The Sun. — London, England, 1865-05-26 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS-LAST EVENING• The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. THE BELFAST WATER BILL. On the order of the day for the third reading of this bCII, Mr. O'REILLY moved that the bill be read a third time that day fortnight. Sir H. CAIRNS objected to the postponement. After some discussion the bill was read a third time and passed. COLONEL DAWKINS' CASE. Mr. D. GRIFFITHS gave notice that to-morrow even ing, on the order of the day for going into committee of supply, he would move for all letters that have passed be tween the C o mmander-in -Chef and the major-general comma nding the regiment in which Colonel Dawkins served ; also the papers referring to the inquiries held in reference to the matter. ALLEGED CLAIMS BY AMERICA. Sir J. WALSH gave notice that he would to-morrow evening ask a question in reference to the claims made by the United States Government on England as compensa tion for the depredations made by the Alabama and other Confederate vessels on United States merchantmen. Ho desired to learn whether any new claims had been made, and what had passed in reference to the claims it was known had already been made. THE LEEDS BANKRUPTCY COURT. Mr. FERRAND gave notice that to-morrow he would move that the select committee to sit upon this matter be composed of five members, with two other hon. gentlemen to conduct the examination, but not to vote. ___— THE LATE SURVEYOR GENERAL OF CUSTOMS. Mr. MONSELL asked the Secretary to the Treasury in what way the Government proposed to give effect to the recommendation of the Commissioners of Customs that the services of their late senior Surveyor-General, Mr. St. John, should be recognised in some special manner. Mr. F. PEEL said the Pensions' Act gave the Treasury no authority whatever to grant pensions to the widows and families of public officers, however extraordinary their ser vices might have been. TIPPERARY POLICE. In answer to Mr. LANIGAN, Sir R. PEEL said that the extra police in the county of Tipperary, paid out of the local rates, were sent there at the request of the magistrates. If they had no duties to perform, and the magistrates petitioned for their removal, they would be removed at once. THE BELLEROPHON. In reply to Mr. TORRENS, Lord C. PAGET said the design for the Bellerophon was proved on the 23d July, 1863. The building was com menced on the following 28th December. She went out of dock in 1865 in perfect readiness for receiving her en gines, boilers, and masts. She will probably be completed for sea by the end of November next. MALT DUTY BILL. In answer to Sir F. KELLY, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER proposed to postpone the motion for the second reading of this bill for a week. UNION CHARGEABILITY BILL. On the motion for the third reading of this bill, Mr. HENLEY reverted once more to the report of Dr. Hunter and the charge it brought against the landed pro prietors of having made a wholesale demolition of the cot tages of the poor. Alluding especially to the statements which affected his own county, Oxford, the right hon. gentleman said that since last the subject was discussed he had carefully analysed the circumstances of the eighty parishes where it was represented by the commissioner the number of cottages had decreased, and explained that the diminution in the population was not confined to the rural districts, but included the principal towns in the county, and that in the vast majority of the parishes alluded to there were numerous houses lying unoccupied. The fact was, that the population of the county, as shown by the census, had decreased, and this was confirmed by the rate of wages which during the last 15 years had increased from 10 to 12 per cent. From all the circumstances of the case, therefore, he arrived at the conclusion that a more un founded charge than that which had been brought against the landlords of Oxfordshire could not have been invented. His surprise was, indeed, that there had not been a much more extensive diminution of cottage accommodation. Turning then to the bill, he protested against the manner in which it had been conducted through the house, and contended that, by converting the country unions into so many parishes, the measure would extend the evils which now pertained to large parishes, and that by not adopting the principle of irremovability, the state of the poor would be worse rather than better. Mr. BENTINCK condemned the bill as a political move founded upon hypocritical pretences. Mr. KNIGHT observed that there were two arguments used in favour of the bill, one in the lobby, the other in the house. The cry against close parishes was raised in the house, but in the lobby the cry of the borough members was—Vote for the bill, that our constituents may gain so much at the expense of the country parishes. After a few words from Mr. MITFORD the bill was read a third time and passed, amid cheers from the Minis terial benches. The Partnership Amendment Bill and the General Post office (Additional Site) Bill were also read a third time and passed. BANK NOTES ISSUE BILL. A proposal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to recom mit the Bank Notes Issue Bill led to some discussion in which Mr. Cobbold, Mr. Heygate, Mr. Greaves, Mr. Clay, Mr. Hubbard, Mr. Hadfield, and other members took part. Colonel EDWARDS remarked that, if the bill passed in its then shape, it would inflict serious consequences upon the trade of the country, and that a more dangerous measure, so far as the provincial banking interests were concerned, had never been concocted on the Treasury bench. In brief, it was a wholesale confiscation of bank ing property, and ho recommended that it should be with drawn. Ultimately, however, the bill was recommitted, when Mr. COBBOLD moved to omit a portion of the Bth clause, and insert words to the effect that the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury might, on and at any time after the Ist January, 1879, by notice in the Lon don Gazette, declare that, unless Parliament otherwise de termined, at the expiration of one year from the date of the notice all issues of banks in respect of which a per centage might be payable under the act should cease, and that such issues should cease accordingly. Mr. AYRT ON opposed the amendment, and character ised as monstrous the claim set up by the country bankers to make indefinite the term during which their power of issue should continue ; and called upon the committee not to assent to the entangling language of the clause proposed by Mr. Cobbold. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER objected to the new clause as altogether out of character, because it was proposed for the express purpose of introducing utter vagueness and uncertainty into the provisions of the bill, and would practically have the effect of rather implying on the part of Parliament a belief or an intention that the private issues under the act might be continued as a monopoly. The words were innocent enough in them selves, but the spirit and aim with which they were pro posed rendered them inadmissable. After some discussion the amendment was withdrawn, and on the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER the following words were inserted in the preamble, further to define the objects of the bill :—"And to fix by law a time whereat the present statutory right of issue on the part of bankers obtaining such exemption shall determine, in order that either their issues may become subject to the enactments of the Bank Act of 1844 hereinafter mentioned in respect to lapsed issues of bank-notes, or that Parlia ment may make further provision concerning them as it shall think fit upon grounds of public policy." The bill was then passed through committee. FIRE BRIGADE (METROPOLIS) BILL. Mr. T. G. BARING moved the second reading of the I Fire Brigade (Metropolis) Bill, and explained that at pre sent the fire brigade was supported by the Insurance Cora panics, but was found to be wholly insufficient to meet the growing wants of the metropolis. Moreover, these com panies were not disposed any longer to maintain the exist ing establishment. It was, therefore, proposed by the bill to transfer the service to the Metropolitan Board of Works, and that the funds for its maintenance on an extended and improved form, amounting to about £50,000 a year, should be raised by a rate of a halfpenny in the pound on the assessable property within metropolitan limits, a contribu tion of £lO,OOO by the State, and a percentage upon the value of in suran ces effected with the companies. It was further _ p ro p ose d th a t th e es t a bli s h men t should be increased by the addition o f three new floating engines, and addi tional James's palace, at Woolwich, Greenwich, Temple Bar, St. B uc ki ng h am P a l a ce, the British Museum, and Chelsea. Powe - r was also given to the Boardof Works, as the rateable value of property increased and the half- Penny rate brought in a larger sum, and as insurances augmented the companies' share of the expenses would increase, to purchas e the f fire-escapes of the Royal Society for the Protection of l Sir W. JOLLIF apprroonl„Fdire. of the general scope and object of the bill, but enterta ri i g neds om e doubts with regard to the mode in which the bad e was hereafter ma naged. It seemed to him that the ',°b ill wouldrelieve the thriving insurance companies at the expense of the rate payers;and that the Board of Work s was hardly the best machinery for managing the tire brigade of the year as Mr. BLACK BURN thou g ht that £lO,OOO a contribution of the State for the p rote ction of Go lu t e t offices and public buildings was excessive, and c, —g - gested that these structures should beassessed in thesame manner as other property. Observations were also made by Mr. Ayrton, Mr. Vance, Mr. R. Mills, Mr. Alderman Rose, and Mr. Locke. Mr. PEACOCKE would have preferred seeing the bri gade placed under the metropolitan police rather than the Board of Works, which did not possess the public con fidence. Mr. HANKY, as chairman of the select committee upon whose recommendations the bill was founded, said he at once entertained the same opinions as that just e x p ressed, but upon farther reflection he had come to a different con clusion. The bill was read a second time. REOORD OP TITLE (IRELAND) BILL. The .A.TT ORNEY-GENERAL moved the second read ing of the Record of Title (Ireland) Bill, which had passed the House of Lords, and the object of which was to sim plify title and improve the administration of the Landed Estates Court. As the law stood no means existed to pre vent the title from lapsing and in course of time being clogged with new encumbrances, so that t e old system of expense in the investigation of title and the difficulty of dealing with it in the market was created afresh. That defect was early pointed out by a Royal commission—the bill was intended to cure it—and his hon. and learned friend Sir Hugh Cairns had given it his entire and un qualified approval. Mr. WHITESIDE opposed the bill, his main objection being that it did not touch the law of settlement or entail. Instead of amending the existing registration of deeds and registration of judgment offices, it established an antagonistic system that might plunge the country into inextricable difficulty and confusion. The bill ought to be referred to a select committee for the purpose of consider ing clauses which in their present shape were likely to be attended with worse results than any bill relating to real property that had ever been laid upon the table. Sir G. BOWYER had no objection to the measure so far as it went to record titles which had been established under the Landed Estates Court ; but if they recognised the principle that a court of law was to be constituted for the transfer of landed property, it would be fatal to the juris prudence of the country regarding real estates ; for they no more wanted a court for the transfer of landed property than they wanted a court for the sale of a horse or a pig. Sir H. CAIRNS supported the bill, and observed that a court had already been established to declare an indefeasible title in the first instance, and all the bill did was to enable the court to mark the subsequent devolutions of the estate and declare with regard to each that which had been done in respect of the first title. The fact that the bill was en tirely permissive, and that it was not obligatory on a per son to put an estate upon the record, was a sufficient answer to the greater part of the objections which had been raised against it. With reference to the suggestion to send the measure to a select committee, looking at the conside , ration it had received in the House of Lords, and seeing that its clauses were virtually the same as those which had been passed for England, that the session was far advanced and that the bill was anxiously desired in Ireland, he trusted the Government would endeavour to induce the house to pass it through a committee of the whole house, and not delay its success by referring it to a select com mittee. Mr. MALINS supported the second reading, as the bill was regarded with so much favour in Ireland, but he warned the house that it would not do away with all the difficulties attendant on the transfer of land. On the con trary, he believed it would render the system even more complicated than at present. The bill was also supported by Mr. Cogan, Mr. Long field and Mr. Murphy, and eventually read a second time. COUNTY COURTS EQUITABLE JURISDICTION BILL. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the second read ing of this bill. Mr. CRATTFURD thought the principle of increasing the salaries of the judges by fees was very objectionable. Sir F. KELLY expressed his thanks to the Government for having introduced the bill, which ho believed would confer great benefits upon the poorer classes ; but at the same time he concurred in the remarks of the hon. gentle man who preceded as to the objectionable mode of increas ing the salaries of the judges. Mr. HIBBERT cordially supported the second reading of the bill. The clause respecting the payment of addi tional fees was, however, very objectionable, and he trusted the Attorney-General would consent to that clause being modified. Mr. MALINS would offer no opposition to the bill, though he could not wholly approve of it. For instance, he was unable to see why the county court judges should not be permitted to try cases involving more than £5O, whereas they might, under this bill, be able to try cases of equity involving £5OO. It was very questionable whether any advantage would arise from the establishment of small chancery courts in every part of the kingdom. He hoped the whole question would be carefully considered in com mittee, and he should then move that the jurisdiction of county court judges should be limited in equity cases to £2OO. Mr. AYRTON thought that if this bill became law the registrars of the county courts ought to be either barristers or solicitors. He entirely dissented from the doctrine that the suitors should not pay fees. On the contrary, ho thought that fees ought to defray all the expenses of the court. Sir F. KELLY explained that he meant to say, not that suitors should not pay fees under this bill, but that the amount of fees received should not regulate the salaries of the judges. After a few words from Mr. WIIITESIDE, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that county courts were established on the principle that it was better to give rough justice than no justice at all, and the object of this bill was to give facilities for determining ques tions concerning property without eating the property up. (Hear, hear.) The bill was then read a second time. SUPPLY. The report of supply was brought up and agreed to. INLAND REVENUE ACTS. The report upon theresolutions in this matterwas brought up and agreed to. PROCURATORS (SCOTLAND) BILL. This bill passed through committee. METROPOLITAN HOUSELESS POOR BILL. The Lords' amendment to this bill was considered and agreed to. ENCLOSURE (No. 2) BILL. This bill was read a second time. LOCAL GOVERNMENT SUPPLEMENTAL (No. 3) BILL. This bill passed through committee. DOGS REGULATION (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. COGAN moved the ()Mission of clause 21, which gave power to every constable to demand from any per son whether he was the owner of a dog, and ask him to produce a license. The house divided— For the clause Against it lO Majority —2B The amendments to this bill were then considered and agreed to. RAILWAY CLAUSES BILL. This bill was read a second time. SMOKE NUISANCES (SCOTLAND) ACTS AMEND MENT BILL. This bill passed through committee. INNS OF COURT BILL. The house went into committee pro forma to introduce some amendments of Sir G. Bowyer. The bill was then ordered to be recommitted. ECCLESIASTICAL LEASING ACT (1858). This bill was read a third time and passed. ROADS AND BRIDGES (SCOTLAND) BILL. This bill passed through committee. PUBLIC-HOUSE CLOSING ACT (1864) AMEND MENT BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. The house adjourned at half-past 1 o'clock. Court of Common Council. A Court of Common Council was holden yesterday at the Council-chamber at Guildhall ; the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor (Warren Stormes Hale, Esq.), presiding. The court was not is calendar court, being convened chiefly for the purpose of clearing off an accumulation of business standing over from several previous courts. The greater portion of the time was occupied in the discussion of a report from the Law, Parliamentary, and City Courts Committee, on the reference on the 9th March last on the County Courts Equitable Jurisdiction Bill in Parliament, and also on the reference of the 18th inst., on the letter of the judge of the Sheriffs' Court upon the subject of the said bill, and for authority to introduce new clauses in the bill, and also to inquire whether the privileges of the court had been in any way interfered with, stating that the Remem brancer had on the 13th March submitted the bill to them, from which it appeared that the powers conferred by it on the county courts were not extended to the Sheriffs' Court of the City. The Remembrancer had also pointed out to them, that since the passing of the City Small Debts Act, in 1857, various powers had been conferred on the county courts, but not extended to the Sheriffs' Court. That in 1859 the court instructed the Law, Parliamentary and City Courts Commitee, to ascertain whether any, and if any, what changes orimprovements were necessary or desirable, and could be effected in the jurisdiction, process f procedure, and scales of fees, and if so, in what manner and at what cost. That on the 4th Nov., 1859, the committee reported to the court that they were of opinion that several changes and improvements were necessary and desirable, in order that the powers of the court might be, as far as should be considered beneficial, made to correspond with those of the county courts generally, and that these changes andim provements could only b 3 effected by act of Parliament. That the court then directed notice to be given thatlappli cation would be made in the following session for a bill to carry these objects into effect. A bill was introduced to Par liament in pursuance of the notice, but it was afterwards withdrawn on objections made by Lord Redesdale, and the committee adjourned the consideration of the question whe ther it was desirable that the equitable jurisdiction given by the bill to county courts should be extended to the Sheriffs' Court. The committee met again on April 3, and it was resolved to wait until the bill had passed the House of Lords, and then to meet and determine whether they, would recommend that it was desirable to introduce into the bill into th e H ouse o f C ommons clauses exten di ng th e equitable jurisdiction to the Sheriffs' Court, and also clauses to carry out the wishes of your honourable court, expressed in co tuhrte:year mlBask9e, the n c e r e e rr a s e e s po t h u e d w p ol t r h s o s o e f o t f h t e h e S oo h e o r i f f n t s y ' saeul B seec the t into co lle m et mb t ebe i r uo a fncthe extendingre reported uo us Douse theo of Lords to the com mit tequitable de i c o or r t o e t d e s o . t o h e O a d t n t a M h e c a y l mm th ei jurisdiction to the Sheriffs' Court, and poi n t e d out that the mode in which the judge and officers of the Sheriffs' Court were to be remunerated for their duties under the bill was left in doubt, andthat it was clear the court would not have the power of fixing the salaries, and that the fees were to be thrown into hotch-potch with the county court fees. The Remembrancer, however, thought it advisable that a clause should be inserted in the bill on the report from the select committee to insure two things-1. That the fees of the Sheriffs' Court should be paid into the general fund of that court; and 2, that the additional salaries to the judge and officers of the court should be in the discretion of the court, and he was directedto prepare such a clause. At that meeting the judge of the Sheriffs' Court was present, and stated that he had an appointment with the Lord Chancel lor that afternoon upon the subject of the bill. The com mittee thought it desirable that the Remembrancer should submit their views with his clause to the Lord Chancellor, and his lordship informed them that if they could agree on a clause he would insert it in the bill. If they could not agree his lordship stated that the two clauses prepared by them should be submitted to him, which was done, and the Lord Chancellor assured the Remembrancer and Mr. Kerr that his lordship had selected Mr. Kerr's clause to insert in the bill, and would do so on bringing up the report from the select committee that evening. The following clause after wards appeared in the bill :—" The jurisdiction, power, and authority given to the judges and officers of county courts by any provisions in this act are hereby given to and are directed to be exercised by the judge and officers of the court held under the provisions of The London (City) Small Debts Extension Act, 1852,' as fully as if such court had been a county court, and such judge and officers shall conform to the rules and orders made under the authority of this act, provided always that the fees mentioned in the sche dule, or other such fees as shall be from time to time substi tuted for them under this act, and to be taken in the said court, shall be paid into the general fund thereof, and that the judge of the said court shall, out of the said general fund, be paid a sum equal in amount to that which for the time being may be receivable by the judges of the metropo litan county courts, or either of them." The Remembrancer was of opinion that the clause would have the effect of in creasing the salary of the judge of the Sheriffs' Court to the amount of the highest salary paid to a judge of a metropoli tan county court, which, under the bill, might be £l,BOO, and, in addition thereto, the judge would receive the £3OO a year now paid him as commissioner of the Central Crimi nal Court. The Remembrancer addressed a letter to the Lord Chancellor, calling his attention to the clause, in which he stated he was sure his lordship could only have intended to remunerate the judge for the additional labour thrown upon him by the bill, which the corporation were fully prepared to do. By the clause, as submitted by Mr. Kerr, and accepted by his lordship, the judge's salary was increased without reference to the new duties conferred upon him, and a further addition was made, which would vary with the general equitable business, and might amount to £2,100 a year. To this the Remembrancer received a reply stating that he was correct in supposing that, by that addition, the Lord Chancellor intended merely to give Mr. Kerr the same advantages under the bill as any county court judge would enjoy. The Remembrancer having reported to the committee the steps he had taken, the committee were of opinion that it was desirable that the equitable jurisdiction given to the Sheriff's Court by the bill as it stood should be conferred on the court. They were, however, of opinion that they should be empowered to carry out the objects proposed by the Remembrancer in preparing the clause before set out, by endeavouring to ob tain the insertion, in the House of Commons, of a similar clause, and another or other clauses, so as to give the citi zens, by means of the Sheriffs' Court, all the advantages which the county courts confer in the other parts of the metropolis, and enable the Sheriffs' Court to work in har mony with the county courts. The committee also pro ceeded to report on the reference of the letter from the judge of the Sheriffs Court to the Lord Mayor. They stated they had received from Mr. Kerr a statement in writing, fully detailing all his proceedings since the County Courts Equitable Jurisdiction Bill was brought into Parliament, and after a careful investigation of the subject the commit tee were of opinion that, although there had been a breach of privilege of the court, it was committed without due consideration. The adoption of the report was moved, and a long discus sion ensued, the chief point of which appeared to be as to whether or not Mr. Commissioner Kerr had, in submitting the clause alluded to to the Lord Chancellor, committed any breach of the privileges of the court. Mr. Lawley approved the report, except the last clause, and as an amendment he moved the adoption of the report with that exception. The amendment was, however, lost, upon which Mr. H. L. Taylor proposed the following amendment :—" That, after a careful investigation of the subject, the committee are of opinion that there has been a breach of the privileges of the court by Mr. Kerr, the judge of the Sheriffs' Court, in seek ing interviews with the Lord Chancellor, in order to get a clause introduced into the bill affecting his personal in terests, without first having been brought before the court. This amendment was ultimately agreed to, and the court shortly afterwards adjourned. MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—May 25, This was a special county day for the purpose of considering the reports of two special committees, appointed to consider the Prisons Bill and the Mid dlesex Industrial Schools Bill. Mr. Pownall was in the chair, and among the justices present were—Mr. Keinshead, Mr. Laurie, Mr. Armstrong, Mr. Thos. Turner, Sir J. Tyler, Mr. A. A. Croll, Mr. Dixon, Mr. E. Baker, Mr. Wadeson, Dr. Jervis, Mr. Good hart, Mr. G. Pilcher, Capt. Morley, Mr. Glossop, Mr. Browell, Sir R. Kirby, Mr. Prance, Mr. Chas. White, Mr. Sharp, Mr. Swift, Mr. Donnithorne, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Newdegate, M.P., the Baron de Bliss, Mr. E. R. Spearman, Mr. France, Mr. Pilcher, Mr. Bashford, and Mr. Marten. THE PRISONS BILL. Mr. TURNER, the chairman of the special commit tee on this bill, brought up their report, in which they stated that objections urged by them to some matters of detail had been met by the Home Secre tary, but that clauses were retained in reference to the superannuation of prison officers, which, in their opinion, would, in practice, give rise to difficulties, and entail extra expenditure on the county. Capt. MORLEY expressed a hope that a clause for punishing females by further imprisonment for as saults on female warders would be restored. With regard to any male prisoner who committed such an offence, there was a power to inflict corporal punish ment, but that, of course, was not the case with re gard to a female convict. The hon. gentleman also suggested that the provision for measuring, weigh ing, and recording the general appearance of every prisoner should be limited to those prisoners who were committed for a period of not less than one month. Numbers of persons passed through the prisons who were committed for a few days only, and to keep records of all such prisoners was not necessary for the purposes of justice, and would ne cessitate the building of a library to contain the volumes. (A laugh.) Mr. KEMSHEAD disapproved of the superannuation clauses, and trusted they would be struck out of the bill. The CHAIRMAN quoted figures showing that the number of prisoners under a month's sentence had been 3,600, and the number under 14 days nearly 2,000. The report was received and adopted, and ordered to be printed and circulated. The committee was reappointed, with directions to endeavour to obtain the adoption of Capt. Morley's suggestions and the exclusion of the superannuation clauses. MIDDLESEX INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS BILL. The report of the committee appointed on Jan. 14, 1864, to consider suggested amendments to the 17th and 18th Vict. c. 169, and empowered to carry out the recommendations contained in their report on Jan. 19, 1835, was presented to the court on Thursday last, when this special day was appointed. The report has since been printed and circulated. After reciting the fact that the bill promoted by the county was referred to a select committee of the House of Commons, and that the select committee heard evidence, &c., the report proceeds : _ _ _ "The committee of the Commons, for reasons of their own, which they did not impart to your committee, struck out the proposed clause by which the word ' reformatory' would have been substituted for the word industrial,' and also the clause under which the Middlesex schools might have become entitled to a certificate from the Secretary of State, and consequently to a grant from the Treasury in aid of the maintenance of the juvenile offenders detained in such schools, and after hearing counsel and evidence in sup port of and in opposition to three several clauses proposed to be added to the bill by certain Roman Catholics who had petitioned against it, the Select Committee added to the Bill Cjauses 5 and 6 (see Appendix) by virtue of which the warrant of commitment of a juvenile offender must specify the religious persuasions to which he shall appear to be long, and if it be different from that of the Established Church, the committee of visitors shall allow a minister of that persuasion to visit such offender, subject to regula lations to be imposed by them, and unless such offender objects to be so visited. And further, that no juvenile offender so visited shall be compelled to attend any reli gious service, or to receive any religious instruction given by the minister of any other persuasion." The committee further reported : " While your committee are still of opinion that it is a hardship upon the ratepayers of Middlesex that they should be refused such assistance towards the maintenance of juvenile offenders as is granted to the supporters of other reformatories, they have reason to believe that there is little or no hope that the Legislature can be prevailed upon to grant such assistance to reformatories such as the Fel thanxSchool, which are maintained out of the county rates i and not by voluntary contributions, and consequently they 1 see no reason on this account to defer passing the present bill. The clause which has been added to the bill by the Select Committee granting greater privileges to juvenile offenders of a religious persuasion other than the Estab lished Church, is very nearly the same which has been in troduced into the New Prison Bill, and is a concession which cannot reasonably be refused, if indeed such offen ders are to be detained in the Middlesex schools at all, but inasmuch as their presence must, under any circumstances, interfere materially with the general discipline of the school, and especially so if the proposed privileges be con ceded, it is much to be desired that the Secretary of State may be prevailed upon to exercise the power which he will have of removing such offenders to a certified reforma tory, where they will be under the undivided control of ministers of your own persuasion. Your committee also beg to call the attention of the Court to the fact that under Clause 2 of the bill no juvenile offender can in future be sent to a school provided under the Middlesex Act unless the committee of visitors are willing to receive him. On full consideration of all the circumstances, your committee are of opinion that the alterations introduced into the Bill by the Committee of the Commons are of such importance as to render it necessary to bring them specially under the notice of the Court, in the hope that they will appoint a special day for the consideration of the question, whether the present Bill shall be proceeded with or not. Appended is a copy of the bill, as amended and finally settled by the select committee of the House of Commons, and a summary of the gains and losses under the bill as amended." Mr. GLossIP, in moving the adoption of the re port, reminded the Court that the amendments sought by the Middlesex Industrial Schools Bill did not originate in the crotchets of individuals, but in the experience of the Feltham committee, which had enabled them to trace hitches in the management of the institution to defects in the Act of Parliament. The special committee which was appointed in January, 1864, had eventually adopted the whole of the amendments suggested by the Feltham commit tee, and they waited upon Sir George Grey, in the hope that the Government would extend the general Act, so as to place Feltham on the same footing as other reformatories. The Home Secretary pointed out that the proper course was for the county of Middlesex to promote a private bill to amend their own Act, at the same time not committing himself to any assent to a Treasury grant, as a matter falling within the province of the Chancellor of the Exche quer. The Middlesex Industrial Schools Bill was in troduced in the present Session and referred to a select committee of the House of Commons. The committee appointed by this Court, who had the care of the bill, had great hopes that it would have received more favourable consideration from the select committee than had been shown to it ; but he thought the advantages of those provisions which were given outweighed the disadvantages withwhich they were accompanied. One important amendment of the present state of things was the power to grant licenses to Feltham boys. It was a power which was enjoyed by all other reformatories, and would enable the visitors of Feltham to judge whether a boy was reformed or not. If the experiment of a licence in any case was satisfactory, the Secretary of State then had power to discharge the boy before the expiration of his sentence, and thus to exonerate the ratepayers from the cost of his maintenance. Another important amendment was that which, if this bill passed, would enable them to retain the boys to the same age as in all other reformatories. In practice it was found that there was no difficulty in providing for strong healthy lads of 17 or 18. Many of them went into the merchant service, but a merchant captain would not look at a stunted London boy of 13 or 14, and they could not be sent off to Canada to shift for themselves. Another alteration would enable the County Treasurer to enforce payments from parents. A magistrate, on proof that the parents were clearly able to contribute, might commit them to prison for a monthif they re fused to do so. There was also a power of remov ing boys to other schools. On representations from the justices the Secretary of State might remove to any other certified school, and he trusted they would be able to induce the Secretary of State to exercise that power in the case of Roman Catholic boys. It was expedient that they should be educated under the training and influence of members of their own persuasion, and that the general influence of Felt ham should not be impaired by the privileges se cured to boys of that faith. Another amendment was that the boys should be subject to previous im prisonment. The principle was correct that an offender should be first punished and then reformed. At present there were numerous cases of two bro thers, and in one instance of three brothers, being inmates of Feltham. It might be that the parents thought it desirable that the younger boys should have the same advantageous training as the elder, but they might be influenced if they knew that each boy would be subjected to previous imprisonment. There was also a power given to the Middlesex magistrates to decline to receive boys. Unlike every other reformatory, they had hitherto been unable to decline, and the consequences had been that a deaf and dumb boy, an idiot boy, and boys in the last stage of consumption had been sent to Feltham. He conceived that it would be the duty of the Feltham committee to decline to receive any boys who in their opinion were unfit for the training of Feltham, or whose presence would be likely to injure the reformatory effect on the other inmates. The com mittee in charge of the bill had made a very hard fight for a clause providing that, under certain cir cumstances, they should have the power of claiming for the Feltham schools a grant from the Treasury ; but, unfortunately, they had not succeeded. He had never expected to obtain it, and he doubted whether any committee of the House of Commons would re lieve Middlesex from an obligation which 10 years ago they had voluntarily undertaken. It was, never theless, a great hardship that Middlesex should be an exception to the ordinary rule, and he thought it the more unjust when it was remembered that a Cornish boy sent to a reformatory was generally born in Cornwall; whereas the majority of boys in Middle sex sent to reformatories were born in other counties. (Hear.) The bill contained a clause which a special committee had not asked for. It was introduced at the instigation of a section of the community who unfortunately thought it necessary to adopt a very aggressive policy. If they found people inclined to give them an inch they immediately insisted that they must have an ell ; and he regretted to see that Mr. Hennessy had given notice of amendments on the third reading beyond even those which the select committee had inserted. The clause now in the bill provided that in ~the case of Roman Catholic boys the priests should not wait until he was asked to visit, but should visit unless his visits were specially objected to by the boys. The justices would still have the duty to approve the minister and the power to make regulations to prevent the introduction of improper persons. He therefore deemed the clause not unreasonable, and he trusted the select commit tee of the House of Commons would not assent to Mr. Hennessy's amendments, or allow the clause to be altered from the state in which it left their hands. (Hear, hear.) At Redhill they declined to receive Roman Catholics at all, and the justices would have the same power, if it should be necessary to make use of it. With regard to any objection to the bill on the ground that the increase of age would lead to an in creased number of boys and an increased expense, the Feltham Committee would have the power to say they would not admit more than 600, and they might in that way practically fix the maximum annual cost. He did not believe that they would get better terms in another Session, and he therefore hoped they would not withdraw the bill, which certainly contained provisions of an extremely valuable nature. (Cheers.) He begged to move that the report be received and adopted, and the committee be reap pointed, with power to carry the amended bill through Parliament. Mr. TURAIt seconded the motion. Mr. N. LAURIE submitted that all the amendments upon which the Feltham Committee set great store would entail additional expenditure ; that as Feltham could accommodate 800, they could not refuse to re ceive boys until they had received the full number; that payments by parents would amount to nothing ; and that they would not be able to decline to receive Roman Catholics. With iegard to what he called the Conscience Clause, in order to avoid offence, there was no reason whatever why they should not take the chance of another session and another Par liament, and perhaps another Ministry. He had not changed his opinion on the Prison Ministers' Act, and he regretted that this court had not exercised its dis cretionary power under its provisions. But that Act Butland; this bill they could withdraw, and it applied to children, not adults, which was a very different thing. Restrictions were to be imposed upon Felt ham which were not to be imposed on any other reformatory in the country, and no grant in aid was be given, although such grants were enjoyed by kindred institutions. He moved as an amendment, . " That the Select Committee of the House of Com mons having struck out of the bill provisions which would have entitled the county to the same allow ance from the Consolidated Fund which is made to other reformatories, and having prescribed condi tions in reference to the religious instruction of cer tain inmates of the Felthaua establishment which are not enforced on other reformatories, this court is of opinion that it is not expedient to proceed with the bill in the present session." Mr. ARMSTRONG seconded the amendment. The amendment was then put and carried by 21 to 3. The bill, therefore, will be withdrawn. Charge of Forgery and Uttering a Will. An elderly man, named James Whalley Cathrill, was brought before Sir Thomas Henry, at the Bow-street police court yesterday, charged with forging and uttering a will, and Edwin Dresch was charged with aiding and abetting him in so doing. This prosecution was directed by the Judge of the Probate Court, in consequence of certain disclosures made in the course of the action, " Cathrill v. Kiddie and Jeffree," tried at the end of February last. His lordship directed that the documents and alleged will should be impounded with the view to the indictment of the parties. Mr. Hannen (instructed by Mr. Pollard, solicitor to the Treasury) said he appeared on behalf of the Crown to con duct the prosecution. For the information of the Court and of the prisoners themselves, he would briefly state the cir cumstances which had led to these proceedings. A Mrs. Eleanor Saunders died on the 2d February, 1863. On the 14th March, 1859, she made a will, appointing Mr. J. Jef free and Mr. Kiddie as her executors, to whom she gave £lOO each. Mr. Jeffree had been for some years the medi cal attendant and friend of the deceased lady, and after the payment of certain legacies specified in the will, the residue of her property was bequeathed to Mr. S. Kiddie, also her friend, and a relative of her late husband. This will was proved in due course, and some time afterwards, towards the end of the year, the prisoner Cathrill produced what he re presented to be a subsequent will of the deceased Mrs. Saunders, bearing date the 23d March, 1859, being about ten days after the date of the genuine will. In this second will the residue of the property was bequeathed to the pri soner himself, instead of to Mr. Kiddie. Of course this document took the executors by surprise, as their friend ship with the deceased had continued up to the death of Mrs. Saunders, and nothing had ever happened to indi cate any alteration in her intention as to the disposal of her property. On the other hand, the prisoner had not been for some time apparently on friendly terms with the deceased, although claiming her as a cousin; and a legacy of .£5O in favour of the prisoner, which had appeared in a former will, was struck out of the two subsequent wills which she had made before her decease. Witnesses would be called to prove that the prisoner was present after the funeral of Mrs. Saunders, and heard the will of March 14 read, when the question was asked if any per son present knew of a later will. The prisoner did not re ply, although he now states that he did assert the existence of a previous will at that time. It would be also shown that some time after this the prisoner called on Mr. Jeffree, and asked him to intercede with Mr. Keddle to grant him a sum of money out of the estate. This application was repeated several times, and the prisoner was again and again in formed that it would be refused, till at length the prisoner said, "Then I am determined to upset the will in one way or another, and you will find the ecclesiastical courts rather expensive." Then came the production of the alleged will of March 24, and the proceedings in the Pro bate Courts, a full shorthand report of which would be produced by Mr. Gerrans. At the trial of the suit the second prisoner Dresch was called as a witness, and he stated on oath that he was present when the latter will was dictated to Cathrill by the deceased lady, Mrs. Saunders, at her residence, No. 3, Walnut Tree-walk, Kennington, that he saw her sign the will, and appended his own signature as the "attesting witness," and his residence as "49, Wych street, Strand," where it would be shown he had no resi dence at the time in question. Mr. J. F. Coleman, one of the Record-keepers of the Pro bate Court, produced the alleged will and other documents impounded by order of Judge Wilde, and also the genuine will of March 13, 1859. The prisoner Cathrill expressed a wish that the whole of the evidence given by him in the Probate Court should be read over. Mr. Hannen said that this would occupy two or three hours. He proposed only to read certain parts of it. The prisoner, however, demanded that it should be all read. He claimed this as a right. Sir Thomas Henry said it should be all read if the prisoner thought it desirable for his interests, and accordingly the shorthand writer read his full report of the examination of both of the prisoners, before Sir J. Wilde, occupying some 400 pages of manuscript. In effect the prisoner's state ment was—That he was an advertising agent, about 65 years of age, and had been at sea, living on a biscuit and half a pint of water per day ; that he was formerly a mer chant, and had been cashier to Mr. Bentley, the publisher, when £lOO,OOO a year passed through his hands; that the deceased, Mrs. Saunders was his cousin, and was always very fond of him, calling his daughter "her pet," and kiss ing her occasionally, and making her presents. That on the 23d March, when he happened to call on her, she said, "James, I have not done right by you. This chair I Sit upon is yours. Your father lent my father £BOO, and it made me what I am." That at her dictation he wrote out the second will, desiring him tp take it to a lawyer; that he took it to a Mr. Biston, a barrister's clerk, who put it into proper shape, and the same day it was signed and duly attested ; that after the death of Mrs. Saunders he had tried in vain to find the will, and only succeeded on receiving a letter upon the subject from his son in Australia. The evidence of Dresch went to show that he was the at testing witness to the will, and he gave a minute account of the personal apparance of the old lady, Mrs. Saunders, &c. Mr. James Hooker, 30, Bartlett's-buildings, solicitor for the defendants at the trial in the Probate Court, and one of the attesting witnesses to the will of March 14, deposed that he knew the handwriting of the late Mrs. Saunders, and he believed the signature purporting to be hers in the alleged will of March 23 was a forgery. Cross-examined by Cathrill—l never had any difference with Mrs. Saunders. No doubt she made a fresh will about once a year. Mr. John Jeffree, of Howard Lodge, Atkins-road, Clapham ioad (one of the defendants in the late action), said he was a surgeon out of practice, and had attended Mrs. Saunders professionally for some years. She always spoke of Mr. and Mrs. Kiddie in terms of the warmest attachment. He had seen the will of March 23, and was one of the executors, and she told him where she kept it, in a bureau. He had heard her complain of the prisoner Cathrill's importunities for money, and found her once in a state of great excite ment through his having forced himself into her presence in 'Tit() of her orders to the servants to refuse him admit tance on all occasions. Cross-examined—l attended the late Mr. Saunders, and have known them about 17 years. Mr. S. Kiddie stated that he resided at Salisbury, andhad been a friend of the late Mrs. Saunders for many years. His wife was related to her. He knew nothing of the will of March 14, 1859, until after her death, although some years ago she had intimated her intention to him respect ing a former will. He last saw her in Jan., 1863, and they were on the most friendly terms up to the time of her death. He never heard her mention the name of Cathrill, and was not even aware of his existence till after the death of Mrs. Saunders. -He was present at the funeral, and heard the will of March 14 read. Mr. Jeffree on that occasion asked the company present if they knew of any other will. Seve ral replied, "No," and the others were silent. No one men tioned the existence of another will. Cross-examined—l believe my wife is a cousin of the late Mrs. Saunders. I saw you at her residence two days before the funeral. Louisa Bard, 25, Walcot-place, South Lambeth, deposed that the prisoner Cathrill told her, about 12 months ago, that he had found another will of Mrs. Saunders, giving witness a larger legacy. Cross-examined—l never heard Mrs. Saunders say that she had taught you the Lord's Prayer. She said she knew you as a boy. She spoke of you unkindly sometimes. She varied in temper. Mary Ann 0 wnes, a widow, said that no person named Dresch lived at 49, Wych-street, till 1860. The prisoner lived there after this period. Emma Coe said she knew the late Mrs. Saunders for 30 years before her death, and was present at her funeral. The prisoner Cathrill said nothing of any other will then, but about a year after, owing to a letter from him, she went to Cathrill's house. He said, "I suppose you have heard that another will has been found ?" and asked if she had heard from his solicitor. He said the first solicitors he had em ployed were rogues, and, therefore, he had placed the mat ter in other hands. He said the old lady gave him a chest of drawers while she was at Walnut-tree-walk, and while looking in them one day ho accidentally discovered the will, of which he showed her a copy. He read it, and said she would be a gainer by the discovery, and wanted to borrow £2O to carry on the suit. Witness's father de clined to lend the money, saying that the alleged prospect of £5O under the new will should have been augmented by the addition of another " 0," before he could be induced to advance any money. _ _ _ The prisoners were now asked by Sir Thomas Henry if they wished to say anything to the charge, upon which Cathrill expressed a desire to examine Mr. Saunders, a nephew of the deceased. Mr. H. Saunders said he was a farmer, living in Berk shire, near Oxford, and knew the deceased. Had often heard her speak affectionately of Cathrill, and she said once that the chair she sat upon she owed to him (prisoner:,. He believed that the prisoner was a great favourite of the husband of deceased. There was a disturbance after the funeral, much confusion, and he distinctly heard prisoner say, " That is not the last will of Eleanor Saunders." Mr. Saunders, jun., confirmed this statement, but admitted that neither Mr. Jeffree nor Mr. Kiddie was likely to have heard him, owing to the excited discussion or quarrel going on. Mrs. Kiddie was taken ill, the room being very small. Mrs. Kiddie, in answer to the prisoner, said her last inter view with the deceased was most friendly. She, with Miss Coe, destroyed some of the letters of the deceased, which were of no interest or value. The prisoners, who reserved their defence, were com mitted for trial. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS TIMES.—Sir John Walsh has given notice of an important question for this evening. It has been stated with an air of semi-official authority, that within the last few days an indemnity has been for mally demanded by the Cabinet of President John son for the depredations of the Alabama and that a formal refusal has been already returned. Sir J. Walsh wishes to know if the first of these assertions is well-founded. Neither strikes us as probable, and we await Lord Palmerston's reply without any great anxiety. In the meantime, however, we know that a series of claims has been sent in on account of damage inflicted on Federal commerce, and we must be prepared for a possible revival of them sooner or later. We cannot do better, therefore, than recall the attention of our readers to the plain facts of the case, and the principles of the law ap plicable to them. In the summer of 1862 a ship called " The 290" was launched at Birkenhead, and sailed from Liverpool, with a small crew, on pre tence of a pleasure trip. She was pierced for eleven guns, and adapted in some respects for warlike pur poses, but she carried no guns or ammunition. Off the Isle of Anglesea she took on board forty men from a tug-steamer, and proceeded to the port of Terceira, in the Azores. Four days afterwards her armament arrived, Captain Semmes followed, and " Thee 290," now the Alabama, sallied forth as a Confederate vessel of war. There is no doubt what ever that all her equipments were manufactured in England, and that the grossest fraud had been prac tised by the agents who smuggled her out without a clearance, and afterwards provided her with all the means of destruction. It will also be remem bered that Mr. Adams furnished our Government, before the escape of the Alabama, with evidence of her character and destination, which, however, was deemed insufficient by the law officers of the Crown ; and that, owing to the inopportune illness of Sir John Harding, the order for her arrest was at last telegraphed just too late to prevent her sailing. The history of her subsequent career until she was sunk by the Kearsage in the English Channel is familiar to all. How many prizes she may have. burnt at sea, and what may have been the value of the cargoes destroyed by her, we do not pretend to remember, but it is certain that she was the terror of Federal merchantmen, and contributed singly, in no small degree, to ruin the carrying trade of the United States. If we add to her actual captures the enormous increase of insurance to cover the risk of falling in with her, the sales of American ships to foreign owners, and • the transfer of American trade to foreign bottoms, we must admit that Ame rican merchants have good cause for their irritation. The only question is how far their losses occasioned by this flagrant violation of our neutrality consti tute a legal demand upon us. To this question there is but one answer. There are two grand sources of what is called international law—usage and mora -1 lity. Obligations recognised by the practice of all civilised nations, especially if confirmed by treaty, and obligations founded on natural rights, as be tween sovereign states, must be treated by a govern ment as legal obligations ; and the breach of them is a legitimate ground for compensation. To which of these classes, or to what other claSs of interna tional duties, .can the alleged liability be referred? Let us grant, for the sake of argument only, that the Alabama, if seized in time, must have been con demned under the Foreign Enlistment Act, and let us also grant that a little want of promptitude was shown by the, authorities. Still, not a single prece dent, we believe, can be produced for the allowance of a similar claim under similar circumstances, and no rule of natural justice enjoins us to pay for the mischief done by the Alabama. It is the right of a neutral to prevent his territory from being made the base of hostile operations, and for this purpose he may impose very stringent prohibitions on the I officers of belligerent powers. It is also his duty to do so—but in what sense and for what reason ? Obviously, because to do otherwise, at least delibe rately, would be to show partiality towards the one or the other, and thus to forfeit the character and privileges of neutrality. The maxim is " Hostem esse qui faciat quod hosti placet," and if we had wilfully permitted the Alabama to issue, armed and equipped, from the Mersey, we should have become virtually the allies of the Confederates. Now, bad faith has never been imputed to us, but it is said or implied that, as neutrals, we were bound to insure the one belligerent against a wrongful act of the other which we failed to prevent. This doctrine is wholly untenable. . . HERALD.—The panic which the news that an extensive emigration to Mexico is being organised in the restored Union has created in French political circles is not creditable to their judgment or infor mation. The danger, indeed, is quite as great as they rate it. The French Government is in an extremely embarrassing position, out of which, according to all appearance, it can only get at the cost of a terrible sacrifice of blood and money, or an even more appalling sacrifice of honour. There is cause enough to make all Frenchmen who care for the interests and good name of their country extremely anxious ; matter enough for the wretched crew of democratic writers who during the last three years have chronicled with glee every check which their countrymen have sustained, because it embar rassed the Government, to chuckle over. But there is nothing in the news which can surprise any per son at all acquainted with the temper of the North and with the opinions of its leaders. It has been perfectly clear for the last two years that if the South should be conquered, the North would in stantly turn its attention to Mexico, and that, directly or indirectly, a desperate effort would be made to overthrow the new empire, and expel all European troops. If any doubt could have been entertained about the course which the victorious North would pursue it must have been removed by the accession to power of Andrew Johnson, an avowed advocate of war against the Emperor Maxi milian and France. Not 12 months ago, Johnson, in acknowledging to a Nashville mob the honour conferred upon him by his nomination for the Vice- Presidency, said that " he was in favour of the Monroe doctrine throughout, and prophesied that the day was not far distant when, with the rebellion crushed, we should say to Napoleon that he should not establiah a monarchy in Mexico." The assas sination, of Abraham Lincoln has given the Ten nessee ruffian the power to fulfil his own prophecy. He can say to Napoleon, " Take your troops away, or I will drive them away ;" and we suppose that if he does he will be applauded by the French Liberals, who, although well knowing that the triumph of the North must be followed by these serious difficulties between it and their own country, have raved with frantic delight over that triumph, just as our English Liberals, as bitter enemies as their Frenchbrethren of their own country and of true liberty, have hailed with joy every vic tory which precipitated the day in which the blood of gallant Englishmen must flow in desperate combat with Yankee mercenaries. And if the French pub lic ought to have been prepared for these dangers, still more ought the French Government to have an ticipated them. The action of Mr. Seward, the re solution of the Senate, the tone of the newspapers, the language of the elect of the nation, like Andrew Johnson, must all have been well known to the Emperor. He must have been well aware that the conquest of the South would be followed by hostili ties against the Mexican empire on the part of the American people, if not of the American Govern ment. He must have been shrewd enough to under stand that from the moment the Southern Confede racy fell beneath the ceaseless blows of the North he would no longer have to maintain his Imperial protegi, the interests of the Latin race, and the honour of France, against Juarez and his half-caste bandits, but against large armies flushed with vic tory, anxious to revenge the sympathy given to their foes, and covetous of the riches Mexico is known to hide, if not against the disbanded soldiers of the South, who, having no chance of living at home ex cept as prisoners, would be glad to seek their for tunes in Mexico. And yet he took no step to avert the danger. He must have known that the victory , of the Confederacy would be the safety of the Mexi can empire. He must have known that with his aid the Confederacy could easily obtain the victory, and yet he left it to perish, perhaps, from a selfishishort sighted calculation that it must succeed of itself, and consequently that his object would be obtained without compromising himself with the North in any way—perhaps from that cowardice which often gathers, as he grows old, upon a man whose daring in his earlier years has been almost sublime. The expediency of the resolve to regenerate Mexico, regarded from the stand-point of French in terests, is doubtful, but there can be no question that the cleverest Sovereign of Europe has made a fatal mistake in giving the Northern States the opportunity of upsetting his plans. We are curious to see what course the Emperor will take, whether he will wait, or boldly provoke the contest, and thus peihaps prevent it. Give up Mexico at once he cannot. To withdraw his troops at the dictation of Mr. Johnson would be to incur a disgrace which m i g ht imperil his dynasty. To permit them to be vanquished in detail by Yankee - emigrants, or driven to a corner by a Yankee army, is even more out of the question. He must hold Mexico for the present, if he have to send a hundred thousand men there and incur a debt of a hu n d r ed millions. What be will do will probably be to attempt to gain time, with the view, perhaps, of ultimately abandoning the new empire in such a way as to save his honour. If the United States Government can be induced to declare its resolution to remain perfectly neutral on the Mexican question —as it might possibly bein duced to do upon certain assurances—short work might be made of Juarez and his few remaining supporters, and the empire formally established over the whole country, the French troops might be withdrawn, and the new Emperor might be left to i himself and his foreign legions. After a decent n terval the other part of the arrangement might be carried out. France could not, of course, guarantee the new Emperor against the consequences of quarrels with his neighbours. The United States could very easily pick a quarrel with him, and the short-lived empire thus fall into the American Union without the slightest reproach upon France, whose interests would be regarded by a recognition of the debt due to her by Mexico for the attempt at regenera tion. That would be a very inglorious and con temptible ending of the providential mission of. France in America, but it would be quite of a piece with the inglorious policy which the French, like the English, Government has pursued on this American question. The turn of France comes first. Ours will soon follow. We have more at stake, and unless Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Bright. and the Duke of Argyll become our triumvirs, we shall fight, and no doubt win, but the cost will be tremen dous. We shall preserve our colonies, and maintain our honour, but we shall have to spend thousands of, lives and millions of pounds to do so, whereas we had the chance of securing both for ever at a risk of the most trifling kind. The first fruits of the triumph of the North are bad enough. Mexico, the prey for 40 years of constant anarchy, had a bright future before it. Order was re-established. Security against foreign enemies and internal peace invited the capital and energy of Europe to develope its rich resources and increase the common stock of human enjoyments. It is arrested at the very outset of this career that promised so brightly. The mere dread of Yankee interference has sufficed to rekindle dis order and frighten away capital. For years the Em peror, assuming that he is able to maintain himself upon his throne, will be unable to devote all his. energies, as he had hoped, to the improvement iof his country, the development of its wealth, and the promotion of his people's happiness. He will have to give all his thought to its defence against its powerful neighbour, to the suppression of the revolts that neighbour will foment, or to avoid the quarrels it will try to fasten on him. In the more probable case, that, left in the lurch by France, he is van quished by Juarez and his allies, Mexico wi▪ ll be handed over again in almost its whole extent to the anarchy from which it has just been lifted. emigrants may colonise Sonora and the adjoi▪ ning states, the United States may annex them, but the rest of the country would be left to the old factions; to the old system of murder and extortion. COUNTRY MARKETS _r-~_...w--..._ . _. BIRMINGHAM—THURSDAY. At this day's market there was again a short suppl of in wheat, on which, owing to the fine weather, the turn price was in favour of the buyer, but we make no alteraz tion in our quotations. Barley and oats gave way 6 d P er qr. Beans and peas scarce, and inquired for. Currencies':—English wheat, white, 43s to 475; recl,l9! to 44s per 36 stone. Malting barley, 30s to 35s ; grinar"l. 22s to 25s per qr. Oats, 24s to 30s ; Irish, 21s t o 24s pe 30 stone. Beans, 42s to 45s ; and peas, 40s to 42s per qr. BURY ST. EDMUND'S—WEDNESDAY. There was a good supply of wheat, and business ro" ther inactive. Talavera wheat, 44s to 495; red ditto, 37s to 40s; 308 to 325; secondary ditto, 27s to 29s per qr. 09 Averages ; Wheat, 1,720 qrs., 41s 6d ; barley , qrs., 28s 2d; oats, qrs., —s Od. MANCHESTER—THURSDAY. Our market this morning was moderately attendea: Wheat was in very limited demand, but holders were 11 7 disposed to press sales at any material reduction in Pr ice No alteration in flour. Oats and oatmeal in favour of th buyers. Beans fully as dear. Indian corn no change. BRISTOL—THURSDAY. of On our market to-day there was a moderate supplY,,, English wheat, which sold slowly at barely last wae'" prices. For foreign scarcely any . inquiry ; values n ew. ' nally unaltered. Barley again 6d per qr. lower , with ! limited inquiry. Oats dull, and values barely maintainea EDINBURGH—WEDN'EsDAY. Wheat on the top, Os Gd down average, Os 2d down' Barley on the top, Os fid down average, is 2d dovill' Oats on the top, Os 6d up average, Os 3d up Beans on the top, Os 9d up average, Os 9d up. Average prices. Wheat, 40s10d I Oats, 23s Od Barley, 2Bs 8d j Beans, ...39s 5d Total supply and sales. Wheat Barley 424 qrs sold 145 Oats. 1174 qrs sold 703 Beans 127 qrs sold 117 Town-made flour sells as follows :—White, 36s Od ; extra superfine, 34s 6d; superfine, 33s Od; fine, 31s 6d. GLAS GOW—WEDNEsDAY. At this day's market there was an average a tten II"' d a nce,. but the transactions were unimportant. Wheat and have to be written nominally unaltered. To make Pro to gross an abatement would have had to be submitted c i Barley, beans, oats, and oatmeal 3d to 6d lower per bell° load respectively; peas and Indian corn neglected. Foreign Mail Packet List. Australia and New Zealand, via Southampton.. • • .I,T une 18. Ditto, via Marseilles , , Jane 1 2 ' Brazil and Cape Verde. by British pao•et June ‘ , 6 ' Ditto, by French packet May 24- Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena 2 ,1 0 25 ' China. Penang, and Singapore. via Sou hampton Jane 2 ,, Ditto, via Marseilles ' MO 2 " Falkland Islands Gibraltar, via Southampton. - India (Calcutta); and. Ceylon; via Southampton.... June 2. Ditto, via Marseilles ' • ... May 211 India (B .mbay), via Southampton. .flay " Ditto, via • arseiiles• ' ' . . * , • June ii Mauritius, via Southampton • Ditto, via Madl 6 ... ..; . .... . .... . June ,• n Newfoundland Portugal •••• Ditto, by private ship to Lisbon.. . ... • United states and British North America, by Bri tish packet.. Ditto, by United States packet, via Southamp- ton ...... ............• Ditto, via C ,rk Ditto, by Canadian packet, via Londonderry.. M a y West Coast of Africa, Madeira, and Tt neriffe „June 1 " West Indies and Pacific (except Baha—as, Cuba, and Mexico MO 29 ' Bahamas, via New York. J 1. Bermuda, ditto Julie 7 " Cuba and tdv,xico MO 29' POPULATION OF VICTORIA.—The estimated p Ol lotion of the colony of Victoria on the 31st of Deeer e 's last numbered 604,858 souls, of whom 347,954 were male and 256,904 females. The increase of population by Oceof of immigration over emigration during the last quart 683, 1864 was 3,646, and by excess of births over deaths, 0 4 / The increase from all causes during the year was 30, es, persons, of whom 17,383 were males and 13,1449, The marriages celebrated during the year numbered 415 ~, ADVERTISEMENT.]—HoIIoway's Pills and Ointinetio Disorders of the kidneys, known by the deeply-sea tea p r stec l in the back and scanty secretion of water, can be arr," - t i l ig in their distressing and rapid course by these ree,e„re pills. Their highly . tonic and strengthening proper tle 'jge vent the impoverishment of the blood, and the dell' 9. 01 ment of circulation characteristic of kidney disease' bag often ending iu partial or general dropsy. Experiel l pe roved the almost unvaried success obtained when Ida ay's ointment is well rubbed over the region of tb c f s o f net's. This treatment will relax the hot and pa re ll e „ioit° overcome the attendant costiveness, and induce a secretion by the kidneys—symptoms which are w e bingers of disease departing and health returni Birth s. DuNcAN.—On the 25th inst., at Henrietta-street, Li c „et" _ _ garden,3lrs. Duncan, of a ion. ci, V e i DISNEY.—On the 25th inst., at 111, St. Ge orge's - r ° lp. ° cleston-square, the wile of John Edgar Disney, A.• - • '' a daughter. wife a 0 . HARRISON.—On the 24th inst., at Stourport, th® *w.- - Harrison, Esq., of a son. Marriage& h S e ' CROSS—WESTLE.—On the 25th lust at Saint•air- ts Greenwich, William Cross, of Bow,' only son on ly f the 16 ' William Cross, Esq., of Rotherhithe, to Elizabsthl' i le' daughter of the late Joseph Westle, Esq, ° f house. rir MITLREADY—STALBT.--On the 25th inst., at vY es- Essex, Michael Mulready, artist, late of Lincleiw - r Bayswater, to Fanny Jesimthia, the eldest &lig ht° A red Staley, solicitor. Deaths. S BEAmisa—On the 25th inst., at3B, Beaufort-gardens, "iO/ Louisa Mary Ann, wife of Captain Hamilton R.N., aged 33. CHURCHWARD.- -On the 24th inst , Mr. Richard° 0 ward, of 65, Tollington-road, Upper. Hollowan ag o e, ' FITZGERALD.—On the 21st inst., at Trevayler r rt ddt Augustine Fitzgerald, son of Sir Aug ustine Fite ° ge Bart., aged 30. of GIBBs.—On the 20th inst., Henry Stephen Gibbs, " - ',,qity, The Shrubbery, Highbury-hill, and 2, George -193 " aged 74. of 11 MOYSEL—On the 23ct inst., John Chaffer *oyseY, Laurence Pontney-hill, city, aged 65. ~h ot bt Tucx..—On the 23d inst., at C re sswell-park, 131a° ' suddenly, Mr. Barber Tuck, aged 56. °' London : Printed and Publibhed by WEL [AAA( AN 1) , 0 o t of No. 112, the -Strand, Plinter, at THE SUN Oflice, No Strand, in Precinct of the Savoy, in the CO'" Uidillesex,.Friday, May 26, 1865. The iss u , and the ha,'. am lgg~ rim SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY. EVENING, MAY 26, 186 k.