The Sun. — London, England, 1861-02-07 00:00:00

THIR D EDITION. SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock. TATTERSALLS'-(THIS EVENING). LINCOLN HANDICAP. 7to 1 agat Golden Pippin (taken) LIVERPOOL STEEPLECHASE. 10 to 1 agst Anatis (taken) 14 to 1 agat Emperor (taken) 15 to 1 agst Franc Picard (taken) 100 to 6 agst Cockatoo ; taken) 100 to 6 agst Tattler (taken) 20 to 1 agst Old Ben Roe (taken) 20 to 1 agst Jealousy (taken) 33 to 1 agat Kilcock (taken) TWO THOUSAND GUINEAS STARES. 15 to 2 agst Diophantus (offered) 9to 1 agat Russley (taken) 9to 1 agst Kettledrum (taken) CHESTER CUP. 100 to 8 agat Chere Arnie (taken) 16 to 1 agst Man-at-Arms (offered) 33 to 1 agst North Lancashire (taken) 33 to 1 agat Satellite (taken) 40 to 1 agst Herne (taken) 40 to 1 agst Wallace (offered) DERBY. 4to 1 agst Dundee (take 9to 2) 20 to 1 agst Dictator (taken and offered) 30 to 1 agst Klarikoff (taken) 40 to 1 agst Overton (taken) 40 to 1 agst Preceptress (taken) 40 to 1 aget Kildonan (taken) 65 to 1 agst King of Kent (taken) 66 to 1 agst Cashio (taken) 1000 to 10 aget Aurelian (taken) 1000 to 10 agst Walloon (taken) IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT Both Houses met to-day, at 2 o'clock, for the purpose of presenting the Addresses to her Majesty, at Buckingham Palace, agreed to at the opening of Parliament. There was no sitting of the House of Lords this evening. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(Tuts EVENING). The house re• assembled at five o'clock. THE ADDRESS TO THE QUEEN. The SPEAKER reported to the house that the Address :lad been presented to her Majesty, who was graciously pleased to return the following answer : " Your loyal and dutiful Address affords me much satis faction, and I rely with confidence on your careful consi deration of the bills relating to the amendment of the law to be laid before you, and other important measures." PRIVATE BUSINESS. It was announced that the standing orders had been corn. plied with in the case of several railway and other bills. Several private bills were also read a first time. PETITIONS. Several petitions were presented in favour of the Aboli tion of church rates, for an alteration in the present mode of rating for the relief of the poor, and for Parliamentary Reform and Retrenchment, &c. INDIAN ARMY. Colonel SYKES gave notice that he would move for certain returns in connection with the Indian army. TRANSFER OF SEATS. Lord ENFIELD gave notice that on Friday week he would move for leave to bring in a bill to transfer the seats of St. Albans and Sudbury to the parish of St. Luke's, Chelsea. BULLION. On the motion of Mr. HANKEY the following was ordered :—Return of the amount of bullion purchased and sold by the Bank of England, distinguishing gold from silver, and bar gold from foreign gold coin, in each month from 31st Dec., 1859, to 31st Dec., 1860; also the excess of payments to or of receipts from the public, of British gold coin ; and also the amount received from the Mint during the same period (in continuation of Parliamentary paper, No. 86, of session 1860). REDUCTION IN THE DOCKYARDS. Sir F. SMITH asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether a considerable reduction in the number of ship wrights and other workmen in her Majesty's dockyards had taken place since the close of the last session of Par liament, or is now contemplated ; and if so, whether it was in consequence of any intention to substitute iron for wooden ships of war, or to employ private builders more extensively than heretofore. Lord C. PAGET said that no reduction to any extent had yet taken place, but it was contemplated to reduce a certain number of men employed in the dockyards next month. Such reduction was in consequence of the substitution alluded to. RAILWAY ACCIDENTS. In reply to Mr. BENTINCI, Mr. M. GIBSON said that the facilities afforded by railway companies to the railway inspectors to obtain every information in reference to railway accidents rendered unnecessary the recommendation of the committee last year with respect to issuing commissions of inquiry. It was not intended to introduce any bill to interfere with the free action of railway companies. The inspectors had reported on the railway accidents that had occurred since the pro rogation of Parliament, and their report would be laid before both houses. TRADE MARKS. In reply to Mr. BASS, Mr. M. GIBSON said that two bills had been prepared on this subject, and would be introduced in a fortnight. THE QUEEN'S SPEECH. The Royal speech was considered, and the usual order for supply was agreed to. BANK OF ENGLAND (CONSOLIDATED FUND) ACT. The house having resolved itself into a committee on this subject, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the following resolutions :-1. To charge upon the conso lidated fund in gross the sums payable to the Bank of England on account of the management of the national debt. 2. To charge upon the consolidated fund the defi ciency, if any such should arise, in the sums which may be held on account of Post-office savings banks to meet the lawful demands of depositors in such banks in the event of their being established by law. He stated that his object was to carry out, in transactions between the Government and the Bank of England, the principle affirmed by the act of 1834. [LEFT SPEAKING.] COUNTRY MARKETS. NEWARK-FBB. 6. A fair attendance to-day, and the supply of wheat was tolerable. Sales progressed steadily, and is per qr. more money was realised. The barley trade assumed a healthier aspect. Oats a frea sale. Beans firm, at the late extreme prices. Peas quiet. White wheat, new, 60s to 74s Barley, grinding.. 31s to 35s Red do. sos to 66s Oats, old, .. 33s to 36. Old white 6os to 74s New do 254 to 30 Red do. 50s to 66s I Beans. 54s to 58s Barley, malting.... 37s to 44s Beans. new 40$ to 44e Peas, ....40s to 50s. SHEFFIELD-FEB. 5. The supply of wheat in bulk was small. Good dry sorts realised the extreme prices of last week, with a free sale. Red wheat, petload of 3 impend. bushels...24s Od to 28. Od White ) /) Od to 286 Od New red 206 Od to 224 Od New white „ f„ t 22s Od to 268 Od Beans f, 1, l6s Od to 22s 6d Peas, per qr 54s Od to 55s Od Grinding barley, per qr. 33s Od to 35s Od Malting ditto, „ 3ss Od to 43s Oi Oats ,' 2ss 6d to 34s Od Millers' prices for flour-2s 3d, 2s sd, and 2s 8d pet 141 b. HULL--Fnn. 5. A short supply of English wheat, the best samples of which sold readily at is per qr higher. Dry foreign is to 2s higher. Spring cern in retail. Linseed 8 cake tstea 69s dy 0,1 Wheat.... Old white p er q r ......... 66 Od o Old red 61s Od to 68s Od New white ........ 55s Od to 6 3 s Od Dantzic, Kon . b , &c. old white 62s Od to 66s Od Dutch, Belgian, and French. 60s Od to 62s Od Baltic and ilamburg, red.... 60s Od to 62s Od St. Petersburg and - Riga, old. 52s Od to 55s Od Barley.... English malting 4ls Od to 4 2 s Od Grinding 348 Od to 3 6 s Od Saal and Oderbruck Holstein and Danish 3Bs Od to 408 Od Grinding 0at5...... English, old Archangel and Riga, per st Os 14d to 14 1 d Friesland and Dutch ' osl4ld to oslsd Swedish and Danish 051 4d to o s l4 l d Beaus ....English, old, per qr New pigeon 44s Od to 45s Od New tick. 43s Od to 44s Od pus .. Egyptian .. 38s Od to 40s Od .... Fo re i gn breakers Tares Grinding • • • •Spring Indian Corn . —s Od to —s Od 37s Od to 38s Od Linseed, feedi ng erushinn. Linseed cakes g u n ) 46s Od to 52s Od Foreig n £lO 10 Rape 810 oto 9 0 0 cakes ... - ........... Bones 5 0 oto 5 5 0 COAL MARK (Prices of Coal per Ton at a. d.l ET—F EB. 1. the olose et the market Howard's West Hart ley 17 0 Bower's West Hartley.l7 0 Byass's Bebside West Hartley ......... .17 0 Davison's West Hart ley ...... . ..... l7 0 Lambert 's West Hart ley l6 6 TAntield Moor l6 3 Tafttield Moor Butes l6 31 Wept-Hartley Ships at marks s. d. Wylam ... l7 6 Londonderry Gas l4 6 Carway and Duffryn Malting 24 6 Walls End. Harton _ 19 0 Brsuldyll's Hatton 20 3 Kelloe Haswell..... 21 6 Pittington ......18 6 .t 25; sold, 61. UMW IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.) FOREIGN AFFAIRS. Mr. S. FITZGERALD said—l am deeply sensible of the inconvenience of making observations on what passed last night in the absence of the noble lord who presides over foreign affairs, but I learn from the Secretary to the Treasury that the noble lord is on his way to the house, and as this is the only opportunity, and as probably the noble lord will arrive before I am very far advanced in the observations which I have to make, I trust the house will grant me its indulgence. lam also sensible of the incon venience of reviving a discussion to-day which might have more fitly been taken last night ; but the fact is that the hon. member for Birmingham by his speech, devoted to a subject of paramount domestic interest, so entirely changed the tenour of the discussion that I abstained from reverting to the subject of foreign policy. The tone of the hon. member for Birmingham was so earnest and so fairly indignant at the course of the Government that I felt it a very difficult matter for me to recall the attention of the house to less exciting topics. I may say in passing that I can well understand the curt and indignant feeling with which the hon. member forßirmingham spoke, because the noble lord the member for the city net only buried reform, but had not the delicaey to apply his handkerchief to his face to conceal the smile which was upon it as he stood in the position of chief mourner. (Hear.) I wish to recall the attention of the noble lord to the answer which he gave my right hon. friend the member for Bucks with reference to two despatches addressed to the British Minister at Turin on the 31st of August and 27th of October. With reference to the Speech which her Majesty has been coun selled to address to the house, I was inclined, until I heard the speech of the noble lord, to complain of a grave omis sion. I believe that if there is any one subject upon which the heart of the people is set it is the maintenance of gene ral peace—(hear, hear) —not merely from economic and prudential motives, not only from a sense of the burdens which a state of war imposes upon all who are included in it or have to prepare against it, but I believe from higher motives, springing from a conviction that war, not rendered necessary by the honour and interests of the country, is a high moral crime. (Hear, hear.) What I thought the Speech ought to have contained was an assurance on the part of the Government that they were alive to the dangers which menaced the peace of Europe, that no efforts would be spared and that no stone would be left unturned to secure the maintenance of general peace. The Speech says that her Majesty trusts that the moderation of the Powers of Europe will contribute to the maintenance of the public peace ; but whether her Majesty's advisers mean that they trust the Powers of Europe will be moderate, or that if they are moderate general peace will to secured, seems on the face of the Speech doubtful. In reply to the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucks the noble lord made a very satisfactory statement—namely, that at the present moment, in concert with our allies, they are using every exertion in their power, and directing the whole energy and the whole weight and interests of this country to the maintenance of the general peace of Europe. I believe that if the Government sincerely work for that object peace may possibly be maintained, but at the same time 1 am sure that it is impossible those efforts can be successful if the noble lord and his colleagues publish to the world such documents as those of the 31st of August and the 27th of October. The noble lord, in reply to my right hon friend, was certainly more adroit than candid, and his reply in reference to the second of those papers—if I may use the word, not in an offensive sense—was almost evasive. The great claim which the present Government has on the con fidence of the house in the guidance of foreign politics is that they hold fast by the principle of non-intervention. Certainly, members on the Opposition side will not com plain of the adoption of such a policy, because I always re member with satisfaction that the Government to which I had the honour to belong in a subordinate capacity was the first Government which proclaimed and adhered to the prin ciple that we ought not to pursue—as for years we have pur sued—a meddling policy in every petty as in every great affair in which nations with whom we have communication become involved. Gentlemen on the Opposition side are not likely, therefore, to complain of the present Government adopting and firmly adhering to the policy of non-intervention. (Hear, hear.) The contrary is the fact. The complaint against the present Government is that, proclaiming them • selves adherents to the doctrine of non-intervention, in the first place they do rot practise it, and in the next that they publish documents wholly inconsistent with it. The noble lord, who is now the champion of non-intervention, wrote a letter upon the 31st August in not very courteous terms. I think the letter was unnecessarily offensive, and that it mixed up subjects in a manner far more likely to irritate than to conciliate, to estrange than to influence, the per sons to whom it was addressed. At the same time I think the noble lord was perfectly justified in writing that de spatch, because it is clear there was a great ferment and crisis in Italy at the time, and therefore, although the lan guage was unnecessarily strong, the object was good—viz., to throw the whole weight of the Government into the scale for the maintenance of peace. The letter sent to the King of Sardinia was to the effect that if Sardinia stirred in a certain direction she would have England against her, and that the noble lord had reason to think that the great Powers of Europe would also interfere. The words menaced intervention on the part of this country, and all the remark I will make on that despatch is that it was not one on which the Government could rest its claim of acting on the principle of non. intervention. (Hear.) But with regard to the second despatch the noble lord did not deal frankly with my right hop. friend. The noble lord detailed the cir cumstances under which the first despatch was written. Ho referred to its terms, and hejustified its principles. He ad hered to all it contained, and he so far dealt candidly with my right hon. friend. But when the noble lord came to deal with the second despatch his answer was not satisfactory. He adverted to its terms, to the circumstances under which it was written, and to the course taken by the King of Sardinia, but he did not justify that course on the ground stated in the despatch, but on another ground totally different and absolutely inconsistent with it. I regret ex tremely that the noble lord is not yet in his place, but as the despatch in question is one for which the Cabinet must have been collectively responsible, I have, at least, the satisfac tion of addressing the noble viscount at the head of the Government and two other members of the Cabinet. My right hon. friend the member for Bucks seems to have been not the only person who has been bewildered as to the policy of the Government, for the Government of one of our allies was thrown into a state of oven greater confusion and per plexity on the subject. Nor is this to be wondered at; for I defy the ingenuity of man to reconcile two such contra dictory documents as the two despatches of the noble lord, or to discover how they could have been written by the same hand. The noble lord, as we know, attended her Majesty upon her visit to Germany. He there had an interview with Baron Schleinitz, the Foreign Minister of Prussia, immediately after which the Prussian Government, desir ous of reassuring their own people, published the following statement in their official Gazette : "The cordial relations which have ever existed between England and Prussia will continue to exist if the two coun tries do not mutually misunderstand their true interests. These relations have become more deeply rooted, and have acquired increased firmness and extension by the conference at Coblentz, and by the ready exchange of views which then took place between the leading statesmen of the two countries. In view of the present great complications in the European political system, the more satisfactory it is to be enabled to state that there was a coincidence between the views and opinions of England and Prussia on the great and important questions of the day." I can readily conceive the surprise and bewilderment of the Prussian Minister when, after having come to the above conclusion, he read, only five days after, in the journals the letter of the noble lord, the special object of which was to find fault with the important step which the Government of Prussia had taken in regard to the affairs of Italy, and to express, on the part of her Majesty's Government, not ac cord of opinion with that of our ally, but utter and entire disapproval of everything that had been done. A document of more dangerous tendencies than that despatch of the noble lord had never issued from the pen of any statesman in any country of Europe. The doctrine of non-interven tion is popular in this country, not merely because it tends to keep us out of war, but from our conviction that the adop tion of that'principle is a great gain to international law and international morality. Lllere Lord John Russell entered the house.] I pass by the reference of the noble lord, whom I am glad now to see in his pace, to Vattel, because in the present day the opinion of a British Minister is of a great deal more weight than the dictum of a writer who has been dead more than a century. The position of the noble lord, as I understand it, is that a foreign State has the right to interfere in support of a people against their ruler, when the people have good cause of complaint. But, as he holds that the people are not only the best, but the sole judges of the justice of their complaints, and as no insurrection ever takes place without the insurgents believing they are very illused, I do not think I over state the doctrine of the noble lord when I say that it amounts to this—that, in every insurrection that occurs, it is the part of a country wishing to pursue a liberal and generous course to lend the rebels the support of their arms. Is that doctrine consistent with the doctrine of non-inter vention ?It is exactly the reverse. There is no State in Europe, there is no conceivable circumstances in which, ac cording to the noble lord, it would not be the duty of a libe ral and generous Government to interfere by force of arms. (Hear.) What must be the result of such a principle ? The noble lord is surely of too logical a mind not to per ceive that it cuts two ways, and that it may be adopted equally in favour of a people struggling for liberty and a disr.osscssed sovereign struggling to regain his throne. (Hear.) It is a principle which justifies an absolute sove reign in helping a brother despot in distress no less than a liberal sovereign in helping the people of another State to acquire freedom. The noble lord, who has the means of informing himself as to the state of affairs all over Europe, cannot fail to be aware that at the present time nothing is easier for a Sovereign with aggressive designs upon his neighbours than to stir up an insurrection in their domi nions. (Hear, hear.) I believe the noble lord is well aware that at this very moment there are present in many coun tries of Europe the emissaries of foreign Powers who are certainly not engaged in maintaining peace or promoting harmony, He must know that machinations are in progress THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY: EVENING, FEBRUARY 1, 1861. in many countries of Europe, by means of which, if war breaks out, it is possible an aggressive Sovereign may find his attacks from without assisted by disorders within. And when that happens the aggressive Sovereign will find a pretext ready shaped for him in the words of the noble lord. He nee only point to the disorders which he has fomented, assert that the people alone possess the right of judging whether they have any ground for their complaints, and protest that he has assisted them against their ruler, notin a spirit of ambition or aggression, but in a spirit of gene rosity and liberality. But there is another and more serious danger to be apprehended from the doctrine of the noble lord. Nothing, lam satisfied, is so calculated to interfere with the progress of the constitutional cause as this unfor tunate declaration on the part of a liberal Government. Instead of promoting the spread of constitutional freedom, it will stimulate insurrection and revolution by encourag ing the leaders of such movements to expect as3istance from abroad. I can give the house a curious illustration of this. I had the pleasure of spending a considerable time in Hungary, and there became acquainted with all those illus• trious men who are, at the present time, struggling to ests• blish constitutional freedom in that land. Shortly after the appearance of the noble lord's despatch, I received a letter from one of the most distinguished of that party. The noble lord will see, from the sentiments contained in the passage I am going to read, that it is impossible to make public the name of the writer. I will only say that he is one who is now engaged heart and soul in the struggle for constitu• tional liberty in his country. He writes as follows : "You who have been among us and know the difficulties of our position, can well understand how they are increased by this wonderful letter of your incomprehensible Lord Russell. It has already in effect given such courage to the Separatists that we, who hate the Austrians as much as they do, must either side with the Government or see our country the prey to anarchy and insurrection. Alas, in deed 1 that it is an English Minister who thus makes else- where constitutional fiction impossible, revolution almost inevitable." _ It is remarkable that the doctrine of the noble lord has no the mark of originality. It is dangerous, but it is not new. Not much more than half a century ago the same language was held by the National Convention of France. (Hear, hear.) They, too, declared, just before the establishment of the Republic, that France, as a liberal and generous nation, offered the assistance of her arms to any people who were struggling against a tyrant. There was this difference, however, between the Convention and the noble lord, that they were ready to back their words by deeds, and the noble lord is not. (Hear, hear.) That is an essential difference, I grant, but the principle is the same. And now, after the lapse of somewhat less than 70 years, we have the Minister of an English Sovereign, a member of a constitutional Go vernment, adopting the sentiments, and almost the very language of the National Assembly of 1793. (Hear, hear.) It is worthy of remark that the noble lord last night did not justify the conduct of the King of Sardinia on the ground that he pursued a liberal and generous policy, but on the ground that it was an exceptional case, and that the continuance of anarchy and disorder in the South of Italy menaced the peace and security of Sardinia, He re ferred not to the authority of Vattel, but to the authority of Lord Castlereagh. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) He never attempted to justify the dangerous doctrine con tained in his despatch. By the way, I may refer to the charge of the noble lord that my right hon. friend the member for Bucks was an Austrian in sympathy, and had spoken in high eulogium of the King of Naples. My right hon, friend has said that, at a distant period of time, he may have spoken as the noble lord and others have spoken, of the importance of maintaining Austria as one of the Powers of Europe, but that the idea that he ever praised the King of Naples is a mere hallucination on the part of the noble lord. Ido not wish to go into the general bearings of the Italian question. I will only say that I can well understand the cordial sympathy entertained in this country towards the illustrious man who has shown com mendable moderation, singular purity. of conduct and cha racter, and the most distinguished bravery, even although the course he has pursued in Italy may have been some what irregular. I can well understand also the feeling of disgust which prevails at the falsehood and treachery which have characterised the other party. Ido not yield to the noble lord in my sympathy for those who are struggling for freedom, nor in my attachment to the cause of constitu tional liberty. I hope and trust the time will come when it will be enjoyed by all nations of Europe as freely and fully as by ourselves ; but there is a wide difference between sudh feelings and the doctrine of the noble lord, the ten • dency of which must be to check the progress of constitu tional States, and to render them as much objects of sus picion and apprehension to their neighbours as States of a despotic character. (Hear, hear.) My right hon. friend last night endeavoured in vain to elicit from the noble lord a clear explanation of our relations with France. I have always held that a cordial understanding between France and England was essential to the peace and happiness, not only of the two countries themselves, but of Europe at large. That was an axiom in European politics, but I want to know what the present Government mean by a " cordial understanding." If the noble lord can assure us that her Majesty's Government had the cordial assistance of France n her laudable efforts to preserve peace, he will make a most satisfactory announcement. (Hear, hear.) But if the noble lord means,by cordial understanding such rela tions as we had an example of last session, when at the first the noble lord assured us of the most friendly intimacy be tween the two States, and afterwards informed us that we must look for an alliance elsewhere, then I say it is not a ground of security, but a cause of disquiet and alarm. In the first despatch the noble lord stated that an engagement had been received from Piedmont net to cede to France any further territory. It is clear that the noble lord would not have required that assurance unless he believed that a cession was about to be made. I wish, therefore, to ask him whether he is satisfied at the present time that no compact exists between France and Piedmont for the cession of the island of Sardinia or other territory to France in return for assistance rendered by the arms of the latter. I wish also to know something as to the state of affairs in Syria. The time is fast expiring in which the French troops should evacuate the district. I believe that the entrance of those troops into Syria is not only dangerous to the peace of Syria and the existence of the Turkish Empire, but is also one of the greatest obstacles to the main tenance of the peace of Europe. I fear if a concession is once made on this subject, and the occupation of Syria by French troops is prolonged, the youagest man among us will not live long enough to see them withdrawn. (Hear, hear.) It is therefore the duty of the noble lord not merely to tell us that the subject will come under the consideration of the European Powers, but to inform us distinctly what is the opinion of the British Government with regard to the matter. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL.—I do not rise at all for the purpose of complaining of the course the hon. gentleman has fol lowed. I could have wished, perhaps, that he had given me some notice of his intention to make the observations he has done to-day ; but as to the substance of his remarks I think it is an advantage to the Government, as well as due to this house, that if a despatch has been totally miscon strued—if an interpretation has been put on it which is totally foreign to its purport and to its words—full expla- nations on the subject should be given by the Government. The hon. gentleman condemns the despatch of the 27th of October as affording a general countenance to people who are in insurrection, and as entitling them to expect the support of foreign Powers who are imbued with liberality and generosity. I think the hon. gentleman must choose one of two courses—either he must deny that there should be any power of interference by a foreign Power, or ho must show that in this particular case of Italy the in tervention of Sardinia was unjustifiable. As far as the general question is concerned, it would be the greatest ab surdity to lay down a rule that those who rise against a Government are in all cases to be placed in the same cate gory, that they are all guilty or all meritorious, all deserv ing of the cross or the diadem. To tell me that because I admire Washington I must therefore admire Wat Tyler, that because I approve the brave conduct of William the Silent I must therefore approve of Masaniello would be ut terly absurd. All I contend for is that each case must be judged by its own merits. (Hear, hear.) You cannot say that there should never be any intervention by a foreign Power at any time without condemning our own conduct in various instances, and without sapping the very foundation of the constitution we now enjoy. (Hear.) Take the cases that have happened since the peace of 1815. There was an in surrection in Greece against the Sultan which lasted for four or five years. Three of the Powers of Europe interfered to put an end to the struggle. Were those Powers of a revolutionary democratic character akin to the Jacobin Convention of France ? The first of them was the Emperor of Russia, who interfered to protect the rebels from the vengeance of the Sultan. The other two were the constitutional Powers of France and England. They agreed that a force which the Sultan had despatched under Ibrahim Pasha, one of his Generals, to suppress the insurrection, should not bo al - lowed to continue its operations, and, though the instruc tions given were not very precise, they were pretty sure to end as they did, in the forces of the three Powers, under Admiral Codrington, totally destroying the Turkish fleet and preventing the Sovereign of the country from reduc ing his subjects to obedience. Does the hon. gentleman mean to say that intervention was there unjustifiable; and that the people of Greece should not have been sup ported in their insurrection? Another instance occurred not very long after, in which my noble friend took a very conspicuous and distinguished part—l mean the in surrection which took place in Belgium. The people of that country were discontented with the rule of the Dutch Sovereign under whom the Congress of Vienna had placed them. Their grievances in regard to the distri bution of patronage were, no doubt, very considerable; but they enjoyed freedom of repre , entation, and if I were to compare their wrongs with those which the people of Naples and Sicily have suffered they would appear as nothing. (Hear.) The whole people of Belgium rose. A gentleman with whom we are all acquainted, and who by his concilia tory manners, great acquirements, and experience in diplo macy is generally respected in English society,—l mean M. Van de Weyer, the present Belgian representative, signed a document on the subject commencing with the words " To arms, to arms, to arms —a document which must be called of a revolutionary character; but the gentleman whose name was attached to it believed he was justified in publish ing it. On that occasion France and England interfered not only by counsel, but by arms and by action. The Prince of Orange was sent by his Lather, the King of the Netherlands, to quell_ the rebellion. I believe he would have taken Brussels, and for the time, at least, quenched the insur rection in blood had he not been checked by the information that a French army was on its way to occupy Brussels, and to encounter the Dutch troops. An English fleet went nearly at the same time to establish a blockade, so as to prevent the King of the Netherlands from making any fartaer effort to recover his sway over his revolted subjects. Does the hon. gentleman say that that was a wrong inter ference ? He can hardly do so. But there are other in stances of intervention. There is that upon which, as I have said, our constitutional liberties rest, viz., the inter ference—and that without an insurrection, but merely upon the suggestion that the people of this country were discon tented—of the Dutch Stadtholder, at the head of Dutch forces, to invade the kingdom of England, and dethrone the Sovereign who then ruled it. That, I suppose, the hon. gentleman can hardly say is an event whieh we ought to re pudiate, because, although I have heard a noble lord in this house call King William 111. our glorious deliverer, by no other name than thatof the DutchStadtholder,l suppose that we all now acknowledge that to him we owe it that that real liberty and that Constitution which had been matter of doubt and of contest for fifty or a hundred years was at last established. (Hear, hear.) Take also an instance further back, which has lately been recalled to our recol lection. Those who have read the interesting volumes of Mr. Motley, in which with great research and with great ability he has explained the causes which led to the rise and the establishment of the Republic of the Netherlands, know that he shows that, notwithstanding the for- midable nature of the war in which the adoption of such a course would involve her, the lion-hearted Queen who then ruled over England did not scruple to give her assist ance to the Dutch, but that in order to enable them to establish their independence of their legitimate Sovereign, she encountered all the perils of a great war, and all the dangers which were threatened by.the formidable armada prepared by Philip 11. (Hear, hear.) Perhaps, after hear ing of these instances, the hon. gentleman will allow that there maybe cases in which intervention is legitimate, and may be justified by the interests of the country or the im portance of the object; but then he may take issue upon . . the case itself which is stated in the despatch, lie, like the right honourable gentleman who spoke last night (Mr. Disraeli), who also wished to fix my attention to that despatch, has evidently paid no attention to it himself, Both he and the right hon. gentleman evade and avoid all its arguments. They evade the statement of facts which it contains, and they say, "Here is a general declaration in favour of insurrection, and an assertion that it is an act of liberality and generosity to assist it." I am almost ashamed to read any part of the despatch ; but it begins with stating these questions :—" Were the people of Italy justified in asking the assistance of the King of Sardinia to re lieve them from Governments with which they were discontented ?" and, " Was the King of Sardinia justified in furnishing the assistance of his arms to the people of the Roman and Neapolitan States ? " These questions are argued in the despatch. Shortly, indeed, but as com pletely as I could within the limits of such a document. I state in it all the principal reasons which in this instance justified the people of the kingdom of Naples in asking for the assistance of the King of Sardinia, and the circumstances which justified that Sovereign in complying with their re quest. Ala Ito go over that ground again ? I have no objection to do so, and I will state again that in the year 1821 Austria, in compliance with a decree of the principal Powers of Europe—happily England ex cepted—sent a very considerable army into the kingdom of Naples, where the people, under their legitimate Sovereign, under a Bourbon King, had established a regular repre sentative Constitution, and whore we know by the undis -puted testimony of Lord Colchester, who was there at the time, and who, sir, was ono of your predecessors in that chair, the Parliamentary discussions were then conducted in a most orderly and most decorous manner. The wish of the people was to establish under their legitimate Sove reign a Government somewhat resembling that of this country, under which people might speak freely of their own affairs, and under which any one who was arrested should have a right to an immediate trial, and should either be proved guilty of some crime or be at once declared to be innocent. Such were the desires of the people of Naples, and it was to suppress such a system, it was upon the declaration that it was impossible that Lombardy should continue to be governed as it then was if there was anything like freedom or constitutionalism in Naples, that a large army was sent into that country, and that 40,000 men were left for, I think, three years in Naples and Sicily, and re 'established a system of unjust imprisonment, of the suppression of all freedom of opinion, and of the applica tion of torture to political offenders. (Hear.) Another at tempt to obtain free institutions was made by the people under apparently favourable circumstances in the year 1848. The King solemnly swore to the Constitution, and it was apparently established on a firm basis. I have seen some of the men who took part in the establishment of that Constitution, and one who was a Minister under it. At that time the King made one reservation. It was that the National Guard should have no artillery, and the Mi nister, thinking that this was only a Royal whim, agreed that none but the regular troops should have that arm. There came a fatal day, however, when this reservation made by the King had its effect, when his oath was set aside, when all its obligations were scorned, when the artil lery of the regular troops was used to destroy those who were struggling for the Constitution, and when the men who had endeavoured to carry it out, and who as members of Parliament had been among the most Conservative, were arrested and imprisoned for having relied upon the good faith of the Sovereign. (Hear.) One of them told me that he, at the personal desire of the King, accepted a seat in the Chamber of Deputies. He wished not to sit there, but he had been elected, and the King prevailed upon him to accept the seat. A Committee of Public Safety was appointed. He said that he could not approve it ; but he was asked by the friends of the Sovereign to take the chair of that committee. He took the chair, and he told the members that a Committee of Public Safety could have no good effect; that their operations would be danger ous; and ho begged them to dissolve, and to report to the Chamber that they could not act with advantage to the country. They took his advice, they dissolved, and he re ceived the thanks of the King for what he had done. As he retired from the closet, after having an audience of his Majesty, one o f the King's chamberlains said to him, " Did the King receive you very graciously ?" " Yes, he did." " Did he praise you very much ?" " Yes," replied the Minister, " I never before received such words and such assurances of favour as I have received this day from the King." The chamberlain said, "Well, take care; I was in the closet this morning when the Minister of Justice was present, and I saw the King sign an 'order for your arrest." ( [Tear.) The Minister knew the man with whom he had to deal. He had before been 12 or 13 years in prison in consequence of a breach of faith on the part of the King. He immediately went to the English mission, and thence on board ship, and thus avoided the dungeon which had, no doubt, been prepared for him by his Sovereign. (Hear.) It came to be a question the other day whether or not the son of that King was to be entirely believed when he de clared that he was in favour of a Constitution, and that he would observe it, and it was said that he had sworn to it. "To be sure," said one of these Ministers, Poerio, in the Sardinian Chamber of Deputies—" To be sure he swears, for how else could he be foresworn ? He must swear first, in order that he may be foresworn afterwards." These were bitter words, but they were not without justification, because all those who in 1848 trusted the promises or be lieved in the oaths of the Sovereign were condemned by him by virtue of his superior force to expiate their cre dulity by 10 years' imprisonment. (Hear, hear.) Well, sir, I ask, are not these circumstances which may induce a people to rise against a Sovereign, and to declare that they would rather be under the sway of a King who, what ever may be his faults—and that he has many faults I am ready to admit—has, at all ev3nts, been true to his peo ple—(hear, hear)—who has never made a declaration in favour of their constitutional liberties which he has not ob served—(hear, hear) —and who has taken no oath that he has not kept ? (Hear, hear.) What reason is there for won der or surprise that the millions of people who were under the Neapolitan sway should declare that they could bear the burden no longer, and should ask the assistance of the King of Sardinia in order that they might enjoy the benefits of constitutional government, without suffering from a con stant fear of Royal perjury ? (Hear.) The hon. gentleman has put me upon the defence of this despatch. I have not gone into details, but I have suggested certain topics, and I think that the reasons that I have adduced were such as 'justified the Neapolitan people in the course which they took. Had not the hon. gentleman forced me to do so, I should not have recurredto these subjects, because the suc cessor of the late King has expiated these faults and crimes of his predecessor. These, however, were the causes to which I attributed the insurrection of the Neapolitans aid ing the invasion of Garibaldi, and I will say that they hav ing so risen, and having called upon the King of Sardinia for aid, he was, for the reasons which I gave last night, justified in going to their assistance and placing himself at their head. Because, as I said, had he not done so, there would have been no restoration of the King of Naples, but there would have been in that kingdom such a state of anarchy and confusion that it is very likely there would have been other intervention—an intervention hostile to the objects which the people of Italy had in view. (Hear, hear.) I likewise stated in the despatch which has been referred to, that beside what had taken place in the Papal States and in the kingdom of Naples, there had during the last five or six years been growing in the minds of Italian patriots a conviction—l know not whether Mazzini or who may have been its author— that there was no chance of ;defending Italy against those who wished to prevent its being independent except by its being an united State; and how was it to become an united State, except by the King of Sardinia taking up arms to make it so ? It was not a republic tUey sought to set up ; it was a constitutional monarchy. And let me here observe that there are now in Europe, as there have been at various periods, three parties. There are those who are for despotism, there are those who are for disorder, and there are those who are for constitutional monarchy ; and I say that it is not unbefitting the English Government to declare that when there is a contest among these principles they cannot favour despotism, they cannot show any countenance to disorder; but that with the cause of constitutional monarchy and of representative institutions, under the regis of a king who can keep his word, they do feel sympathy, and that they are glad to see such a cause flourishing in a country which is so glorious for its ancient recollections, and so distin guished for the ability, industry, and activity of its sons as is Italy. (Hear, hear.) Therefore it was that when Russia and Prussia, and impliedly Austria and France, expressed their disapprobation of any attempt to establish an inde- pendent Italy, I thought that the voice of this country might be heard on the other side, and that it might be shown that one constitutional monarchy at least would be glad to see the Italians free themselves by their own exer tions. Not that we meant to interfere to promote that cause, but that we were ready to favour with our approba- Lion the meritorious and glorious efforts which were then being made in its favour. (Hear, hear.) Does it follow that because we approve these efforts in Italy we are there f )re, like the French Convention, to declare that wherever a people rise, wherever they are discontented with their rulers, we are in their favour? Cn the contrary, as I have said before, if such an instance is a case of real dis- order, if it is a case of causeless discontent, breaking out in riot, we are not the least bound to favour or to express admiration of such an event. Every case must be treated upon its own merits. That is the purport of the whole of my despatch, which, as I have said, was an answer to the con tinual repetition of the statement that the conduct of the King of Sardinia was against the law of nations, and that such a thing had never been heard of before. " The law of nations," it was said, "has been violated by the King of Sardinia, and we, Austria, Russia, and Prussia," a little for getting the old story of Poland and the more recent story of Cracow, (hear), are the sole interpreters of international law. We are the only doctors who know what is right and just, and we deolare from our supreme tribunal, from our high court of appeal, that he has offended, and is therefore con demned." In my despatch, therefore, I stated the case of the King of Sardinia and that of the Italian people ; and, at the same time, I stated that the severance of the ties which bind together a sovereign and his subjects is in itself an insurrection. I have to-day said that if Belgium was justified in severing the ties which bound her to her sovereign because undue partiality was shown to the sub- jects of the King of the Netherlands—if she was jus fled in setting at nought the Treaty of Paris and the Treaty of Vienna, by which Belgium was given to the Nether lands, ten times more, I might say 100 times more, were the people of Naples and those of the Two Sicilies justi fied in severing the ties which bound them to a sovereign from whom they got no justice, and from whom they re ceived none of the protection which a Government owes to its subjects. (Hear.) Towards the end of his speech the hon. gentleman said that he would say nothing about the rights or wrongs of the Italian question ; but the rights or wrongs of the Italian question form the whole matter in dispute. (Hear, hear, and expressions of dissent from Mr. Fitzgerald.) If the Italians have been right in their• revo lution, in their insurrection, they and the King of Sardinia must be absolved together. If they have been in the wrong then they must be condemned for destroying Governments so excellent and so worthy of support as those which they have lately overthrown. (Hear.) I have sometimes had in this house to find fault with a Government which I have not mentioned to-day—viz., the temporal government of the Pope. Now, while Ido not think that that Govern ment provided for temporal good of his subjects, I cannot but see in the Pope himself a Prince animated by the most benevolent designs, warm-hearted and kind, and with an Italian heart in his breast, feeling for the Italian people. It remains for him now—and more for him even than for the Emperor of the French—to solve this Italian question. At the commencement of his reign he showed—and showed most amply—his desire to govern his States in unison with the wishes and in unison with the wants and interests of his subjects. I trust that the feelings which then inspired him will recur to his mind, and I do not at all despair of seeing him again show his sympathies for Italy, and make some agreement with the King of Sardinia, who has been chosen by the almost unanimous voice of the Italians to be their temporal sovereign, by which, while resign ing his secular power, he shall retain the homage which is due to him even from those who are not members of the Roman Catholic Church, and the spiritual authority which must belong to one who is the head of a faith which is pro fessed by so many millions of Christians. If he takes such a course he will not only preserve his dignity as a sovereign prince, but will at the same time establish a claim to be con sidered the first of Italian patriots, preceding even those men who have done so much for the liberation of Italy. We all know that it is constantly said by Roman Catholics who are in favour of the maintenance of the temporal sove reignty of the Pope, that it was assumed in days of diffi culty and trial ; that it was not sought for as an object of ambition, but that it was undertaken by a Pope who was respected by the people of Rome in order to preserve that city and a great part of Italy from the evils of the anarchy which would otherwise have resulted from the desertion of the Emperors of the East and the incursions of the bar barians of the North. If such was the case, and if it is true, as it is also alleged, that that temporal sovereignty was for centuries useful, not only to the people of Rome, but to the rest of Europe, and if a time has now come when it: can no longer usefully be exercised, let it be laid aside, and I am convinced that all Europe will admire such a noble and dis interested relinquishment of authority, (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentlemanlikewise asked me some questions with regard to our relations with France; and I must, I confess, decline to enter into the particulars of relations which are going on from day to day. He asks me with regard to Syria, and upon that subject I have to tell him that the French Government have said, and have said, I think, not unreasonably, that it was at the request of Europe that they sent their troops to occupy a part of Syria, that alarms have reached them that the massacres may be renewed, and that, as the occupation was begun at the instance and with the consent of Europe, it ought to finish at the same instance and with the same con sent. They have made that declaration at Constantinople, and the Sultan has said that, although a Conference is not, in his opinion, necessary, and although he has no doubt that the occupation may cease, without any danger to the people of Syria or the Lebanon, whom he is willing to pro tect, yet that he has no unwillingness to send a representa tive to a Conference at Paris. Our consent was dependent upon that of the Sultan, We have said that we would go into no Conference at which a representative of the Sultan should not be present, and we say now that the Sultan having given his consent we shall be ready to go into a Con ference. The practical thing to be considered in that Con ference will, in my mind, be what is the disposition of the Sultan with respect to his own territory ? Syria belongs to no Power of Europe but the Sultan ; it belongs to no Con ference, it is a dominion of the Sultan. (Hear, hear.) Therefore, though it is perfectly seasonable that the Powers in Conference should ask the representative of Turkey, " Has the Sultan provided means for preserving tranquillity in Syria ?" still, if the Sultan said, " I am willing to un dertake the responsibility of governing Syria without the occupation of foreign troops, and I can answer for the means which I have taken to secure its tranquillity," I believe that not one of them would wish to press the continuance of foreign occupation. That, how ever, is a matter into which we cannot enter, because it is to be the subject of a Conference, and our Ambassador must, of course, hear what is said by the representatives of other Powers in that Conference. When anything is decided I shall be ready to inform the house of the determination which has been come to. With regard to our general rela tions with France, with reference to which a question was put by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) last night, that right hon. gentleman made, as I have heard him do upon former occasions, allusions which were hardly appro priate to his argument. Ho has more than once alluded to the close connexion and alliance which we maintained with France in the time of Elizabeth, in the time of Cromwell, and in the time of Sir R. Walpole. In the time of Eliza beth and in the time of Cromwell, and more especially in the time of Elizabeth, there was another danger to the independence of the States of Europe, and in the opinion of these great and wise sovereigns a more formidable danger than that which arose from the preponderance of France— it was the danger naturally arising from the immense pos sessions and the ambition of Spain, and they sought to counteract that ambition, and to meet the schemes of supreme dominion over Europe and the danger of the extinc tion of the Reformation by looking to France, many of whose subjects were then Protestants, as a counterpoise to the ambition and the preponderance of Spain. That reason for an alliance with France has, at all events, disappeared. Sir R. "Walpole likewise most wisely maintained a close alliance and connexion with Frarce ; but with whom did he maintain that alliance and that connexion ? He maintained it with Louis XV., the most unambitious of Sovereigns, and Cardinal Fleury, the most peaceable of Ministers. I say give me again the days of Louis XV. and Cardinal Fleury—(a laugh)—and my noble friend will be ready to act the part of Sir R. Walpole, to write the most amiable letters to the Court of France, and to be in most intimate correspondence with it. But the days are not similar, the Sovereigns are not similar. We must do all we can to keep on the best terms with France, and we have this satisfaction, that our objects can always be avowed; they are perfectly legitimate; they are to main tain the peace of Europe, and to secure that every Power should be allowed its independence as at present enjoyed. We ask nothing more than that. This house, this coun try, asks nothing more than that. We have no projects of ambition. We wish not to annex any country or any part of any country in Europe—(hear, hear)—and, there fore, we can boldly avow our meaning and can constantly maintain it. That is all that I can say with regard to our own position. The Emperor of the French also knows the value of peace, and I trust that he will despise the coun sels of those who tell him that the greatness of France must be promoted by any projects of war or of ambition. (Hear, hear.) It was the opinion of the Powers who entered France in 1814 that for the security of Europe France ought to be great—Franco ought to be strong. Since that time she has increased in greatness and in force. Her territory is large, her population intelligent. Ihe works of ber industry and those of her intellect are appreciated in Europe, and I may say in all the countries of the world. It appears to me that a Sove reign of France cannot better consult her interests than by following the paths of peace—(hear, hear)—and by maintaining that great and glorious country in the position which she holds—a position which we need not envy, but which we must all admire as that of a country ' containing a population as brave and as intelligent as any that has ever existed. With all these advantages, I see no reason why we and all the other Powers of Europe may not act together in peace with France. I certainly do not share the apprehensions which have been expressed by a Sovereign who has lately come to the throne, that we are immediately on the eve of great convulsions. I trust that such evils may be aNerted ; I trust that peace may be maintained ; but under any circumstances I hope that this country will always be prepared to maintain its own dignity and independence. (Cheers.) QUALIFICATION FOR OFFICES. Mr. HADFIELD obtained leave to bring in a bill to render it unnecessary 0 make and subscribe certain de clarations as a qualification for offices and employments. The house then adjourned. 2711; NAVY ESTIMAIES. It is to be hoped that any revision of our public expenditure will include an efficient inquiry into that department which is popularly supposed to have a pretty intimate connection with the figures of the Estimates and the burdens of the Budget. How is the navy managed? How is it that, with an outlay of millions upon millions, we are so commonly short of ships and so invariably short of seamen ? How is it that no addition to the navy estimates ever puts an end to our difficulties by securing us what we want ? Is it not highly probable that the "administration" by which all this business is conducted must be badly organised ? Is it not very likely that with a better organisation we might obtain greater efficiency and yet save money into the bargain ? By way of answering these questions, we subjoin a plain description of the de partment in question, as recently given in a sketch of " Admiralty Administration ; its Faults and Defaults." After perusing this account the reader will be in a position to form an opinion for himself as to the efficacy of the machinery on which so much depends. Theoretically the Navy is governed by a Lord High Admiral, but that office is now executed by commission, and the Commissioners charged with the duty constitute that " Board" with which the public is familiar. The Board of Admiralty con sists of six Commissioners or Lords, and two Secre taries. One of the Secretaries is appointed perma nently, and occasionally one of the Junior Lords is retained in office, notwithstanding a change of Ministry ; but with these exceptions, the whole Board " goes out," or " comes in," with every fresh Administration. The " First Lord," or political head of the Board, has rarely any professional acquaintance with naval matters, but is appointed with reference to his poli tical position only. The four Lords next in order are naval officers, the first of them being known as the "Senior Sea Lord ;" but the sixth, or junior on the list, may be a civilian, like the first, though of less political distinction. Supposing, then, that a change of Ministry has taken place, the manage ment of the British Navy devolves on a sudden upon six gentlemen, of whom not more than four are necessarily sailors, who may have little or no pre vious knowledge of each other's views, and who, except that they belong to the same party, may have no opinions in common. Thus constituted, " the Admiralty" proceeds to take cognizance of the affairs of its department, according to a traditional' " distribution of busi ness." This division of labour suddenly brings some ten or a dozen different branches of naval adminis tration under the superintendence of each member of the Board, but the arrangement is purely private and discretional. The public has nothing to do with it, nor Parliament either. It represents merely an understanding of the members of the Board among themselVes, by virtue of which each becomes accountable, in a private way, to the others collec tively, but undertakes no further responsibility. No individual is responsible for this or that depart ment' either to Parliament or to the public, all such responsibility being assumed by "the Board." The Board, in fact, is presumed to do everything of itself, like the contractors for a great public work. There may be sublettings or delegations without number, but into those matters nobody can enter. Nobody can ask any particular officer how the Navy comes to want precipitate " reconstruction," how it is that the fleet cannot be manned, or how it is that we are in arrear of our neighkurs in the newest type of fighting ships. On all these points the Board alone can be questioned, and the Board alone can be put on its defence. In one or two departments, however, usage has introduced a certain modification of these arrange ments, and the details of business are practically left to the management of permanent heads. But with respect to other departments, there is no such modification of the administrative theory, and the matters thus expected happen to be of the most critical importance. There is, it is true, a Surveyor of the Navy, who might be considered responsible for the material efficiency of the fleet, but the proper business of this officer has of late years been brought so completely within the direct con trol of the Board that his authority, and with it, of course, his responsibility, has virtually disap peared. In two other departments of equal conse quence there is not even a pretence of definite or particular supervision. The whole direction of the " Works," which furnish so heavy an item to the Estimates, and which comprehend the entire system of basins, docks, and harbour accommodation, is thrown, by the simple "distribution of business," into the hands of the Junior Lord, who, being a civilian and unacquainted with naval affairs, finds himself charged, among an infinity of other functions, with a duty which might well monopolize all the energies of a professional superintendent. Similarly the manning of the fleet is thrown upon the shoulders of the Senior Sea Lord, who, while overwhelmed with other business, has to provide for this matter as he best can, having no recognised system to go upon and no organisation of any kind to assist him lin the work. This sketch of our " Admiralty Administration " is delineated without exaggeration or colouring from the pages to which we have referred, and we ask any man of business whether it could be ex pected that such machinery should produce good work? There is no concentration either of autho rity or responsibility. The division of labour is so contrived as to give everybody too much, and yet to leave the most important objects without effec tive superintendence. There is an officer who might he held accountable for the sufficiency and efficiency of our ships of war, but the " Board" has so effectually divested him of his powers, that " if he were to witness the whole sale destruction of public property in the Dock yards he could take no step to arrest it, except by a submission' to the Admi ralty." There i 3 no officer who Can be held accountable for the supply of seamen, except in so far as this charge is privately delegated to the " Senior Sea Lord" by the internal arrangements of the Board ; nor is there anybody charged with the superintendence of Dockyard works, except in so far as the Junior Lord is supposed to accept this duty among a host of others. On each and all of these points if any dissatisfaction is felt,—and it is felt pretty frequently,—the responsibility devolves upon the " Board" alone, which, besides possessing the proverbial impregnability of all boards, is itself in a state of almost perpetual transition. It we should persuade ourselves at last that our lavish and incomparably unproductive expenditure on the Navy is all the fault of " the Admiralty," we are still nearly as far from the end as ever, for we shall be asked " which Admiralty " we are proposing to censure ? Within the last eight years there have been four com plete renewals of the Board, involving a succes_ sion of five First Lords and thirty-four subordi nate members. Take a period of 30 years, and it is found that the total number of changes in the officers who have managed the affairs of the Navy amounts to 103. How can any responsibility be fixed under such a system ? How, without respon sibility, can efficiency be expected ? It really seems almost a wonder that things are as well as they are, but unfortunately we only main tain the efficiency of the Navy at an enormous cost. If we had well-organised reserves of ships and men, we might afford to dispense with some of the force actually in commission ; but as it is we never seem to know, except by actual experiment, how far our resources really extend. To complete the picture, it must be remarked that when the in competence of the proper officials to deal with such a subject as the manning of the fleet is confessed by its reference to a " Commission," the Commission is always strictly debarred from entering on the only point which might lead to a solution of the difficulty—the administration of the Admiralty itself. Such, however, is the position in which we now stand, and it cannot be considered a satisfac tory one. We must pay a certain price: we suppose, for Parliamentary government, but we do not think the charge for that advantage should necessarily include not only extravagant Estimates, but alto gether inadequate returns.— Times. [ADVERTISEMENT.] Pills and medicine invariably ag gravate and perpetuate diseases; their annoyance, dis appointment, and expense may be avoided by persons in indifferent health sending only their address to E. S. Barry, Esq., 77, Regent-street, W., London, and they will receive gratis and free by post the " INVALIDS' Ova umE," or Natural Restorer, without medicine or ex pmse, of perfect digestion, strong nervesisound lungs, and refreshing sleep, to the most enfeebled, insuring the removal of indigestion (dyspepsia), constipation, liver complaints nausea, epilepsy, paralysis, debility, nervousness, palpitatioL. cough, asthma, consumption, dropsy, flatulency, diarrhMa, dysentery, biliousness, fevers, sore throats, catarrhs, colds, noises in the ears, rheumatism, gout, impurities, eruptions. hysteria, neuralgia, irritability, sleeplessness, acidity, palpi tation, heartburn, headache, despondency, cramps, spatula, sinking, fits, 1:T0110111UL "Unquestionably the Weld sauitle to health,' MR. SPURGEON'S NEW TABERNACLE This edifice is now very nearly finished. During the last mouth the friends of the Rev. C. H. Spur geon, as well as the rev. gentleman himself, have been using every exertion to raise the sum required for completing the building. The efforts made have been singularly successful, and no doubt is now entertained that by the 26th March next the doors will be thrown open for Divine worship, entirely free of debt and without encumbrance of any kind. It is estimated that above a million persons have contributed towards rearing this gigantic edifice. The into spent will have been £30,000. Already £28,000 has been raised, and the remaining £2,000 there is every prospect of obtaining. The " last effort" is now being made. On Monday evening last a meeting was held in the Tabernacle, at which there were about 4,000 persons present, on which occasion the Hon. A. Kinnaird, M.P., pre sided. The hon. gentleman said he was truly happy in testifying by his presence the heartfelt sympathy he had with Mr, Spurgeon in the com pletion of this great enterprise. The accommoda tion afforded to so vast a congregation and the scientific manner in which the entire building was constructed reflected great credit both on the architect and the builder. It was so admirably adapted for sound that a voice of less volume than the rev, gentleman's,if ordinarily modulated, might reach the ears of the entire mass. Mr. Spurgeon said that when he first broached the idea of erecting a place of worship on so gigantic a scale it was pronounced as absurd ; it might be a great idea, but at the same time it was a great absurdity, said many who were now alive to see its completion. He predicted that in a few years this " absurd idea" of his would be imitated by more than one of those who had pooh-poohed the present under taking. He wished the greatest success might attend any future effort of the kind, for he could with all sincerity pray that many such buildings might be erected in the metropolis. In return for the kind feeling evinced towards him by his brethren of other sections of the christian church than that to which he belonged, he would say that they were welcome to hold their annual meetings in the New Tabernacle without any charge what ever, a feeling which was warmly reciprocated by the whole assembly. Several gentlemen addressed the meeting, after which a collection was made, and the result of the last month's efforts showed that nearly £9OO had been collected. Opening services by the different denominations, and a bazaar presided over by Mrs. Spurgeon, will occupy the next month. It is a fact worthy of note that not a single accident to life or limb has taken place during the whole of the erection of this truly magnificent structure. HEALTH OF LONDON DURING THE WEEK. (From the Registrar-General's Weekly Return.) The deaths in London were 1,544 in the week that ended last Saturday; they show, as from the favourable change of the weather might have been anticipated, a clear decrease on the heavy returns of the two previous weeks, when 1,926 and 1,783 deaths successively were registered. In the last fortnight the mean temperature of the air has been 13 deg. higher than that of the previous fortnight. The average number of deaths as obtained from the returns of corresponding weeks in ten previous years, and corrected for increase of population, is 1,358. The mortality of last week was still high, for the actual number of deaths exceeded the esti mated number by 186. The deaths arising from pulmonary complaints, exclusive of phthisis, in the week were 447, whilst the average number of corresponding weeks, cor rected for increase of population, is 308. Bronchitis has decreased from 354 in the previous week to 289 last week ; pneumonia from 117 to 110 ; asthma from 46 to 24; whooping-cough from 108 to 91. The deaths from phthisis last week were 142. Of 12 deaths from burns and scalds 8 occurred in consequence of the clothes taking fire. Five infants were suffocated in bed. Five infants died from syphilitic disease. Three were murdered. On 10th January a cabinet-maker, aged 42 years, died at the workhouse, Bethnal-green, from " ex posure and want of food and necessaries." (Inquest.) And on 25th January, at 9, Digby-walk, Bethnal green, a bricklayer, aged 78 years, died from " dis ease of the lungs accelerated by want of food and by exposure." (Inquest.) A girl, aged 17 years, died of idiopathic ptyalism ; and a harness-maker, aged 22 years, died of glan ders. A police officer, aged 36 years, died in Threadneedle-street, of smallpox. A man, aged 49 years, died of " syncope, brought on by excitement from being attacked by several boys." (Post mortem inquest.) He died instantly. Last week the births of 1,049 boys and 1,001 girls—in all, 2,050 children—were registered in London. In the ten corresponding weeks of the years 1851.60 the average number was 1,739. At the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, the mean height of the barometer in the week was 30'126 in. The mean daily readings rose above 30 in. on Satur day, the 26th January, and continued above it dur ing the whole of last week. The barometer fell to 29.96 in. on Tuesday, and rose to 30.54 in. on Satur day, which is higher than any point attained since 10th December, 1859, when the reading was 30.59 in. The mean temperature of the air in the week was 42.3 deg., which is higher by 4.6 deg. than the average of the same week in 43 years (as deter mined by Mr. Glaisher). The mean daily tempera ture was above the average throughout the week ; on Sunday and Friday it was about 9 deg. above the average. The highest point attained by a ther mometer in the shade was 55 deg. on Sunday and Tuesday ; the lowest point in the week was 29.5 deg. on Tuesday. The range of temperature in the week was therefore 25.5 deg. The mean daily range was 14.7 deg. The difference between the mean dew-point temperature and air temperature was 2.7 deg. The mean degree of humidity of the air was 90, complete saturation being represented by 100. On Wednesday the humidity was 98. Till Friday evening the wind blew from the south west—it then changed to north-west. There was no rain in the week. The mean temperature of the water of the Thames was 40.9 deg. The magnetic disturbance, which had been almost continuous since Tuesday, January 22, ceased at 10 p.m. on Sunday. BIRTHS. HART.—On the Gth inst., at Wanstead, Mrs. Lemon Hart,. of a son. KEKEwicit.—On the 6th inst., at 1, Ulster-terrace, Re gent's-park, the wifo of Arthur Kekewieh, Esq., barrio ter-at-law, of a daughter. MARRIAGES. ITCOAT — HAMMOND.—On the Gth inst., at St. Mary's, Islington, Alfred Jeffcoat, Esq., c.f Bayswater, to Amelia, only daughter of the late Mr. W. Hammond, of nol loway. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—The following are some out of many thousand extraordinary cures without medicine effected by Du Barry's delicious Health Restoring Reva lenta Arabica Food : —Cure No. 41,617.—Winchester, December 3, 1847.—Gentlemen,--I am happy to be able to inform you that the person for wh om y our R eva l en t a was procured has derived very great benefit from its use ; dis • tressing symptoms of dropsy, dyspepsia, and constipaticn of long standing have been removed, and a feeling of re stored health induced. James Shorland, late surgeon, 96th Regiment.—Cure No. 52,422.—Mr. James Roberts, timber merchant, Bridgehouse, Frimley, Surrey, 33 years' dis eased lungs, spitting of blood, liver derangement, deafness, singing in the ears, constipation, debility, shortness of breath and cough, have been removed by your Revalenta Arabica. Avoid Pills and Medicines: they invariably aggravate and perpetuate diseases ; their annoyance, disappointment, and expense may be avoided by using Du Barry's Food which, at a few pence per day, saves 50 times its cost In other remedies, removing effectually, ss,.thout purging, constipation, indigestion (dyspepsia) nervous, bilious and liver complaints and all their consequences. Certificate No. 36,418. We find it the safest remedy. Andrew Ure, MD., F.R.S., Dr Harvey, Dr. Wurzer, Dr. Shorland, Dr. Campell. Let invalids avoid the fearful dangers of spu rious and injurious imitations offered under a variety of false pretences. Nevill's imitations are prohibited by the high Court of Chancery under a penalty of £5,000 against Alfred Hooper Nevill and his agents ; and the pretences that Nevill has a patent for Arabica Food and that Du Barry's are connected with such patent are utterly fake. No canister is genuine without the name Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Regent-street, in full, ontheseal and wrapper. Shopkeepers who attempt imposition in one article must expect to be distrusted in all others. Packed in tins 11b. 2s. 9d.; 21b. 4s. 6d. ; 51b. lls. ; 121 b. 225. ; 241 b. 40s. The 121 b. and 241 b. canisters are sent carriage free on receipt of Post-office order by Barry Du Barry and Co., 779 rte gent-street, London; Fortnum Mason, and Co.; AbbiG) 60, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 62 and 150, Os bard-street ; 330 and 451, Strand; 49 and 60, Bishopsgate• street ; Batty, 16, Finsbury Pavement ; Phillips and Cr'. tea-dealers; Petty, Wood, and in Willi am - s t r eet, City; at 127, High Holb orn; and C0., :i1l l.- grocers [ADVERTISEMENT.]—HoIIoway's Ointment and Pills. --- Woman's Friend. —Much depends for securing future health on the judiciou s managemen t o f th e s y s t em ' s irre gularities. For present comfort it is requisite, for ease In after life it is essential. For this purpose nothing equals Holloway's remedies. The slightest departure from natu ral functions or their complete suspension, are safely, pain lessly, and effectually set right by the proper use of these admirable preparations. The ointment must be rubbed at least twice a day on the back. Full directions for guid ance accompany each package, which all who read can thoroughly comprehend. Professor Holloway has gene rously placed his remedies within the reach of all, that every household may with promptitude and safety meet and turn the first insidious approach of disordered action. DEATHS. AUSTIN.—On the Ist inst., at Park-road, Soho-hill, Bir mingham, George Austin, late of London, aged 9L BLu'ros.--On the let inst., at Cheam, Surrey, Mrs. Bluton, aged N. Bacon. —O n the 4th i ns t., a t 34, Great Cumberland-pltc e, Hyde-park, Thos. Bacon, Esq., aged 52. LONDON : Printed'and Published by MIIRDO YOUNG!. at No. 112, Strand, Printer, at TR SUN Office, No. 112,Stra.nd, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the Coul►ty pf Mid 4 f1,0e% Thursday, February 7, WU. .. -.~:. _ OM Th 1 ph J o , C)., eel