The Sun. — London, England, 1861-02-15 00:00:00

iss.'"*" . """'" ... , Asa m.••••••••rimmie•MlllMOßmmilaammami.................. th i s re spec. I/ aey did their duty well, and he cordially concurred .t the compliment which it was now proposed to p a y them , Sti 11 he thought they ought to have an oppor tunity ° I exp' eessing their opinion upon the policy of our contest • with' China, and he hoped the Government would afford . the 'Louse an opportunity of doing this. If it did not, b e sl could. certainly deem it to be his duty to bring the sulajc:ct ran der their lordships' consideration. T. he I ,)v.ke of SOMERSET did not think it was neces op 1 7, after what had been already said by noble lords who had addressed their lordships on that occasion, to say more then to express his satisfaction at the bravery and skill of the navy engaged in the war with China; He could no,t allow the occasion to pass without readitk an extract from a letter from Sir Hope Grant in reference to the use of the gunboats in the war in China. The noble lord read the extract in question, which testified to the great value of the gunboats, without which the army would have had to contend with great inconveniences. The re sult of the war in China had led to the ratification of a treaty t ha t could not tut be highly beneficial to this country, and thiiy owed much to the Earl of Elgin for having twice gone f.o China as our commissioner, and for the ability and zeal 'which he had displayed throughont in the arduous deg' which he had to perform. (Hear.) 'the Marquis of BATH said he could not do less on that occasion than express his deep abhorrence at the destruc tion of the Emperor's palace at Pekin, which he regretted to hear had received the sanction of the Earl of Elgin,de spite the remonstrance of the French authorities in Ch ina. He must enter his protest against this act of vandalism, which was only to be compared with the burning of the Alexandrian library and the sack of Rome by the Constable Bourbon. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said it was to be recol lected that they had to deal in this matter with O r i enta l s, and that it was necessary to strike terror into them by some such act as that referred to by the noble marquis. They owed much to the Earl of Elgin, who had made great sacri fices for the honour of his country, and whose conduct was marked by judgment and discretion. They owed the glorious result in China to the exertions of their brave army and nay", and the compliment now paid them was what they justly merited. The vote of thanks was then agreed to, and the house adjourned at seven o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS.--(YESTERDAY.) The SPEA.XER took the chair at four o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The standing orders were declared to have been com plied with in the case of several railway and other bills. CALEDONIAN, EDINBURGH AND GLASGOW, AND SCOTTISH CENTRAL RAILWAYS BILL. Mr. BLACKBURN, in moving the second reading of this bill, said that he was the chairman of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railer ay, which was one of the undertakings proposed to be amalgamated. This bill had been intro duced for the first time last session, and after a most patient hearing from the committee to which it was re ferred, it was rejected on the ground that sufficient public benefit would not be realised by the bill to jus tify its adoption. The Opposition to the bill proceeded from the Town Council of Edinburgh and Glas gow, and other places, and no less than 77 petitions had been presented against it, while there was no similar de monstration in its favour. Objections were made to the present bill on the ground that it contained the same fea tures as that introduced last session. He contended that the objections were unfounded, as the bill was materially altered from that of its predecessor, and said no case had been made out against the bill being referred to a select committee. Mr. BLACK opposed the second reading, as the real object of the bill was to monopolise the whole of the traffic from England to the south and west of Scotland. The present bill was essentially the same as that of last year, and the committeewere sofully satisfiedas to its public inutility, that they decided against it without hearing any evidence on the'part of its opponents. Amongst the petitioners against the bill were mineral owners and proprietors of 12 railway companies in Scotland, who might naturally be supposed to be as well acquainted with their own and the national interests as the promoters of this bill. The alterations in the present measure were very trivial, and he doubted Very much whether their so-called amendments would effect any improvement. He concluded by moving that the bill be read a second time this day seven months. Mr. DALGLISH supported the amendment, and said that the whole community which would be affected by this bill were opposed to it. He objected to the bill also on the general principle that he was opposed to amalgamation. Mr. B. COCHRANE, as one of the proprietors residing on the line of the proposed railway, bore testimony to the fact that the opinions of all the proprietors on that line were not adverse to this bill. Mr. INGHAM, as one of the members of the committee who rejected the bill, stated that it appeared to the com mercial public in Scotland that it would be more conducive to commercial interests if there were competition, instead of the whole traffic being surrendered into the hands of three amalgamated companies. Colonel SYKES said that the real question in reference to this measure was whether or not the public in Scotland should be left at the mercy of a monopoly. He had voted against the original measure, because it surrendered the public into the hands of a monopoly, and for the same rea son he would vote against the present measure. No less than C. 5,000 was expended in opposing the bill of last ression, which was a proof of its unpopularity. Sir J. J. FERGUSON said there were advantages offered to the public in this bill, such as the rates, which entitled it to be carefully considered before its rejection. He therefore supported the motion. The LORD-ADVOCATE said that the question at issue in reference to this bill had been fairly tried last ses sion, and the bill had been decided against on its merits. lie thought the house should affirm the principle that they would not sanction the opponents of a bill being put• yearly to 'the expense of contesting it, if the promoters thought fit to introduce it annually. He must, therefore, oppose the second reading of this bill. Mr. CAIRD said the bill had been brought before the house seven times, and under the circumstances he must oppose the present motion. Mr. HADFIELD supported the bill, and wished to know whether the opposition was authorised by Government. Mr. M. GIBSON said that the bill had been under the consideration of the Board of Trade, and they did not think there was anything in regard to it that justified the de parture from the usual practice of making any special re port, but left its merits to be decided on by the house. Mr. MASSEY said that no ease had been made out to induce him to withhold his assent to the bill being referred to a select committee. After a few words from Mr. BLACKBURN the house divided, when there appeared, For the motion Against Majority The bill was then read a second time. ' PRIVATE BILLS. Th© East India Irrigation and Canal Railway Bill was 'withdrawn. Several private bills were read a first time. NAVAL ADMINISTRATION. Sit J. PAKINGTON gave notice that on an early day be would move for a select committee to inquire into the constitution of the Board of Admiralty, and to inquire also whether some mode might not be devised more efficient than the present for the administration of naval affairs. DRAINAGE OF LAND, &c. Sir J. SHELLEY asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether it was the intention of the Government to introduce any measures for further facili tating the drainage of lands by the improvement of outfalls and arterial channels ? Sir G. C. LEWIS said he believed that considerable in terest existed on the subject, and a bill was in preparation, which would be laid before the house on an early day. THE MILITARY AND CONSTABULARY AT LONDONDERRY. Mr. M'CORMICK inquired of the Chief Secretary for Ireland by whose advice and recommendation a large number of the military and constabulary force were sent into the city and county of Londonderry, on or about the 18th of December last ; and whether any correspondence or documents. upon which such orders were made were in existence, and would be produced. Mr. CARDWELL said that in sending troops and con stabulary to Londonderry the Government acted on their own responsibility. SCHOOLMASTERS IN SCOTLAND, &c. Mr. STIRLIRG asked the Lord-Advocate if he pro posed to introduce in the present session any bill for the relief of the parochial schoolmasters of Scotland, whose salaries had been diminished by the expiry of the late Act. The LORD-ADVOCATE said ho had submitted the matter to the consideration of the Government, but he could not say what would be the nature of the bill, or when it would be introduced. VAGRANCY, &c. (SCOTLAND). In answer to Sir S. FERCRISSON, The LORD-ADVOCATE said that ho had a bill in pro- Paration en these subjects, and he took that opportunity of a , tik ,ting that h o was a l s o p re p are d t o i n t ro d uce a bill on the of the fisheries in Scotland. Oa the' that:it:moth:4mi NEW WRIT. issn of Mr . BRAND a writ was ordered to be 6n of a member of Parliament in tto place of Sir Jou, Owe n , .. n Bart., deceased. THE ARMY 4NTILE NAVY ENGAGED IN TIE CIIINESE WAR. Lord PALMERsto N ____ I sir, to perform on e o f th e most agreeable duti es that eat risefall to the 14 of a member of this house, and in doing that ,'I call upo n th e h ouse a l so to perform one of those fun c tions t swhich must be m os t gra tifying to them, I mean t( m ovehat the th an k s o f th i s house be given to a number of brave and g a ll ant office lt f great difficulty the army and navy who have perf ormed brilliant a A; tinguished services under circumstanc es of - an d —s and attended with great and remarkable hear.) The operatio ns to which I ref er took pi se e e . i ii ( n ilea , r ? last year. They we re, in the first p lace, p erfo rmed by rco—t'llia paratively small force in one of t he most distant parts of il; globe. They were performed by a force which was perhaps beater equipped than any that ever left the shores of this or say ether country. There WAO nothing wanting on the part of those who, in this country, sent out that portion of their forces employed in China, nor on the part of those in the Government of India, whocontributed theirpropo on very materially towards the success of the cperat ns of the army and navy. The operations of the force were con ducted with the utmost possible skill, gallantr and intre pidity. I may say there was not a mistake made in the whole course of those operations. (Elear, ho I ) There was no deficiency in any of the arrangements, either of provid ing the force with all those things which were necessary in transporting it from place to placn, or in those naval and military operations which it was called upon to perform. (Hear, hear.) There was also, lam glad to say, the most perfect harmony between the British and French forces. (Hear, hear.) The difficulties were great, and they were overcome with rapidity. The period, too, during which they were accomplished was comparatively short, and what they undertook they accomplished without a single check. (Hear, hear.) It is well known that the war in China arose in the refusal on the part of the Chinese Government to ratify the treaty of Tien-tsin, which had been concluded be • tween. the Earl of Elgin and that Government in the former year. It became necessary to obtain the ratification of that treaty, and the French and English Governments both concurred in that necessity, and each sent their respective forces to enforce the treaty. But both Govemmentsresorted in the first place to persuasion through their representatives before they had recourse to extreme measures. They pro posed to the Chinese Government to reconsider its decision, and to fulfil the obligations they had contracted ; and it was not until it was evident that every effort of negotiation had failed, and until it was evident that nothing but force would obtain the ratification of the engagements of the treaty that force was resorted to. It was at the beginning of May that the force assembled at Hong Kong, and in the beginning of June they lett that port for their destination, which they reached at the end of June. It was not, however, until the 26th of July that everything was ready. I believe that the French suffered by shipwreck and tempest some loss of their supplies, and it was necessary to wait until those losses were made good. On the Ist of August the allied forces landed at Peih-Tang, at the mouthof the river, an operation which was performed with the greatest possible skill. The troops had to wade through a great extent of mud, up to their knees, before they could reach dry land ; and even when they got there it was found that there was a position which might have been fortified. There came on the next day very heavy rains, which rendered it impossible for them to advance and attack those forts. It was very important indeed that those forts should be taken. On their march from Peih-Tang they met with forts, which proved to be an entrenched Chinese camp, and on the 14tH of August they attacked and took the position, and captured 400 guns, overcoming at the same time all difficulties. On the 21st of August they performed the most brilliant operations in the capture of Chinese forts, and it was but justice due to the Chinese to say that they defended themselves with great bravery. Their position was strong and furnished with a great num ber of guns and stockades and palisades, and it was not taken without the loss of a great number of men to the allies, and the loss also on the part of the Chinese was very great. On the 20th of August the yet unsurrendered places were attacked by storm, and the forts surrendered. On the 6th of September the allied forces reached Tien-tsin—the place where the treaty had been concluded—and when they arrived there there were many attempts made by the Chi nese to induce the allies to enter into negotiations; but it was seen that their object was not to ratify the treaty, but to gain time. On the 9th of September the representatives of the allies advanced, and a place was marked out on which the advanced portion of the allied forces was to encamp, and arrangements were to be there made for concluding the treaty ; but on Sept. 10, when our troops arrived there, they found a vast force of Chinese established, and in far greater numbers than the forces of the allies. At that time Mr. Parkes and those associated with him went forward for the purpose of demanding explanations on this change of position. They were induced, evidently by treachery, to confide in the Chinese, and were then made prisoners, and, as is well known, those gentlemen were treated by the Chi nese—who should have afforded them protection, and in whom they confided—it is well known they were treated with the greatest injustice, and that the most barbarous cruelties ever known were inflicted upen them by the Chi nese. Well, it was on that occasion that the allies advanced and performed the most brilliant operations, taking the Chinese position; and it would be recollected that there were on that occasion 20,000 Chinese in arms, who were routed by our forces, and from whom, with our allies,we then took 75 guns. On the 21st the Chinese again attacked the allied armies and they were again defeated. The Tartar and Chinese forces were superior in numbers, and they were driven back with signal defeat, and lost on that occasion 43 guns. In the whole course of the operations the allied troops took 500 or 600 pieces of cannon. (Hear, hear.) On the 7th of October our allies advanced and occupied the Emperor's Summer Palace, and on that occasion demands were made to the Chinese authorities to deliver up imme diately the prisoners, and to surrender into the hands of the allies one of the gates of Pekin. That demand was enforced, and the result was that the Chinese agreed to the treaty of Tien-Tsin, and those prisoners who were still alive were given up to us. In the course of three days those results were accomplished without any defeat, and the result is that the treaty, with all its conditions and promised advantages, is now likely to be carried out. (Hear, hear.) But there was one event which occurred, and which nothing but the barbarous cruelties and atro cities that had been committed by the Chinese on the prisoners could justify—l mean the destruction of the Emperor's palace. It is well known—and I am not new going to put the house to the pain of the relation—that the most enormous cruelties that were ever inflicted upon men were inflicted, as I stated, by the Chinese upon the unfor tunate men whom they so treacherously made prisoners. I will not dwell upon those inhuman cruelties—cruelties the most barbarous that ever were perpetrated by man. I will not dwell upon the treachery—treachery in which was exhibited much skill—by which the Chinese hoped to take a much larger portion of the allied army, and also our ambassadors—treachery unsurpassed, because there were negotiations going on at the time for the ambassadors to go to negotiate in Pekin. When those negotiations were going on they demanded a right of escort of 1,000 men as a means of safety, and the Chinese seemed to comply, but their proceedings were only part of a much larger plan by which the Chinese Government might defeat the ob jects of the expedition. I will not dwell upon the state ment which the Chinese made when we asked them how they had treated the prisoners, and what those of them who survived stated when we asked them how they had been treated by the Chinese. The first statement of the Chinese was that they had been well treated. Nothing could be snore untrue—nothing more treacherous and barbarous than the conduct of the Chinese, and the atrocities committed by them; but the conduct of the allied forces was such as showed that such atrocities could not be committed on our people with impunity. (Hear, hear.) It was necessary that the Chinese should be made to suffer for such atrocities; but at the same time, not in a similar spirit. Had Pekin been stormed, every one might have reason to lament the bloodshed that would ensue ; and it was therefore thought by General Grant—and I think justly thought—that the atrocities committed by the Chinese authorities were not inflicted by the will and desire of the Chinese people. An hon. friend asked me if the French General agreed to the course which we proposed to pursue on that occasion. Well, then, I may say that the French General did not agree; but the French forces advanced, and the General's troops, as I have stated, took possession of and occupied the Emperor's palace. But Lord Elgin stated that notwith standing that, the French General did not decline to take any part in the operations in conjunction with our forces. (Hear, hear.) On the contrary, he said it was his duty, and I am happy to say that the allied forces operated together successfully. (Hear, hear.) In the first place, then, lam happy to say that our joint operations were successful; and in the next place, the lesson which we have taught the Emperor of China and his people will not, I hope, be lost upon them. In, a commercial point of view, nothing can be of greater importance than oar success in opening up that great•country not only in its ports, but in its rivers and inte rior, to the enterprise of the people of this country—(hear, hear)—and in such a manner as will compensate for what has occurred. Their great river, Yang-Tis-Kyang, is now opened up to our shipping. (Hear, hear.) I have also great satisfaction in finding that there were in the expedi tion officers of our army and navy who proved themselves, by their great bravery and brilliant achievements worthy of those who had gone before them, and who had left them such glorious examples for imitation—(hear, hear, and cheers)—and that they proved themselves in every way worthy of the country that sent them out. (Cheers and hear, hear.) Many gallant menhav have been nlnestt in h ex pedition. We find a mong t officerse the the many g name of Hope, who had already distinguished himself in the Peninsular war. (Hear, hear.) W e find also a name which is so associated with those officers who bore the name of Napier—(hear, hear)—a name which is distinguished in our military and naval annals. I know not whether the gallant officer to whom I allude is allied to those great men whose names are distinguished in the history of our coun try, but I trust that the mention of his name, associated with his valour, will be sufficient to entitlehhu t o th e thanks of this house. (Hear, hear.) It would be trespassing too long on the house were I to recount all the names of the cs on that ocea sgiaolnl a ; n t t h o e fi r l C s e e r r s v w i c h e s o aredistinguished n th th e e m a s n el n v als of their coun try's greatness. (Hear, hear.) We have also the satisfac tion of knowing that in an expedition in a remote part of the globe, accompanied by great difficulties, we have had two great nations working side by side, fighting together in one common cause, and carrying out those operations in the most perfect harmony and accord, and without any of those dissensions too frequently found prevailing in the operations of forces, whether naval or military, belonging to different nations. (Hear, hear.) I trust it may be long before the forces of England and Franco will go info action in any other way than side by side, for the common interest and for the common glory of the two countries, and for ob jects honourable alike to the one and the other. (Hear, hear.) I will not trespass longer on the attention of the house, but move the resolutions which I have to propose, viz. : " That the thanks of this house be given to Lieutenant- General Sir Hope Grant, K.C.8., Vice-Admiral Sir James K.C.8., Major-General Sir John Michell, K.C.8., Major-General Sir Robert Napier, K.C.8., Rear-Admiral L ewilaobiae Jones, C. 8., for the distinguished skill, zeal, and intrepidity with which they conducted the combined J • THE SUN, LONDON, oPeratichas in tiae north of China; which terminated in the rapture of Pekin, whereby ah honotitable peace has been obtained on the terms proposed by her Majesty and het ally the Emperor of the French. " That the thanks of this house be given to the officers of the Army, Navy, and the Royal Marines, including her Majesty's Indian forces, both Ruropean and native, for the energy and gallantry with which they executed the services I they were called upon to perform. " That this holise doth acknowledge and highly approve the gallantry, discipline, and uniform courage displayed by the petty officers, noncommissioned officers, and men of the Navy, Army, Royal Marines, and her Majesty's Indian forces, European and native, and the cordial good feeling which animated the united force, and that the same be communicated to them by the commanders of the several ships and corps, who are respectfully desired to thank them for their gallant and steadfast behaviour." Mr. DISRAELI—Sir, I have the honour accorded to me to second the motion of the noble lord. The noble lord has given such a clear and animated narrative of the suc cessful operations in China that it is unnecessary for me to dwell upon them, and indeed it would be presumptuous for me to do so. It is enough that we all feel that a great mili tary operation has been achieved with power and precision, with indomitable bravery, and irresistible perseverance. The army and navy of England have more than once ex pressed their conviction that one of their greatest rewards is to receive the thanks of Parliament ; and I can say for myself, and I hope for the house also, that we consider it one of our greatest privileges to offer the expression of our ' thanks and admiration for their achievements. (Hear, hear.) Although on the events which have occurred in China, it is impossible to refer to any of those great military exploits, or to any of those immortal deeds which were ac.• complished on those great fields, that posterity hereafter will look to with varied feelings of wonder and admiration ; yet, nevertheless, looked at in a military sense, and having regard to military considerations, there is one view of the case the importance of which cannot be overstated, and that is, that in a remote part of the world, and in a strange climate, we have found the health of our troops so admir ably preserved. (Cheers.) I attribute this to our now per fect organisation, applying all those discoveries and re sources of modern science to the maintenance of the health and the equipment of our troops, which has been so long desired and sought for. And if, as I believe, this is a cir cumstance not of an exceptional character, we have the satisfaction of feeling that, so far as this subject is con cerned, we have already mitigated one of the miseries of war. The noble lord has touched upon the singularity of such great results having, in such a distant part of the world, been achieved with so small a body of men, and at such comparatively small sacrifice. Indeed, I think this is a subject which well deserves.the consideration of the house. A handful of men, not, I believe, amounting to the number who followed Zenophon, have waged war in a great coun try at nearly the remotest part of the globe, and have dic tated a peace in the ancient capital of a nation which num bers more than one third of the whole population of the world. (Cheers.) This is not the first occasion during the last quarter of a century that mankind have been impressed with the immense influence which Europe is exercising over the rest of the world. This is not the first occurrence of great exploits which has proved the predominant power of that part of the globe in which it is our happiness to exist. (Hear.) But, Sir, there are other considerations connected with this result which should not be, I think, absent from our thoughts. At this moment, under Providence, it is not merely this quarter of the globe, but we may say it is Wes tern Europe that commands the world. (Cheers.) If that power be so irresistible, if those means be so great, I think we all should feel that the moral responsibility of their exercise is proportionately increased in that respect. (Cheers.) Under these circumstances, that appears to me a consideration which should not be lost to the councils of the Sovereign, and which may blend advantageously even with the triumphant gratitude of Parliament. For the distinguished zeal by which these operations have been con ducted, I Leg, sir, to second the resolutions. (Cheers.) Mr. V. SCTJLLY said that he was not going to interfere with the harmony of the vote of thanks which had just been proposed ; but as he had placed a notice of motion on the paper, he wished to call attention to the published statements that the Emperor of China's Summer Palace and its contents had been ruthlessly looted and destroyed by the English and ;;French forces. From the blue book on the affairs of China he could not make out whether this wilful act of destruction had taken place with the consent of the French Ambassador. The burning of the Emperor's Summer Palace appeared to him to have been an act of Vandalism and barbarism without precedent in ancient or modern history. It was not the fact that the French ab stained from destroying the palace, because they had pre viously obtained their revenge by looting and gutting the palace, and in confirmation of this view he read an extract from a despatch written by a French general, which ap peared in the Ifoniteur of Jan. 2. He did not want to read any homilies to the house or come forward as a humanita rian, but if Baron Gros had done what he (Mr. Scully) complained of, then his acts would be criticised by the noble mover of the resolution as inconsistent with civilisa tion and the advanced spirit of the age. There were plain and obvious comments that might be made if he were dis posed to indulge inhostile criticism. Ho would merely say non meus hie. sermo—the language was that of Byron : " Let Eratostratus and Elgin shine, In many a branding page and burning line." [Much merriment was here excited in consequence of the hon. gentleman not being able to proceed with the quota • Eon.] Well, he would finish with a quotation from a poet with which he was more familiar : " The next sun's ray shall melt away, The tracks on the snow where the false lord came. But none shall see the day When the cloud shall pass away, Which that dark hour left on England's fame." (Laughter.) Mr. WHITE entirely concurred in the resolutions vot ing the thanks of the house to the gallant officers engaged in the Chinese expedition. (Hear.) Sir J. ELPHINSTONE said it would be ungracious on an occasion like this to refuse a unanimous vote of thanks to those engaged in the Chinese campaign. (Hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL said the hon. member for Cork seemed to think that the services of Irishmen were over looked in the motion, for that many of them would appear in the accounts of the killed and wounded. No one could doubt of that, but the motion included all British subjects engaged in the struggle. (Hear.) The ambuscade into which Europeans were entrapped on their way to Pekin was of the most barbarous character. Men who were en gaged for the very purpose of bringing about a peace and assisting in concluding a treaty, were surprised and treated in such an inhuman manner that several of them lost their lives. Lord Elgin considered in what way he should punish a crime of that nature, and came to the conclusion that if he demanded the Chinese authorities to give up the subor dinates who actually inflicted those barbarities on the cap tives, the parties really guilty would escape. (Hear.) Under these circumstances, and with the concurrence of Sir H. Grant, Lord Elgin decided on bringing the punishment home to the Emperor of China by the destruction of his palace. This course was the one most likely to produce a great moral effect, not only on the Emperor himself, but also on his subjects. The objections of Gen. Montauban to this course was not that the punishment should not be in flicted, but that it might so inspire the Chinese with terror that the execution of the treaty might be delayed. Events, however, proved that Lord Elgin was correct, and that owing to the course which he pursued much more favour able terms were obtained from the Chinese. (Hear.) As to the families of those who had suffered, it had never been usual to ask for indemnity in such cases. The gal lantry and good conduct of the army and navy on the occa sion were beyond all praise—(hear)—and so far from its being true that the articles of the treaty were not known in the south of China, there was a despatch from the consul at Canton stating that the treaty was published there, that trade had commenced in accordance with the tariff, and was proceeding most satisfactorily. The votes were then read and agreed to seriatim. BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this bill, Mr. ROEBUCK said the introduction of this bill had been the occasion for the most indiscriminate eulogy of it ; but he would raise his voice against it. They were bid that this bill was to settle the question, but it would not do so. The Attorney-General complained of the present sys tem, that it was wanting in uniformity, that it was expen sive, and that the difference between insolvency and bank ruptcy was the opprobrium of the English law on the sub ject. But what had he done in the present bill ? As to the want of uniformity, arising from there being five dif ferent commissioners, each able to give a different decision, the Attorney-General forgot to inform the house that there was an appeal to the Lords Justices in any case where the decision of the commissioner was questioned, and he pro- posed to meet the case by appointing a chief judge in order to settle the differences in these courts. But what could the new judge do that the Lords Justices could not do? It would ba simply an additional expense without being an ad ditional advantage. There were causes of expenditure in thesecourts on which the Attorney-General had not put his finger, viz., the fees which did not go to the officers of the court, but which were paid into a fund in that court. In no one particular would this bill diminish the expenses of the courts, and as to the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency, the bill did not touch it at all. The bill was an objectionable alteration of the law without being a reform of it; on the contrary, it made it more expensive, and would benefit no one except the attorneys. Mr. MOFFATT supported the bill, because it would de crease the expense, and. greatly simplify and improve the procedure. Mr. BOVILL said . that it would have been much bettor to have introduced a measure which at once amended and consolidated the law. There was the bill of last session, which was admirably adapted for the purpose, and there was also the bill of the member for Newcastle. He should be sorry to appear to oppose the bill, but he regretted its introduction in its present shape. He objected to the officers being retained at their full salaries when their offices were about to be abolished, and the country being saddled with an enormous expenditure. The commissioners were to be retained, and the messengers, who wero displaced by last year's bill, were still to be retained. Indeed, the only dif ference in the constitution of the Bankruptcy Court from what it now was consisted in the appointment of an addi tional commissioner, at a salary of £5,000 a-year. With respect to the official assignees, be proposed to continue FRIDAY EVENING, them also, but with the exception that a creditor's assignee was to audit their accounts, and were to collect all debts over £lO, they remained in the same position. Debts under £lO were in future to be got by the official assignees. lie believed that so stringent were the clauses of the bill, that no person would be found to undertake the office of credi tor's assignee. There were, no doubt, very many valuable provisions in this bill, but he contended that, as it was the principal measure of the session, it ought to be much more comprehensive. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that when, last year, he brought in a bill which consolidated the old law, with various suggestions and improvements, it was said by hon. gentlemen, " What a huge production It cannot be understood or properly gone through." Well, the bill he brought in this year embodied all that was new in the old ; and: though it did not contain any portion, of the old law, yet it incorporated every suggestion involving the alterations contained in the measure of last year. But inas_ much as ho did in the last session say, with unnecessary candour, that it could not be read or thoroughly understood, and therefore not properly discussed, ho thought it better to insure its passing this session, by carefully extracting from that measure all that was new, and so far from its being less valuable, though not so voluminous, in his opi nion it was of greater value. (Hear.) At all events, if it were not so, all he could say was, that ho had thrown away weeks and months of labour in vain. (Hear.) He did not complain of the course pursued by the hon. and learned member for Sheffield. The objections urged by the hon. and learned members for Sheffield and Guildford were, in fact, based upon an imperfect knowledge of the provisions of the bill, or at best upon slender information. It had been said, for instance, that this was an attorney's bill, but all he could say in reply was, that the bill had the approval of the commercial body, and of none more than the consti tuency represented by the hon. and learned gentleman. It was true that the custody and control of funds were en trusted to solicitors, under the superintendence of the offi cial assignees; but it was at the same time placed under such regulations as would ensure the prompt payment into the bank and the speedy distribution among the creditors of the assets when collected. He would admit that there were many parts of the bill which could be amended, and when they got into committee he would invite the most full and free discussion on the part of his hon. and learned friends on both sides of the house, as well as of the mem bers connected with commerce. His great object was to make the measure as effective as possible, and at the same time to pass it without any unnecessary delay. He trusted the house would agree to the second reading, and proceed with the bill in detail as early as possible. The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Monday next. BANK OF ENGLAND PAYMENT BILL. This bill was read a second time. PAROCHIAL ASSESSMENTS BILL. This bill was also read a sead a second time. RED SEA. AND INDIA TELEGRAPH COM PANY BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this bill, Mr. %VYLD said he understood it was the intention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to refer it to a select com mittee. He could not understand why that course should be taken, but he hoped that if it were so referred the select committee would have power to investigate all the facts connected with the contract. If he was rightly informed, the company meant, after saddling the country with a bur den equivalent to the interest of a million of Consols for 50 years, to abandon the undertaking altogether, and leave their cables in the sea, useless either to this country or India. Mr. CONINGHAM said he was not prepared to agree to the line proposed for the Red Sea Telegraph; and it would be monstrous to call upon the public to pay their money for such a scheme. The country ought not to be exposed to lose £Boo,oooby this scheme, which was marked with fraud ; and he (Mr. Coningham) would, for one, if he even stood alone, divide the house on the question. Mr. CRAWFORD said his hon. friend (Mr. Coning ham) had stated that Mr. Gisborne had failed in his pre vious efforts ; but his hon. friend was not, in his opinion, justified, however that might be, in his place in Parlia ment, in branding Mr. Gisborne with fraud. (Hear, hear.) If his hon. friend thought so, he ought to rise and state in a straightforward way what the nature of the imputed fraud was. With respect to the failure of the Red Sea Telegraph, he did not think that they would be able, by aty inquiry, to ascertain it satisfactorily. In his opinion, the science connected with the laying of deep-sea tele. , graphs was not sufficiently developed when the Rea Sea Telegraph was laid down as to ensure its success. Mr. DISRAELI said it was desirable to shorten discus sions of this kind. With regard to what had taken place, nothing he might say was ever better known than the terms upon which the late Government entered into the contract, and he believed the hen. gentleman who had just addressed the house was well aware of that. But he (Mr. Disraeli) could say from his own experience that nothing was better known to the members of this house than the impending contract, and nothing was more known to the members of the city of London or to the public. And although he should not now touch upon the highebt, or rather the lowest depths of hypocrisy that marked some men's pro ceedings in the matter, still he must say now that this con tract was gone into with the full knowledge of the members of the city of London. And looking at what had taken place in India, had that contract not been entered into, it was the intention of the late Government to have decided that the contract would be taken up by the Government on the part of the country, and he thought it was the duty of any Government to carry such a proposition into effect. (Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was sorry that the right hon. gentleman had by his observations somewhat widened the sphere of the discussion. He would not follow him in all his observations, but he might say that the Government were, in his opinion, in the present stage of the proceedings warranted in stepping in and taking the matter up. He would not now enter into a dis cussion of what the expenditure had been, or what it might be; but he must say that much depended upon their keep ing perfect faith with the public and the company, and their intention was to give effect as far as could be to the contract. All these matters were legitimate subjects for the cognisance of Parliament, but were entirely apart from the consideration before them. Those persons who had in vested their money in this undertaking were not only entirely dependent on the house giving effect to the arrangement that had been made, but on their doing it with the utmost pos sible despatch. To mix this up with larger questions would create the utmost possible dissatisfaction out of doors, and would raise a suspicion that Parliament was seeking for some occasion to elude the fulfilment of the contract. Ile trusted that the bill would be allowed to pass the second reading without a division. In principle be entirely agreed with the remarks of Mr. Ayrton. If it were thought desirable to examine into the matter to which he had called attention, there was no indisposition on the part of the Government to initiate or to promote that examination. They ought to wait until they appointed a committee. He did not agree with Mr. Disraeli that no measure had been better understood by the members of the house than the bill of ISSB. The bill was then read a second time, and was ordered to be referred to a select committee. CONSOLIDATION OF THE CRIMINAL STATUTE LAW. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL moved to introduce the following bills :—Bill to consolidate and amend the statute laws of England and Ireland relating to offences against the person ; bill to consolidate and amend the statute law of England and Ireland relating to malicious injuries to pro perty ; bill to consolidate and amend the statute law of England and Ireland relating to larceny and other similar offences; bill to consolidate and amend the statute law of England and Ireland relating to indictable offences by forgery; bill to consolidate and amend the statute law of the United KinAom against offences relating to the coin; bill to consolidate and amend the statute law of England and Ireland relating to accessories to and abettors of in dictable offences; bill to repeal certain enactments which have been consolidated in several acts of the present session relating to indictable offences and other matters. Towards the close of last session the whole of those bills had come down from the other house; they were read a second time, but there was not opportunity to give them due consideration. At the same time it was intimated that the bills would be introduced in this house early this session. The bills were seven in number, and their general object was to consoli date and assimilate the statute law in England, Scotland, and Ireland, as it bore upon crime. One of those bills was simply a bill to repeal other acts, and another related merely to accessories and abettors. It was not proposed to interfere in any way with the common law. but to deal only with that which depended on statutes. As to the propriety of the consolidation of the statute law generally, there was but one opinion among those who had applied their minds to the subject, however they might differ as to the means of effecting this object. (Hear.) To attempt to consolidate the common law would be to enter on very debateable ground. Reference to the titles of the five bills would show that they had a very wide application and effected a great reform. The bulk of our criminal law for many years had been the crea ture of statute. As society advanced it was necessary to enact punishments for fresh offences. It was proposed by these bills not merely to consolidate, but to assimilate. The house would probably think this a wise object; at the same time there was such differences between the two peoples of England and Ireland and their condition, that it was impossible to attempt general assimilation. The first steps necessary were consolidation and assimilation in the statute book, and next and nearly important came expurgEo tion. Then came the operations which were necessary to place the statute book in a satisfactory condition. Consoli dation then being the first step, they must proceed with it subject by subject. The statutes relating to crime were mos, conveniently consolidated, so that the house must admit that all the steps already taken had been in the right diree tibn. Suppose the present bills to become law, they will feral part of the system of consolidation which was com menced by the late Sir R. Peel. Various commissions had been issued on the subject. The first was in 183 3—nearly 30 years ago ; and that commission issued three reports. la 1837 a similar commission was appointed and Published four reports ; and in 1845 there was another commission, which published four reports also. These commissioners were to take note of the labours of their predecessors, and in 1849 FEBRUARY 15, .1861. another commission was issued, who were also to consider the statute law. It appeared from this that between 1833 and 1819 there were four commissions issuing four reports. Then came the Statute Law Commission of 1854, which was of much wider scope, namely, to consider both the statute and the criminal law. Bills prepared by this commission were introduced in 1856 into the House of Lords by Lord Cranworth, but were lost in consequence of the advanced period of the session. The present bills had been prepared after a careful examination of all the previous reports and measures. In these bills they had attempted to carry out the principle of assimilation much further than before. Still there was a limit to that principle beyond which it was inexpedient to go. He now came to the year 1858, and he might say that this not being a party measure, or adopted exclusively by one or the other side of the house, it had been taken up by the Government of Lord Derby with a view of extending the principle of assimilation still further than had beenrecommended by the commissioners of 1857. Those bills fell through ; but since that a gentleman, a member of this house, Mr. Whiteside, had taken up and still further amended the bills of Sir F. Kelly. Tho provisions of these bills were mainly the same as those he now asked leave to introduce, but they had undergone the closest scrutiny and examination. It now became his duty to ask leave of the house for their introduction. He wished further to say that, as these bills were introduced originally in the House of Lords, infliction of the punishment of death was proposed in three cases only—viz., those of offences against the per son, murder, and poisoning with intent to mnrder. Clauses were afterwards introduced by which the punishment of death was to be inflicted in three other cases—those of at tempting life by blowing up houses with gunpowder, by, setting fire to houses, and by setting fire to ships. These amendments he had retained in the present bill. Another question to which he wished to draw attention was the punishment of whipping. The limit fixed by the former bills for the infliction of this punishment was the age of 18. These clauses he had loft as they stood, and it would be competent to any hon. member to take the opinion of the house on the matter. The course he proposed to adopt was to transfer all the bills to a select committee. The house would probably be of opinion that the detailed labour of going through all these bills could be better accomplished in a select committee than in a committee of the whole house. After all that had been done towards preparing for this consolidation of the law the various measures intro • duced during the last 30 years, it might not be too much to ask the house, when the bills should have gone through the select committee, not indeed to take them on trust, but to look upon them with a confident persuasion that no mate rial change, or at all events no injurious change, was intro duced by them into the law of either England or of Ireland or into its application or mode of' administration. He con cluded by moving for leave to bring in the bill. Mr. M'MAHON said the house would readily acquiesce in the suggestion to refer these bills to a select committee, in which their provisions should be carefully examined, but he thought the inquiry ought not to be confined to these six or seven bills which constituted but a small and insufficient measure, that would not reduce the bulk of the statutes, or simplify the knowledge of the criminal law. The law of England, Ireland, and Scotland should be assimilated toge ther, so as to have but' one system of criminal law for the whole United Kingdom. In Scotland especially the law was in a barbarous condition ; there was no habeas corpus act there, though a prisoner might demand his discharge after 150 days if the public prosecutor did not bring him to trial within that time. The judges in Scotland claimed the power of adapting the law, at their own discretion, to meet any new offences; and a man might be hanged in Scotland by the odd man in a jury of 15. Now he did not see why we should not have a perfect code for the United Kingdom to be called the Victoria Code, showing how, from the time when amen was taken into custody on a charge of commit ting any offence, to the time of his final acquittal or pun • ishment, our law afforded every possible security that a re gard for truth and justice, and for the lives and liberties of the Queen's subjects could require. We should be as proud of such a code as another nation of its Napoleon Code, which had produced such important effects in Europe. Leave was then given to bring in the bills. PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION. (ST. ALBANS AND SUDBURY.) Sir G. C. LEWIS, in moving for leave to bring in a bill to assign the seats forfeited by the disfranchisement of the boroughs of St. Albans and Sudbury, said that the bill which he was going to bring in was not a large measure of reform—(a laugh)—yet, as it was a bill that dealt with four seats in that house, it was a measure of considerable importance, and would, he was sure, receive the deliberate attention of members of that house. The bill was founded upon the disfranchisement of the borough of St. Albans, which took place in 1844, and of the borough of Sudbury, which occurred in 1852. The reason why these seats had not been previously dealt with was, that it was deemed net desirable to do so until a Government measure of Reform was introduced into that house. The house was aware that last session a bill was introduced into that house by the Government upon the subject of Reform, which dealt with the four seats in question. That bill, however, not receiving the sanction of the house, fell to the ground. As the Government had determined not to bring in any measure of Reform this session, he thought it was desirable that a bill should be brought in which had for its s ijs e t- the disposition of the four seats tints in abeyance. He had no doubt that, when the bill went into committee, a great many suggestions would be made by hon. gentle men, recommending a different disposition of the seats from that which the Government intended to propose ; but he had no doubt that the proposal of the Government would be better than any that could be suggested. Of the four vacant seats, he proposed to give two of them to counties, as was proposed in the bill of last session—one to the West Riding of Yorkshire and one to South Lan cashire. The population of the West Riding of York shire, unrepresented, amounted to 1,315,891 persons, and that of South Lancashire to 1,597,000 persons. Ho pro posed that Chelsea and Kensington should be united into ono borough, and that they should have one seat given to them. (Hear, hear.) To that proposition many gentlemen would perhaps entertain objections. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Supposing that the metro polis had at present a sufficient number of members— (hear, hear)—and that it was already sufficiently and efficiently represented—(hear, hear)--they would pro bably say that the house ought to give the disposable seats to some rural borough. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Well, that was a matter which was open for the considera tion of the house in committee, and the opinion of the house might in that stage bo taken upon the subject. (Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches.) Nevertheless, he would be prepared to recommend the arrangement which he now pro. posed. The parish of Chelsea at the last census contained a population of 56,558, and the parish of Kensington at that time contained a population of 41,053. Both these parishes had since very much increased iu their population. But it might be said that it could be proved, although Chelsea and Kensington taken together form a large popu lation, London, of which they formed part, had already suf ficient members, and those parishes were already sufficiently represented. Now let them see what was the population of London at the present time. He had put himself in corn • munication with the Registrar• General, and supposing the population to have increased in the same ratio within the last ten years that it had in the ten years preceding, it would be now 2,864,000. According to the last census the entire population of Scotland was only 2,862,000, which was rather less than what was now the statement of the population of London. (Hear, hear.) Therefore, whether they looked at the population of those two parishes taken alone, or whether they looked at the population of the me tropolis, it was quite clear to his mind that they were en titled to a seat. (Hear, hear.) Ho therefore proposed to give them one, and he proposed to give the other disposable scat to the town of Birkenhead. It was not, on the one hand, like Birmingham or Manchester, or other places he might name, a great manufacturing district; but it was, on the other hand, a place of great commercial and trading enterprise. At the last census, its population was 24,210, but it had considerably increased since that time. That was the population at the last census. It might be said by those who took a different view on the subject, that, " If you disfranchise St. Albans, you ought to assign the vacant seats in the rural districts." (Hear, hear, from the country gentlemen on tho Opposition benches.) But what were the populations of some of the towns ? Birken head had 24,000, Staleybridge 20,000, Burnley 20,000, and Gravesend 16,000. That would be the principle upon which some would lay down that the representation ought to be given; but he could not help thinking that the recommen dation which he laid before the house was the preferable one. These were the views of the Government, and he hoped they would meet with the fair and reasonable consi deration to which they were entitled. (Hear.) Mr. BENTINCK did not wish, at that late hour, to go at any length into this question. But the right hon. baronet had told them that the Government view of the subject was most important. Now, he (Mr. Bentinck) confessed that, after having listened most attentively to the right hon. ba ronet, he was totally at a loss to understand the principles upon which he proposed to dispose of the vacant seats. If he understood the right hon. gentleman rightly, he based his argument upon figures ; but he seemed to have totally lost sight of the real merits of the case. Let them look at the question, as one of figures, upon which he understood the right hon. baronet to rest it. Now, he would undertake to show the right hon. gentleman and the house, if he un dertook to rest his case upon figures, that every disposable seat—even if there were 130 or 140 disposable seats—ought to be given to the rural counties in England. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition, and cries of " Oh, oh," from the Mi nisterial side of the house.) llon. gentlemen might laugh and cry " Oh," but he would undertake to prove what he had just recommended, and he maintained that if they were to take figures as the standard to go by, and to calculate upon, every disposable seat should be given to the rural counties. He believed it was unnecessary for him to refer to the right hon. baronet, who so ably distinguished himself in finance, to prove to him that taxation and representation, to which the right hon. baronet had referred, were con vertible terms. As a matter of perfect justice in a case referring. to the representation of the country, and in a matter of figures, they were bound to deal with this ques tion in a spirit of perfect justice. The right hon. baronet had given no sound reason for the course which ho pro posed ; but he (Mr. Bentinck) would ask the house to try the question fairly, and not t 9 deal with it open, the ciples laid down by the right lion. gentleman. He must enter his protest against the manner in which the Govern ment treated this question. It seemed to be assumed, when the redistribution of seats was considered, that the country was nothing and the large towns everything. He had no objection to our commercial emporiums having their fair share of the representation, but he objected to their having a monopoly. Mr. STIRLING wished to urge upon the house the position of a constituency which he thought had peculiar claims to consideration. Ho meant the Universities of Scotland. The Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and Dublin were represented, while the Scottish Universities did not possess that privilege. A few years ago it might have been said that they did not possess a university con stituency, but three years ago the late Government had remedied that defect, and introduced reforms which had proved, and would continue to prove a great boon to that country under the operation of the Scottish Universities Act. Though it had come into full play within the last few months, they had now an aggregate university consti tuency in Scotland of 3,301, a number which was daily in creasing. The constituency of the University of Cambridge was 4,566, that of the University of Oxford 3,623, and that of Dublin 1,780. The Scottish Universities therefore had already a constituency about twice as large as Dublin, nearly as large as Oxford, and he had not doubt it would be soon equal to the constituency of Cambridge. One of the great questions considered last year in connexion with the Reform Bill was how to give the intelligence of the country a larger share in the representation without basing the qualification on property to the extent hitherto done. By granting representation to the Scottish universities they would to some extent enter upon a solution of that problem. They would give the franchise to a number of educated young men, who would highly value the privilege, and who for some years might not possess the property qualification. They were at the same time not confined to any one class of the community, but fairly drawn from all cla'sses. He hoped the right hon. gentleman would give time to the public to consider this question in all its bearings, and the public Press the opportunity for fair comment ; and he begged to state that, if no one else brought forward the subject, he should feel it to be his duty to give the house an opportunity of voting upon the propriety of the sugges tion he had made. Mr. MAGUIRE complained that though the Govern ment, in the bill of last year, gave two members to Scot land and two to Ireland, they had now changed their mind and taken no notice of either. If the hon. member brought forward a proposal in behalf of Scotland he should willingly support it. But he asked the right hon. gentleman why he threw Dublin and the county of Cork overboard, both of which were to have had an additional member by the bill of last year. The population of Cork was 600,000, that of Dublin nearly 300,000 ; they were, if anything, larger than they were last year, and he was at a loss to know on what ground the right hon. gentleman and the Government had changed their opinion and given the four members to two English boroughs and two English counties. He saw no pressing reason for an addition to the number of metropoli tan members. They were the most able—(a laugh)—the most active—(hear, hear)—the most persevering, and the most vigilant members in the house. (Hear, hear.) They possessed a fair share of eloquence and wisdom—(a laugh) —and, in his opinion, the Government would have done better to adhere to its proposal of last year. Why should Ireland have the cup which they had raised to her lip dashed down in this manner ? Why should her hopes be balked ? Mr. AYRTON said that ho should have been well con tent to allow this miserable abortion of a bill to fall still born on the table of the house without a word but for the observations of the hon. member for Norfolk. If they had great cause for dissatisfaction in the abandonment of reform on the part of the Government, they had cause for satis faction that the hon. member for Norfolk entertained such sound views on that question. He (Mr. Ayrton) had great hopes of gentlemen on the other side of the house. They had become so enlightened that they might expect to obtain from them what had been denied by the hollow friends of Parliamentary Reform. It was delightful to hear the hon. member for Norfolk say that representation and taxa tion should go together. The question was, what confi dence this assertion would give to those who paid half the taxation, but were denied any voting power ? He was de lighted to hear the hon. member for Norfolk say that if justice were done in the redistribution of seats that at least 100 seats should have to be given to the counties at the expense of the boroughs. He admitted the truth of that observation. But what was justice ? If they proceeded upon numbers as the basis of representation, the counties could not send members to the House of Commons until the county represent ation was based on numbers. When the hon. member came down to the house with a Reform Bill giving a vote to the adult millions living in the coun ties beyond the limits of the boroughs he must be the last to deny the right of representation to the counties. But where was the Conservative who proposed to give that right to counties ? At present the franchise was enjoyed in counties by two or three thousand, while the adult males might be counted by hundreds of thousands. He ventured to say that if that principle were established the hon. member far Norfolk would be able to overthrow a large amount of political intrigue. (Hear, hear, from Mr. Bentinek.) The hon. member said "Hear, hear," but where was the bill ? (Laughter.) Why had not the Conser vative Government framed a bill in accordance with the wishes expressed by the hon. member on the pleociat 0,,a -sion? Had they done so they would have immortalised themselves, and would have received the support, not only of a large majority in that house, but of the nation at large, and would have come triumphantly out of the struggle. It was certainly gratifying to the metropolitan members to be told that they were so singularly efficient, but he objected to be improved out of his own estate. (Laughter.) He did not admit they were so efficient; at all events they had not that power of numbers which, un fortunately, when questions of right were before the house, prevailed far more than eloquence or advocacy on the part of members. He did not admit the doctrine of numbers being the basis of representation, and he regretted to find a Minister of the Crown proposing a measure entirely on that ground, for ho did not consider it a fair or states manlike mode of dealing with the question. If that doc trine were affirmed the whole of the four seats ought to go to Ireland ; but the constitution of the House of Commons had been settled on a different principle—one which was well investigated at the time of the Union, and no addi tional light could now be thrown upon it. He warned Irish members in their own interest not to attempt to disturb it. The boroughs included in the right hon. gentleman's pro gramme were two of the largest unenfranchised consti tuencies existing, and therefore had the first claim to repre sentation. He expressed no opinion upon the details of the measure, but he for one protested against the attempt of the Government to escape from the performance of their great duty by presenting to the house this most trumpery bill. If such a part were to be played as the representation of this ridicules mus of the great mountain of Reform, then there was but one person qualified for the performance, and that was the noble lord the member for the city of London. It was evident that the Government had taken advantage of the known good nature of the right hon. gentleman to do the public work, and had imposed on him, he would not say service, but this very ridiculous performance. The right hon. gentleman always did his work well whatever it' might be—(hear, hear) —but ho (Mr. Ayrton) hoped that the house would not allow him to be made a convenience of on the present occasion. (Cheers and laughter.) He also hoped that the Liberal party would hold the Go vernment to the fulfilment of its duty, and not allow them to escape from it by such a contrivance as this. (Hear, hear.) They had taken office for one great purpose and that purpose they were bound to carry out and it was their duty to fulfil. They bad confederated to displace a former Government—(hear, hear)—and had succeeded, because men thought that that Government would not ful fil conscientiously their duty. They had put that forward as a ground on which they invited the Sovereign to change her Ministers. Nay, more, they might be said to have forced themselvee on their Sovereign, usurping her great prerogative, and in doing that they had been buoyed up by the popular sympathy, accorded to them because they were supposed to enter office in the performance of that duty ; but now that they had obtained office they seek to escape under the hollow pretence that a bill lull of deformities and defects which they brought forward was subject to criticism, and thus they availed themselves of its badness to be ab solved from their obligation and the performance of their duty (Hear, hear.) Therefore, there never was such a contrivance as this. The Government must learn that, as every election takes place they would lose character and credit in the country, and that if they did not face this question manfully, they will sink step by step until they slip out of office objects of universal contempt and scorn. (Cheers.) Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, wo shall not be at all swayed, as I can assure the hon. gentleman ; we are not at all daunted by the magnificent philippic which he has just delivered. (hear.) It may be well for the hon. member to misrepresent the conduct of the Government. But we do not propose this its the substitute for a general measure of Reform. We stated, I think sufficiently, the reasons why we do not think it our duty in this session to bring in what i called a great and comprehensive measure of Reform. (Hear.) Those, I think, who remember the course adopted last year by gentlemen on this side of the house—(hear, hear, and laughter from the Oprosition)—as well as by those who sit opposite, can never feel in their hearts, wh a t ever they may assume to feel, that the Government ought this session to have called on the house to spend so many hours as were spent last year, not in discussing, but in evading and shelv ing that measure—(cheers)—which was shelved as much by the professed friends of reform as by its opponents. (Laughter and cheers.) I therefore repudiate the whole of the insinuti ms of the hon. and learned gentleman as totally unfounded, and as in no degree affecting the standing and character of her Majesty's Government. (Cheers.) We have, upon mature deliberation, come to the conviction that it would not have been for the public advantage for us to have called upon Parliament in the present session to renew any long discussions on a comprehensive measure of reform. But we did think it our duty not to perinit these four seats to remain vacant any longer. The reason no arrangement was proposed before is, that from year to year it was thought tbeY might be included ilk OtAlaC large azl general measure, • ••••••••Ak Now, wo certainly did not expect that any pt'opos,al we might make for the distribution of these four seats would not be met by an an infinite number of counter proposals. These four seats belonged to English boroughs, and tile natural arrangement appears to be that they should be al lotted to four English constituencies. But we did not dis guise from ourselves that the moment we made that proposal we should have some hon. gentleman from Scotland rising to say that they ought to be given to Scotland; and that. members from Ireland would claim them for Ireland. We. knew that we should have, as we probably shall have, vari ous gentlemen proposing a different arrangement for Eng land. We knew that whatever proposals we might make counter proposals would be urged against them. But lam myself of the opinion that when the house comes to consider our plan, and those counter proposals in committee, it will think that the arrangement made is as fair as any that cane be proposed against it. It is quite true, that mere num bers ought not to be the principle on which the representa tion of this country is founded. The House of Commons is the great legislative machine of the nation, and ought to represent, not its numbers alone, but all its various into • rests—(hear, hear) ; all its different intelligence, and all those elements that are essential to the proper action of the great assembly that is to direct its general policy and desti nies. (Hear, hear.) Well, I think the manner in which we propose to distribute these four seats is founded on that• principle. The two places disfranchised are comparatively smell boroughs ; but we do not propose to give those seats to tvie other comparatively small towns; we propose to give two of them to two great counties, in which there are both agvicvltura.l and manufacturing interests—interests that ought to have their opinions represented in this house. We give another member to a place of a different character —a large and growing seaport town, with interests different to those of the counties,. The fourth seat we propose to give to a new borough to be created out of a very increasing and thriving part of the metropolis. Perhaps that which in some degree excited the zeal and energy of the member for the Tower Hamlets against some hon. members who preceded him may have been the sounds—not articulate— that indicated an objection to any addition to the number of the metropolitan membel . s. (Laughter.) That naturally excited some degree of waradh on the part of the hon. and learned member for the Tower Hamlets. I think, how ever, that Kensington and Chelsea are very fit places to be erected into boroughs. They include interests that deserve m to be represented in this house, avd I do not concur with those who think the proposal inexpedient because it will be an addition to the metropolitan members. (Hear.) I feel a great respect for those members, and pay no regard to the opinion that has excited the indignation of the hon.. and learned gentleman. (Hear, hear.) Ido not intend toy go further into this subject at present; I think no case can be made for an addition to the members of Scotland and Ireland. We are dealing with four seats that belong to Eng land,that were forfeited in consequence of corruption. We had to look round England to find how we could best dispose of them for the public advantage. Wo have disposed of them by giving them to as great a variety of interests as could be consulted in that small number of seats ; and when the house comes to consider the plan, I think it will be of opinion that it is as reasonable as any proposal that can be set against it. (Cheers.) Mr. KNIGHTLEY said the hon. member far the Tower Hamlets appeared to taunt the hon. member for West Nor folk (Mr. Bentinck) with having changed his opinion. The hon. and learned member must have been remiss in his attendance in the house. Ho had had the pleasure of hear ing the hon. member for West Norfolk speak often. on this question, and he had always heard him use the same argu ments. The hon. gentleman denies that my hon. friend made out a case for the counties. He was unwilling to go into figures, but he had an extract from the Census of 1857 that was very short, and he would read it. It showed that the representation of England and Wales under the ROorni Act was based on estimates of wealth and population, which gave to the counties property of the annual value of £60,561,288 ; inhabited houses, 2,053,998 ; population, 10,495,930; the number of county members was 159. In the boroughs and cities the annual value of property was £42,898,247; the inhabited houses, 1,383,300; and the population, 7,431,679 ; the number of borough members was 337. (Hear, hear.) Wo have never wished to maintain the present state of the county franchise; we have always wished to place the county and borough franchise on an equality in every respect. (Cheers from the Opposition.) That was what the late Government proposed to do. (Cheers.) They proposed to put the counties and the boroughs on the sane footing. But what did you do ? (Renewed Opposition cheers.) You supported the resolu tion of the noble member for the city of London (Lord J. Russell), and refused to put them on the same footing. (Cheers.) You destroyed the bill of the late Government, and now a very nice little Reform Bill you have got instead of it. (Cheers from the Opposition.) We have always been ready to give a far lower franchise than the present, if you would consent to place counties and boroughs on a perfect equality. (Cheers.) Sir G. LEWIS, in reply, said—There are some members in this house whose notions of Parliamentary reform are so gigantic and colossal that any measure proposed to them is called a pitiful abortion. (Hear, hear.) The Reform Bill of last year was called a " pitiful abortion"—(laughter)-- though now it is termed revolutionary and destructive. The hon. member for the Tower Hamlets has thought fit to denominate the present bill a " miserable abortion," and seems to think I have been reduced to some kind of servile defy in having: laid the measure before the house. Now, the bill is one that disposes of four seats at present vacant, and that are wanting to the integrity of the number of this house. In 1853 the right hon. member for Bucks proposed a measure precisely similar to this "miserable abortion." He asked leave to introduce a bill assigning the four vacant seats to the West Riding of Yorkshire and the southern division of Lancashire, two to each. The plan was dis cussed, but on a division was rejected—not on the ground that it m as a " pitiful" measure, but because it was thought the Government was not in a condition then to make any important proposition. There are two notices on the votes by which it is proposed to assign two of these seats to par ticular places. It is possible that if the Government were not to interpose there would be otbe4 motions on the sub ject, as it is known that it is not the intention of the Go vernment to bring forward any general measure this ses sion. The consequence would be great confusion and inconvenience, and I hope therefore that the house will approve the course which we have taken as the most con venient mode of dealing with the question. (Hear.) Leave was then given to bring in the bill, which was afterwards brought up and read a first time. The house then adjourned athalf-past 12 o'clock. COUNTRY MARKETS. BIRMINGHAM-JAN. 14. At this day's market there was en increased supply ri wheat, and all qualities were firmly held for the currency of this day se'nnight. Barley reeler ckeaper. Oats unal tered. Beans quite as dear. Peas only find buyers in limited parcels. MANCHESTER-PER, 14. The trade is rather inactive, without material change in the value of any article. With the exception of flour, of which the arrivals are to a fair extent, the imports from abroad at Liverpool and Runcorn are on a much smaller ecale than of late. Our market this morning was thinly attended, and was of an exceedingly inactive character. Holders, however, were firm in requiring the currency of this day week for all articles, which was realised in the limited business transacted. EDINBURGH GRAIN-FEB. 13. Wheat on the top Os Od up .... ..... averagS is 7d up. Barley on the top Os 6d up .average Os 9d up. Oats on the top is Od up. average Os 6d up. Beans on the top Os 6d up... ' average is 3d down. Averages per Imperial quarter. Wheat.... New wheat ... -12ths Barley ll9 9 4-12ths Oats 1 9 8 3-12ths Beans Total Supply and Sales. Wheat ..1087 qrs Sold 939 qrs Barley... 1861 qrs Sold 815 qrs Oats .2710 qrs Sold 1448 qrs Beans 299 qrs Sold 218 qrs DERBY SMITIIFIELD-FEB. 12. There was a short supply of fat beasts to-day; higher prices were asked, and there was a good demand for the best quality. A better supply of sheep and a few pens were left unsold. Fat calves scarce. A short supply of pigs, which were well sold. - - • -- - Beet 7d to 'lid Veal 7d to MI Mutton Bid to 9 d Pork .. 61d to 61d Lamb —d to —d Ro ug h f a t, 5 s 6d p er s t one Hides, 2!(1 to 41d ; calf skins, 5d to 6d. B I It T II S. SPENCER.—On the 9th inst., at Canonbury- place, Canon bury-square, Islington, Mrs. William Spencer, of a son. TURNER. —On the 13th inst., at the Lee-road, Blackheath, the wife of Frederick J. Turner, Esq., barrister-at-law, of a daughter. VA RENNE:S : .—On the 10th inst., at 20, Grosvenor-place, la Comtesse do Labrosse do Varennes, of a daughter. MARB.IAGES. DEBENHAM—DEBENHAM.—On the Bth tilt., at Adeline, Illinois, U.S., Charles, fourth son of Robert Debenham, Esq., formerly of Barwell Court, Surrey, to Emma, widow of the late Robert Debenham, jun., and daughter of Mr. John Cave, Spalding, Lincolnshire. MOSES—ALEXANDER.—On the 13th inst., at the residence of the father of the bride, Alfred H. Moses, Esq., son of Henry Moses, Esq., of 6, Finsbury-circus, to Isabel Lindo, eldest daughter of Joshua Alexander, Esq., of 50, Wimpole-street, Cavendish-square. D.EATB 8. LAxoll.—On the 11th inst., at No. 1, Aldhous-terrace, Bainsbury-park, John Laxon, Esq.-, Captain of her Majesty's 7th Fusiliers, in the.B4th year of his age. LESLIE.—On the 12th inst., at Brighton, Lieut.-General John Leslie, K. 11., Colonel of H.M.'s 35th Regiment, in the 71st year of his age. MACKINNON. — On the 13th inst., at Edinburgh, Kenneth Mackenzie Mackinnon, Esq., M.D., late Apothecary- General H.E.I. Co.'s Service, Bengal, aged 66. Nlcnom.s.—On tho Bth ult., at Madras, Major Henry James Nicholls, 25th Madras N. 1., Assistant-Commis sary-General, second son of the late John G. Nicholls, Esq., of West Molesey, Surrey, aged 55. LONDON : Printed and Published by BIURDO YOUNG, at No. 112, Strand, Printer, at THE SUN Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the County of Middle= Felguary.ls, 1861. .