mold and Denbigh Junction (Extensions) Bill was proved. In group 12, the preamble of the Shrewsbury and Potteries Junction Bill was proved. The East London (Thames Tunnel) and the Isle of Wight Bills were proved. The Brading and Yarmouth Bill was rejected. In the Commons the following unopposed Bills were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means —viz., the Sutherland, the Talyllyn, the Moddwy, the Mid-Wales (Eastern Extension), the Mid-Wales (Western Extension); and Halesowen and Broms grove Branch, the Bishops Castle (Deviations), the Busby, the Watchet and Minehead, the London Chatham, and Dover, and the London and South Western Bills. In group 8, the Clitheroe and West Riding Junction Bill was rejected. In group 9, the Barnsley, Ackworth, and Pontefract Bill was with drawn. In group 10, the Midland (New Lines, &c.) and the Lancashire Union Bills were proceeded with. In group 11, the Hoylake Bill, being unop posed, was referred to the general committee. Evi dence was taken in the case of the Wrexham and Minera Bill. In group 12, the North Staffordshire Bill was proceeded with. In group 14, East Glo cestershire and Wiltshire Bill was passed, and the London, Bucks, and East Glottestershire Bill was thrown out. In group 17, the preamble of the Althorpe-on-Trent and Lincoln Bill was proved. In group 19, the case of the Aberystwith and Welsh Coast Bill was proceeded with. In group 21, in the case of the Inverness and Perth Junction and Inverness and Aberdeen [Junction Amalgamation Bill, the Committee considered clauses prior to passing the preamble. In group 23, evidence on behalf of the promoters of the Greenock (recom mitted) Bill was continued. ATTEMPTED WIFE MURDER AND SUlCME.—Yes terday morning, between seven and eight o'clock, a man, named Moratti, an Italian, carrying on business as a confectioner, No. 105, Hackney-road, attempted to murder his wife by cutting her throat, and afterwards made a desperate attempt to destroy his own life. The greatest excitement prevailed in the immediate locality in which the crime was perpetrated. Moratti, it appears, was married about four months since to an Englishwoman, both husband and wife being young. The marriage proved an unhappy one, producing constant quarrels, leading to the wife absenting herself and refusing to re turn to her home. At length, however, Moratti succeeded in his persuasion, and she again took up her abode with him. On Monday afternoon they had a serious quarrel, bringing a number of persons round the door. That quarrel appears to have continued, for yesterday morn ing a son of the bookseller, residing next door, saw Mrs. Moratti in the cistern. As he left the house he called to his father, and on the latter going down stairs to render assistance he met Mrs. Moratti, who had extricated herself from the cistern, in a state of nudity, and her body covered with blood, which was flowing from a wound in her throat. Medical assistance was immediately called in, after which an Inspector of the N division, accompanied by a constable, entered the house, with the view of finding Moratti ; and on proceeding upstairs to the front room they found the wretched man in a pool of blood on the floor, insensible, and with his throat frightfully cut. He was in his night dress. A razor, with which it was believed he had cut his throat, was by his side, and not far distant from him was a large knife, used in his business, with which it was be lieved he had inflicted the wound in his wife's throat. The wounds of husband and wife were dressed by the medical gentlemen in attendance, Mr. Haycock and Mr. Burchell, and they were conveyed in separate cabs to the London Hospital, whore they both lie in a precarious condition. Mrs. Moratti is reported to be enciente. The excitement caused by this frightful occurrence continued throughout the day, and the house has been taken possession of by the police and locked up. ADVERTISEMENT.i—HoIIoway's Ointment and Pills.— Ease for every Sore.—This ointment affords the shortest, safest, and easiest path to soundness in all skin diseases, scrofulous affections, scorbutic maladies, ulcerations, erup tions, and inflammations. There is nothing deleterious in the composition of Holloway's ointment ; but, on the con trary, its ingredients possess the most soothing, purifying, and strengthening qualities. The delicate skin of infants is not irritated by the application of this urguent, which is, therefore, as admirably suited for the nursery as for sub duing the tedious ulcerations attacking the aged. In all constitutional, chronic, and complex afflictions, Holloway's pills should be taken whilst his ointment is being used, in order that all deleterious matters may be expelled from the , system. SPIRIT OP THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. TIMES. In the House of Lords yesterday the grant of the pension of £BOO made to Mr. Edmunds on the 24th of February last was rescinded. Justice has so far been done, and nothing less would have satisfied the honour of the House of Lords and the conscience of the country. It was assuredly not a case for leniency. It may be a painful spectacle to see a man re d uce d i n th e evening of life from affluence and good esteem to such a position as Mr. Edmunds now occupies, but his offences have been so great that he will find but little commiseration. The House of Lords has done substantial, though tardy, justice. There were in yesterday's debate frequent references to the position of the house before the country, and the proper course that should be taken to maintain its credit. The misgivings these expressions indicate are not groundless. Undoubtedly the house has given much cause for scandal. The country has been shocked at finding in these times a repetition of those ques tionable doings which it is accustomed to attribute solely to a past age. Lord Redesdale's resolutions were the first matter to be considered. It is, perhaps, natural that the chairman of the committee which granted Mr. Edmunds his pension should feel ag grieved, both in himself and for his colleagues at the following observations, contained in the report of the Edmund Inquiry Committee :—" It is to be re gretted that the committee did not consider it to be their duty, under the circumstances, to act upon their general knowledge or impression so far as to interpose some delay before the question was finally disposed of in favour of a pension which, had the cir cumstances been fully known to them, would pro bably not have been recommended." This Lord Redesdale and one or two other members of the pension committee looked upon as a censure. Whether it were so or not, they took a strange way of meeting it. They sheltered themselves under the limitation of their powers. Lord Redesdale's first resolution was to the effect that that Mr. Edmunds's resignation having been accepted by the house, and the matter having been referred to the committee of pensions without any observation on the part of the Lord Chancellor or any member of the Government, the committee " had no question to determine on the petition so referred to them but the amount of. retiring pension to which he was entitled, and would have exceeded their duty if, without special instruc tions from the house, they had proceeded to inquire into his conduct in any matter unconnected with his duties in this house." Happily for the credit of the Lords,this extraordinary resolution was not adopted. It was plain that when the house deputed a commit tee of its own body to inquire into the " amount" of pension to which Mr. Edmunds was entitled, they gave it the right of inquiry whether he ought to receive any pension at all. In granting pensions it is not only the length of service—a thing that can be ascertained in a few minutes—but the meritorious performance of duties which is to be the subject of inquiry. It is a rule in the public service, as well as of common sense, that gross misconduct, such as debars an official from the possibility of retaining his post, also takes from him the right to receive a pension. Such conduct was beyond a doubt charged against Mr. Edmunds, and with good reason, as subsequent investigations have proved. The ques tion for the Committee was whether the " amount" to be given him should be £lOO, or £2OO, or £3OO, or £BOO, or nothing. The proper way to decide such a question would have been to inquire into the circumstances under which he had resigned his office and others ; in fact, into all the matters with which rumour was busy. We believe it was the bounden duty of the Committee to make this inquiry; it would not at any rate have been an excess of duty, but only a zealous execution of the task committed to them by the House. Strange to say, Lord Redesdale's view of the case was adopted by Lord Eversley, who declared that the question referred to the Com mittee did not justify them in inquiring into the fitness of Mr. Edmunds to receive any pension at all. This very technical view of the case was, however, combated with much effect by other Lords, and by none more than by Lord Derby himself, who showed conclusively that the House could not affirm such a proposition as that the Pension Committee were preluded from inquiring into Mr. Edmunds' cha racter and the circumstances of his resignation. The Pension Comlnittee may be content with the assurance by the members of the Edmunds Committee that they did not intend to convey any censure upon them by the paragraph we have quoted from their Report, but last night's debate tended much to con firm previous suspicions that the Committee which gave Mr. Edmunds his pension had a knowledge— unofficial, indeed, but still sufficiently accurate—of what had been going on. It is his belief in this knowledge which is the best palliation of the Lord Chancellor's conduct. He may almost say that there could be no deception where nobody was deceived. The Pension Committee, indeed, every section of the House itself, must share, each in its respective degree, the imputation of " error of judgment" and undue leniency. The committee knew that there was some thing wrong, the Government knew it, the leading men of the Opposition knew it, and, though Lord Hardwicke can successfully " vindicate his igno rance," we are not permitted to doubt that a large portion of their lordships were aware that their il lustrious body was about to pension a defaulter. No doubt they did not know how bad his case was, how continued and extensive had been his defalcations, and how little claim the offender had on their mercy; but they were disposed not to be hard on one whom they had been accustomed to see in the service of the house for 17 years, and were too careless to in quire into the enormity of his guilt. The best that can be said for the Lord Chancellor is that his error was little worse than that of the committee ; and for the committee, that their error was little worse than that of the house. A larger assemblage of peers than has congregated during the present ses sion assembled last evening, no doubt in expectation that the Lord Chancellor would address the house in deprecation of the censure passed upon him in the report of the Edmunds committee. But any such expectation was disappointed. That learned person preserved an impassive silence, although more than one speaker seemed to feel a perverse pleasure in alluding to the part which the Lord Chancellor had taken in this unfortunate business. Not even on the question whether Mr. Edmunds should be heard by counsel would the Lord Chancellor open his lips. The great scandal of the day has now reached its end, so far as the House of Lords is concerned. Mr Edmunds has had the quality of fouling whatever he has touched. The character of one or two per sons is grievously affected ; the highest official in the country has been led into a lamentable error ; a great assembly has acted with haste or carelessness, and has been compelled to revoke its own decision ; and the conduct of a public office has been shown to be for years so loose that tyranny and peculation went on unrestrained. The only comfort to be de rived from such exposures is that they are a warning to public men, and tend to place a check on func tionaries great and small. HERALD.—Under every constitution a weak Go vernment is a bad one. But most writers of autho rity and intelligence are agreed in thinking that of all weak Governments a weak Parliamentary Go vernment is the worst. When parties are evenly balented, when no Ministry can command an assured majority in the Legislature, then all the weaknesses, faults, and perils of a system of government by party come into full play, while its advantages are for the most part suspended or outweighed by its evils. The benefits of Parliamentary government depend on the possession by the Administration of a control over the action of the Legislature, which en sures, in the first place, that the Executive shall be able to carry out its policy in full reliance on the assistance of the representatives of the nation •, and in the second place, that the legislative action of Par liament shall be guided by persons whose position ren ders them peculiarly sensitive to the danger of hasty and ill-considered measures, and whose eminence fixes upon them a distinct personal responsibility for everything they do or permit to be done. When this is not the case the British Parliament sinks almost to the level of the American Congress, whose aimless debates and ill-considered action have long been the theme of censure and regret among all thoughtful observers in America as well as in Europe. But this is not all. The Federal Executive may be strong without the aid of Congress ; without the support of Parliament the British Executive is paralysed. When we have a Government which cannot control the de cisions of the House of Commons we have an almost all-powerful assembly left without responsible guid ance, and a Ministry responsible for everything left without substantial power. In such a state of things all the worst features of party government come to the surface. Corruption, personal and sectional, becomes the mainspring of public business. A dishonest Minister may abuse his patronage with scandalous disregard alike of duty and of decency, because the chief of the Ad ministration, tottering in his seat, dare not risk the trifling shock which a Cabinet receives from the ejection of a single member. A selfish or extreme section of the Ministerial party must be conciliated at the public expense, because, without its support, all government would become impos sible, and the daily business of the country could not go on. A factious and self-willed statesman may carry measures disapproved by all his col leagues and by three-fourths of his supporters, be cause the former dare not offend him, and the latter understand that a single vote might compel a change of Ministry and a dissolution of Parliament. Of all these evils we have had abundant experience since 1859 ; and patriotic men of all parties begin to feel that a strong Liberal Government would be more constitutional, and a strong Conservative Govern ment more liberal, than one which, whatever prin ciples it may profess, dare not resist the rt unpo um ties of the Radicals, and cannot overcome the re sistance of the Tories. In the meantime all the rules of constitutional morality are relaxed under the pressure of circumstances which leave scarce a possibility of carrying them out. Ministers submit to defeats which, according to constitutional theory, ought to entail their resignation ' • and openly avow that they have not, and dare not have, a policy of their own, but - wait to take one from the country. The speech of Sir G. Grey, as leader of the house in Lord Palmerston's absence, reveals with striking naivete the effect of six years of weak government in demoralising our statesmen and throwing the very foundations of political ethics into confusion. The task which devolved upon the Home Secretary was threefold. He was called upon to explain the conduct of the Government in regard to the Reform Bill of 1860. He had to vindicate their course in voting for, without giving official support to, Mr. Baines's bill for the reduction of the borough fran chise. And he was required to state the future policy of the Ministry upon the subject of Reform at large. On every single point his speech displayed an utter oblivion of the first principles of constitutional morals. In 1859 the Liberal party combined to eject Lord Derby's Government on the ground that the electoral qualification in boroughs ought to be reduced.. It became the duty of those who took the lead in that movement to carry such a reduction; and, if necessary, to stake their Ministerial existence on its success ; for it was only in order to carry such a measure that they were enabled to defeat and throw out the Ministry of Lord Derby. The Govern ment of Lord Palmerston brought in a Reform Bill ; but they were not in earnest about it ; they let it be understood that they would not resign if it were not carried ; and accordingly the majority of their own party, who had never really liked the measure, com bined to talk it out. The• Government finally with drew it, and Sir G. Grey vindicates the withdrawal on the plea of necessity. Now, this may be a suffi cient answer to Mr. Forster and his friends, but it is no justification of the Ministry. Can any one conceive a more heinous outrage on political morality than that to which theyhave virtually pleaded guilty? All honest men will agree that a change in the dee ' toral qualification, being virtually a transfer of power, in a greater or less degree, from one class to another, is one of the most serious measures that a statesman can propose. To tamper with the basis of the fabric of government is either necessary or criminal. If, in the opinion of Lord Palmerston's Cabinet, it was necessary, then they ought to have carried their bill or resigned their offices. If they believed it to be unnecessary, then what terms of censure can be too severe for their conduct ? Not believing in Reform —not desiring it—they affected the character of Reformers for the sake of office. • They played fast and loose wieh the constitution of their country. They used the plea of the extension of the franchise to turn out their adversaries, and when they had done so they consented for six years to let the fran chise remain unaltered. Have these men any sense of public duty ? Do they believe that the constitution exists in order that Whigs may govern, or do they understand that there are any questions too grave to be made simply the stalking-horse of aparty intrigue? But if we could imagine an excuse for the treat ment of their own Reform Bill, we can conceive of none which can extenuate the manner in which they have dealt with the fragmentary proposals of their adherents. It is confessed that Reform—that is, fundamental alteration of the arrangements hy which the principal branch of the Legislature is chosen—is the gravest subject with which the legis lation of the country can deal. It is a first principle of parliamentary government that the Queen's re sponsible advisers should be also the advisers of the Legislature ; should take the initiative in all impor tant measures of general polity ; and should take the lead in resisting proposals which they do not approve. It is utterly inconsistent with these ad mitted functions of the Government that they should allow private members to take out of their hands the reform of the electoral system, and to deal with it piecemeal. If, in the opinion of her Majesty's Ministers, it is desirable to reduce the borough qualification to £6, then her Majesty's Ministers are the persons who ought to make that proposal. I f in their opinion, the change is not desirable they ought to resist it. If they simply think the time in opportune for the discussion of such a measure, they ought to move the previous question. But to sup port Mr. Baines against that motion ; to affirm that his measure ought to be discussed, and ought to be approved, and yet that it is not one which they are bound to take into their own hands, is to abdicate their constitutional functions and dissolve those ties between the Administration and the Legislature which are the life and essence of representative go vernment. The terms iu which the future policy 01 the Ministry was announced on Monday night might well call forth the laughter and the jeers of the house. Ministers will not pledge themselves to a Reform Bill. They will not pledge themselves against one. The subject is one on which they do not feel it their duty to have a policy or an opinion. lf, as is generally supposed, the country shall prove itself averse or indifferent to change, Lord Palmerston's Administration will maintain the constitution as it stands. If the elections should, contrary to all ex pectation, go in favour of reform, then Lord Palmer ston's Administraton will become Reformers;. This is not a caricature, scarcely even an amplifl, cation of Sir G; Grey's language ; and, though no other Minister would have blundered out the truth in so naked a form, we cannot doubt that the utterance of their bungling orator exactly re presents the future, as it correctly describes the past, policy of his chief and colleagues. It is for the country to say whether it will furnish the Ministri with principles and a policy ; or whether it will be stow its confidence on men with other ideas of the duty of statesmen—men who desire office only that they may give effect to convictions they have con sistently held, .and protection to institutions they honestly love and cherish ; and who, when the stet e of public opinion shall no longer permit them to u se power for these purposes, will honourably and un grudgingly resign it. COUNTRY MARKETS -----..4.....,., LIVERPOOL—TUESDAY. We had only a poor demand for wheat at to-day's r ket, at a reduction of ld to 2d p er cen t a l on the quotatio na of this day week. Flour dull of sale, and rather cheap er Indian corn offered f r eely a t a decline of 6d to 9d per r• ' cl Oats and oatmeal scarcely maintained the late advanc e ' Beans, peas, and barley scarce, but no lower. SHEFFIELD—TUESDAY. Thew was a fair attendance, and the supply of grain bulk and sample was good. There was an active &ratio for most qualities of wheat, and prices were about sal." as last week. Red wheat, per load of 3 imp. bushels....l6s Od to / 78 °1 ~v White do do .... 1 6s 6d 188 ,d New red do do .... 16 s Od 178 '[.,l New white do do '6s 6d 188 od Beans do do ....15s ( d 170 ti Peas, per qr .. 40s Od 428 ° GrindingB Od barley, per qr 30s Od 32 Maitinebarley, c o 32s ed 355 Od Oats, do 238 Od 218 °- a F10ur....1s 6d to is id per 111 h. LEEDS—TUESDAY. There is very little fine red wheat showing to-dan °J . sales are easily effected at the full a d v ance of Fri Barley as before. Oats and beans maintain their The average prices for the week ending May 8 wer e Wheat, 40s lid per qr. ; barley, 32s 10Id ; and 091 23s'llfd. MELTON MOWBRAY.—TUESDAY. White wheat, 40s to 44s red, 37s to 40s per 36 stone : Barley for malting, 32s to -s per qr; feed, 25s to 30 17 30 stone. Oats. 18s to 255. Beans, old, 41s to 445; no 36s to 43s per qr. ItONMOUT II S HIRE--MoNDAY. 9' at There has not been a large supply of English w bc D as the markets, but, prices were firmer, and an advance :te a, been obtained for fine qualities. Foreign' wheat 1iT„,,,10 the tendency being in favour of sellers. Oats and Pu— without alteration. Grinding barley an average s ale. , s u l ,, The following arb the average quotations : 10 10d to 5s Gd per bushel ; barley, 3s Id to 3s 7d ; 03-7 lld to 2s 6d. Births. th e HAIGII.—On the 7th inst., at Sandown-park, Livcrpo o wife of Reginald Haigh, Esq., of a son. r a rtail l HOGGE.—On the 7th inst., at Dover, the wife of C. W. Hogge, of a son. V. HOLLICK.—On the Bth inst., at 9, Clapton-square , Hollick, of a daughter. e of NAITEN.—On the 9th inst., at 4, Highbury-hill, the W Charles Nauen, Esq., of a son. Marriages. Piet y FARRELL—PnEss.—On the 6th inst., at St. James'el; w of dilly, Mr. P. H. Farrell, of Kilburn, to Emma, wirta's the late Frederick Thomas Press, Esq., of Saint ° wood. 1 3, YOUNG—DINGLE.—On the 4th inst., at All Souls' Ca ti or. William Herbert Young, to Elizabeth Ann, only ter of John Dingle, Esq., both of St. Marylebonel don. BERKELEY.—On the. Bth Deaths inst., at 1, Victoria-squa re ' kel° 9' lico, Elizabeth, daughter of the Hon. F. H. F• Der— BETHE M.P. f al ° LL.—On the 7th inst., Hugh Christopher, s° ll ° . Hon. Richard Bethell. 31 VrOr tl4 Bucia,Ey.—On the 6th inst., at Holly.l • • Ville, Sad uue. Charles J. Buckley, Esq J P noieg, DAYIES.—On the 2d inst., at Lucca, Italy, Sir Da irid - IC.C.H., M.D., aged 73. °s sell" HoDsoN.- -On the 7th inst., at Guildford-street, - square, Henry B. Hodson, Esq., aged 72. d, 0i HOWARD.—On the 7th inst , Th omas Burton Ile /iBl. Chalk Pitt House, Sutton, aged 72. --.."---‹ London : Printed and Published by WILLIAg AN/: 1 12 1 of No. 11?, Strand, Punter, at THE SUN OftiCe• a ti 0' Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the 011 Middlesex.—Wednesday, May 10, 1865.