The Sun. — London, England, 1861-03-16 00:00:00

oiould not have been known except that the despatch had been published in Germany. The noble lord the Foreign Secretary had stated to Sir James Hudson that this coun try had interests in the Adriatic which must be watched, but what those interests were nobody from John O'Groat's to the Land's End, no one could tell. In another despatch the noble lord desired Sir James H u d son to keep his eye on Louis Kossuth, and he, in a spirit that showed he was a proper English representative, replied that he considered it no part of his duty to carry out that instruction. lie also condemned the course pursued by the Government in their instruc- tions relative to the Genoese Railway, of which Kossuth was a director, and praised Sir James Hudson in reference to the matter. This policy was of a piece with the pro ceedings that had taken place in regard to the Hun garian notes, and was intended to crush the liberty of Hungary, a country which contained 15,000,000 inhabitants, and 20,000 squars miles more than England and Wales. This policy was intended to be a counterpoise to France, but he deprecated such policy as being most unjust and unwise, considering the feelings which the Emperor of the French had shown towards this country. had seen a letter from Turin recently, from which it appeared that Austria proposed to get up an apparent insurrection in Hungary, in order to place that country under martial law, and he called on the house not to sanction a policy that would lead to a continuance of the present enslaved situation of Hungary. Mr. C. BENTINCK Asked the Secretary of State f or Foreign Affairs whether information was received from Sir J. Hudson, previous to the 31st day of August last, to the effect that the expedition of General Garibaldi was secretly assisted by the Sardinian Government ; andwhetherthe Foreign Office did, previous to t he 11 th day of Septemb er last, receive official information that the Sardinian Govern ment contemplated the invasion or seizure of a portion of the Papal States ; and whether any and what answer was returned by the Austrian Government to the Despatch, No. 96, addressed to Lord A. Loftus, and referring to a de spatch from Consul General P erry ? He contended that Government had not been kept properly informed re lative to the movements in Italy, and designated the inva sion of Naples as a pre-concerted plan on the part of the King of Sardinia, whose agent, he contended, Garibaldi was. THE RELIGIOUS PERSECUTIONS IN SPAIN. Sir R. PEEL asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any correspondence had taken place be tween her Majesty's Government and that of Spain re specting• the imprisonment in Spain of certain per sons for religious opinions. The honourable baronet said that he did not appear before the house in regard to this subject in the character of a person suddenly struck with religious zeal, which he dis claimed—(laughter)—but as an advocate of civil and religious liberty, from the benefits it conferred. The only offence of which these poor men imprisoned in Spain bad been guilty of was having in their pos session and using copies of the Holy Scriptures in common with other persons. But the most remarkable instance was that which occurred in MI as regarded Francis and Rosa Madai, who were seized and put into prison exactly on the same ground as those for whom he now appealed to Parliament. Her Majesty's Government —not only tke present Government but also the Govern ment represented by Lord Malmesbury—directly and suc cessfully interfered in that case. Having mentioned these political and these religious grounds of interference he was quite sure that now, if he could make out a case of perse cution and of intolerance which he believed to be unequalled in any Christian country in the world since the abolition of the Inquisition, he was quite sure that he would be supported by the house in his desire to obtain the moral and the active influence of the Government to relieve those parties from their suffering. What was the cause of this persecution ? This religious sect of dissenters from the Church of Rome existed more particularly in Malaga, at Grenada, and at Barcelona. The chiefs of this sect were a man named Alhama and a man named Matamoros. He went no further back than last year. At the beginning of last year Alhama was seized and put into prison solely because he was in possession of a copy of the Holy Scriptures, and that he had read them in communion with other people. He had been tried, after being months in prison, and did the house know what the punishment was for that act of his ? Why, in accordance with the 25th article of the Spanish penal code a man guilty of the crime of having a Bible, or reading it in communion with other people, was punishable with 10 or 12 years at the galleys ; in fact he became a galley slave, associated with the worst of criminals. That was a disgrace to any Christian country. In fact, the other day Matamoros saw a gentleman in prison, who said, " I wish your offence, instead of being an offence against the Ho man Catholic religion, had been a political one; I wish it had been robbery. You would have been long ago at liberty." In consequence of some papers found on Al hama, residing at Barcelona, Matamoros was taken pri soner, and was dragged to Barcelona, thence to Malaga, and thence to Grenada. It was his fortunate lot to travel with that man on the diligence from Malaga to Grenada. He did not know who he was at the time, but he could not but admire the simple piety of the man. He afterwards saw him at Grenada. The cell in which he was confined was only a few feet wide—it was dark, and there was no furni- Lure in it, or anything to make him pass his time agree ably. (Laughter.) He asked him whether he was at all connected with any political movement, or with anything directed against the Government of the country ? The answer of Matamoros was, " Nothing of the kind. It is simply and solely for the profession of my faith that I am in prison, and the same is the case with Alhama." He (the hon. baronet) should like to read a letter which he had re ceived, though if the house did not seem disposed to grant him that privilege he would not do so. (Hear.) He could assure them, however, that the subject was a very serious one, though the right hon. member for Bucks seemed to find in it nothing but amusement. Mr. DISRAELI—I rise to order. The personal observa • tions which the hon. bart. has made are not justified by any thing I have done, and have no foundation whatever. (Cheers.) I am not aware that I denoted any sentiment to justify a course which during the whole time I have been in Parliament I never knew adopted before. (Cheers.) The SPEAKER—No doubt the hon. baronet, without any interposition on my part, will see that his observations require some explanation. Sir R. PEEL—I must say, air, that Ido not see that my observations require any modification or explanation. (Laughter, and loud cries of " Order !") The SPEAKER—Then it will be necessary for me to express a more decided opinion on the subject. (Hear.) Sir R. PEEL—I will at once, sir, acknowledge my error in the allusion which I made to the right hon. gentleman. (Hear.) Of course a speaker has a very difficult task when he is standing opposite a gentleman who is continually laughing. (Oh, oh.) I beg to apologise to the right hon. gentleman, and to withdraw anything I may have said that is disagreeable to him. I assure him that I did not mean anything offensive. (Cheers.) I hope that the noble lord will take an early opportunity,not by private remonstrance, but by public despatch, to declare that the persecution of these poor people was a flagrant violation of the first prin ciples of religious liberty. (Cheers.) MEXICO. Mr. BUTT asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether Sir C. Wyke, who was appointed on Jan. 23,1860, Minister Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Mexico, had as yet proceeded to his mission ; and, if not, when he was likely to do so • and whether the Foreign Office had received any official intimation of any measures adopted by the present Mexican Government to carry into effect the engagements entered into with the holders of the bonds of the Republic ' Mr. lIENNESSY said ho begged Russellggedtoasktthe noble lord whether he instructed Mr. o would a c t o o a n s k the Ca d r e d f i e n n a l Antonelli whether the Papal army sive, and whether the army of the Pope Would be sent to the Romagna to attempt to regain the R omagna ? There was also another question ho should like to put to the noble lord. (Oh, oh.) The noble lord had called the attention of the Austrian Government to the fact that Austria in speak ing of Lombardy, had called it the Lombardo-Venetian provinces. That was said to be incorrect, and a violation of the treaty of Zurich. He wished to ask whether, if that were a violation of the treaty of Zurich, the noble lord felt himself bound to demand on explanation whether it was not a flagrant violation of the treaty of Zurich that Victor Emmanuel should assume the title of King of Italy ? Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, I certainly have a great many questions to answer, which are multifarious in character as well as numerous. The hon. member for Finsbury began by stating a good many reasons for thinking my conduct in foreign affairs unduly partial to Austria. The hon. mem ber for Taimton, on the other hand, rose, and gave what he thought conclusive proof that my conduct was very un friendly to Austria. These are the sort of accusations Which we receive when we are pursuing a line of conduct Which . we think impartial, and which we believe is condu e_lv:_to the preservation of the peace of Europe. With re ,to the question of the hon. gentlemanopposite, I have t ° say, that without any violent interference on our tart j o e . , from 1,11 affairs, there are occurrences happening to a .! tA) time which seem to us to be calculated to lead u o of the , peaus of Europe. It seems to me very )detht h le e lab) preserve the peace of Europe. (Hear, hear. to our k nowiedz e e lt Place, whenever any occurrences come uatiottwhich may tend to make a rupture between one eet, and o another, it is a friendly act as well as a useful ask for an explanation or for a change of Conduct, 0 for such a course as cir cumstances may seem to r Finsbury has heard o b f: vg:royait many require. The ho n. member for things which did not occur, and seems to ignorant with regard to many matters which have oceurred.g7T any e l hea.ye communicated po sed that her Mejesty's G overtan : n i gh.) How has lie sup or intimated to Sardinia, that if Which l e A ch ue tio t u should leave y her M ri a an territory, Italy for the coast of Dalmatia, es i tc:s aaval h such an expedition would be opposed b e forces. No such intimation has been made.i many stories n. gentleman seems to have been crammed with of this kind not founded on fact. There was one thing, however, with regard to which I did put a question to Sir J. Hudson, but in regard to which the answer he gave wa s a different one from what the hon. gentleman supposes. had heard from persons in the city of London, that there was a contract about to take place for a railroad through Sardinian territory, and the first clause of that contract was that a large sum of money should be paid to Kossuth. It was conjectured, and reasonably conjectured, that a very large sum paid to Kossuth in this Sardinian territory would be used for purposes of aggression against Austria. Now Austria might have said at any time—l do not say she has said, but she might have said—that if hostile preparations are made within the territories of the King of Sardinia, and those preparations have for their result that ships or armies and men and money are directed against Austrian territory, an expedition so prepared upon Italian soil, and so landed upon Austrian territory, will not be considered as the mere act of individuals, but that Austria will think herself jus tified in asking for an explanation or redress from those powers in whose territories those preparations are made. Of coure that principle may be just, or it may not, according to the manner in which it is applied. It is evident that cir cumstances of that kind may arise, either by negligence or oversight, on the one hand, or by too great suspicion on the other. But it is obvious that they are circumstances which may lead to a disturbance of the peace of Europe. I there , fore directed an inquiry to Sir J. Hudson, whether he knew anything of this contract,and whether it was true that a large sum was to be paid to Kossuth either by the Sardinian Go vernment or by parties in Sardinia. And, as far as I can re collect the particulars, the reply of Sir J. Hudson was that there had been in contemplation such a contract, but that the plan had been entirely abandoned. I must say, so far from Sir J. Hudson giving such an answer as the hon. gentleman supposes, expressing indignant virtue at such an inquiry being made, Sir J. Hudson acted as an honest and faithful servant of the Crown, and he gave me to the ques tion I asked every information which his great intelligence and great knowledge of Italy enabled him to do. Then, sir, with respect to this ominous omission in the despatches be tween Aug. 31 and Oct. 27, I have looked over the chief of them to-day, and I find they are, most of them, en very trifling matters. There was an English ship that had been seized by some of the Garibaldians, and was afterwards carried into Malta; and the question arose how compensa tion was to be obtained for that vio:ent seizure. There was a question with regard to the Irish legion of how they were to be got back, and of what had become of Major O'Reilly. (Laughter.) There was a question whether it was fit to have a consul at Florence, and whether her Majesty's subjects would not find t reat convenience in that consulate being established. There was another question with regard to an English gentleman who had got into debt at Milan, and who had been thrown into prison, having been very much encumbered by a debt to his tailor. (A laugh) I did not think it necessary to load the Blue-book with subjects of that kind, and if the house will permit me to make a general re mark on this subject, I may say that before the session be gan, having selected, with the Under Secretary of State, what papers should be given, I said, "It very often happens that when too bulky a volume is presented to members of Parliament, they are almost as much at a loss for information as if no despatch had been pro duced at all. Therefore, let us endeavour to extract all the despatches that are most interesting, bearing on the great point then in dispute, and not give such volumi nous despatches as are sometimes laid upon the table of the house." This, therefore, is the explanation of there being no despatches between those two dates to which the hon. gentleman refers. The hon. gentleman next asked me what I could mean by saying that the British Government has interests in the Adriatic Sea. Well, sir, I must inform the hon. gentleman, that which I suppose all the rest of the house are quite aware of, that treaties were made in 1814 and 1815, by which the protectorate of the lonian Islands was given to Great Britain ; that a British garrison is kept at Corfu, and at that time, when there was great discussion whether the whole of the provinces neighbouring to Greece should rise in insurrection, and that there should be an at tempt to make a great Greek empire, the Greek Minister at that time told me himself, that his Government had no means of preventing any public manifestation of that kind. And though the hon. gentleman may not have heard of Corfu, yet let me tell him that it is a very important posi tion, and is not to be entirely neglected by any person who may have charge of the foreign affairs of the country. The hon. gentleman opposite asked me several question to which I am afraid I cannot give him so satisfactory an answer as— Mr. DUNCOMBE—The despatch relative to Kossuth? I mean the despatch in which the noble lord desires Sir 3. Hudson to keep his eye on Kossuth—(a laugh)—and also that despatch relative to the railways, that no concession should be made by Sardinia of any railway with which Kossuth was connected. The noble lord has evaded that. Lord J. RUSSELL—It is because I recollect no such cir cumstance. The hon. gentleman did not inform me of the precise question he was about to ask ; but I never remem ber asking Sir James Hudson to keep his eye on Kossuth. I did say that the payment of a large sum of money, to be used for the purposes of war against Austria, might be a very inconvenient thing for Sardinia. Therefore I hoped he would make observations upon it. (Cries of " Hear, hear.") I must say again that Ido not think that it is for the interest of Sardinia, or for the interest of that new kingdom of Italy, which I should regard not with those feelings of apprehension which the hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Hennessy) does—l say that to that new kingdom of Italy it would be a most unfortunate circumstance that she should be sending out expeditions to the Hungarians, not to take part in Hungary itself, but on the coast of Dalma tia, and thereby involve herself in hostilities with Austria. I do not deny that I took that step—(cheers)—l should be sorry that Austria should have just cause of war against Italy, or that Italy should have just cause of war against Austria ; and therefore I never omitted any week, begin -1 ning with the last recess of Parliament, impressing upon both those powers not to give any just cause of offence to the other. Then the hon. gentleman the member for Taun ton (Mr. Bentinck) asks me whether information was re ceived from Sir Jas. Hudson previous to the 31st of August last to the effect that the expedition of Gen. Garibaldi was secretly assisted by the Sardinian Government, and whether the Foreign-office did, previously to the 11th day of Sep tember last, receive official information that the Sardinian Government contemplated the invasion or seizure of a por tion of the Papal States. ISir, neither before the 31st of August, "nor since, have I been informed by Sir James Hudson, nor has any official nor indeed reliable information whatever been received, that the expedition of General Garibaldi to Sicily at its first setting out; was assisted in any way by the Sardinian Government. Count Cavour, in the despatch of May, says, and I think says with great fair ness and candour, " The Sardinian Government has no in tention of attacking the territories of the King of Naples." But I must admit that among the subjects of the King in his states there is great sympathy felt for those who are rising in Italy against the King of Naples, and that may give rise to expeditions. Now, whether Count Cavour, or whether the Sardinian Government did not exceed what they might fairly do aceording to international obligations, is a question into which I do not think it necessary to enter. I am not bound to defend all the proceedings of the Sardi nian Government, but I certainly did not receive any inti mation, nor do I believe that the Sardinian Government were concerned in fitting out the expedition of Garibaldi. Their subsequent conduct I need not criticise, because it is not the business of the British Government to defend every act that foreign Governments may have done. The hon. member asks me whether :any and what answer was re. turned by the Austrian Government to the despatch No. 96, addressed to Lord A. Loftus, and referring to a despatch from Consul-General Perry. Sir, the only official informa tion we have received was contained in that despatch of the 7th of September which is on the table of the house. Of course there has been —and I have received since I have held the office I have the honour to hold—various informa tion that a portion of 'the Papal States is very much disaf fected to the Pope, and that continued missions were being sent from Umbria to Turin, asking the King of Sardinia to receive deputations, and that he would take Umbria under his protection. We were always told that those deputa tions were discouraged, but at the same time that dissatis faction and disaffection were known to prevail. When it was likely that that disaffection would break out in revolt of course it was not in our power to tell. The hon. gentle man asks with regard to the foreign mercenaries employed by the Papal Government. Now, in the despatch so often alluded to of the 20th of October, I do not rest any part of the case upon the employment of foreign mercen aries. But there again I think it was a subject which naturally excited great attention on the part of the epeace of Sar dinianth Government. As soon as it was decided after Villafranca to reduce the Austrian army, w in e A re u t s h t e r r ia e Austrian soldiers in great numbers went to Ancona, and Austrian enlisted uniform i nt whenhe P t a h p e a y l service.. engaged t 0 Manyserveof tthemhew ePope.re At that time the circumstance to which I alluded, and which said, no doubt you are able tor rl allow y r ou r i r h m t Government,e tn was pointed out to the was this. I foreign service. Nobody denies t d o o e s n engage e ßu in t with respect to expeditions of this kind, recollect ° that if great numbers of Austrians should be formed into battalions c on the Papal territory on the one side, and Austrian troops an d an Austrian garrison should occupy Verona and Mantua on the other, nothing is more likely to induce Sardinia to believe she is not safe, and that she must rid herself of a force of that kind. Therefore I think, although that is not itself a cause of war, yet it is one of those circumstances which might produce a collision with Sardinia. With re gard to all the circumstances which then took place, I must say that I have no complete information, but they were in that state tkat at any moment the Piedmontese Government might think their safety was compromised and might begin to arm. That is what Sir James Hudson pointed out. Ho said that if Garibaldi were to proceed from Naples to the Papal States an insurrection would follow, and the Pied montese army would throw their arms into it. Of course I am not entering into the general question, as I have no offi cial information. Then the hon. gentleman asks what answer was returned to despatch 96, which referred to some arrests which had taken place in Venice. There is, again, another circumstance which we had pointed out to the Austrian Go vernment. It is no doubt very difficult—some will say im possible, for the Austrian Government to conciliate her sub jects in Venetia. But this is quite certain—that arrests which have been made from time to time during, not the last One or two years, but during 20 or 30 years, and confine ment of persons who have been tried and secretly cons damned, or kept without open trial, is one of those circum stances which have worked most deeply into the minds of the people of that country, and has induced th em to refuse to be r econciled to out in particular cases to th e Austrian Goy e Austrian Government. The rara Austria. Well, we pointed th at eat replied, as no doubt was too true, , THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 16, 1861. that they were in revolution, that there were secret societies meditating insurrection. I did not think it necessary to put that into the correspondence; but we certainly recom mended to Austrian a system of open trials. The next ques tion is that of the right hon. baronet the member for Tame worth. The right hon. baronet said that in which I entirely concur, that in punishing any person for his religious faith, totally unconnected with political offences, is a violation of ri7hts which every man ought to possess. The belief of this house is that every person, whatever may be his faith, ought to be at liberty to profess that faith, and express his opinion in the choice of a mode of a religious worship, without being punished by the civil authority of the coun try. That is the established'opinion of this country ; and I certainly have never failed when I have had the power to do so to communicate that opinion, whether to foreign Go vernments or in this house. The hon. baronet referred to the statement I made with regard to the case of the Madiai. In that case I had this to consider. I considered it very likely that with the opinion which I knew prevailed in Italy, knowing likewise that, though not very numerous, there was a certain number of Protestants in Tuscany, it was very probable the Tuscan Government would release the Madiai. That turned out to be the case. I may mention that, as there is a question connected with Mexico this evening, there are two parties in that country, one called the church party, and the other the constitutional party. The church party have laid down an invariable rule that there is to be only one religion, and that persons who do not belong to the Roman Catholic religion shall never have the right of public worship. We were anxious, France was anxious, and Spain was anxious to induce the parties engaged in a civil war in Mexico to restore tranquillity; but I said I never conld recommend such a peace without recommending to both parties that principle, that the principle of religious liberty should be maintained. One party, without hesita tion, adopted that principle ; but with regard to Spain, the question I had to consider was, not merely the just cause of religious liberty, but how far official representations R ould be likely to be successful. I am of opinion that the public feeling of the various countries of Europe taken in connec tion with the improvement of Spanish commerce will before many years have the effect of introducing religious tolera tion into Spain. (Hear.) Another hon. member has asked me a question with respect to the non-despatch of a Minister to Mexico, namely, 6ir unartee Wyke. Thoc,kwor T haves to make is, that it has been reported that our Government had engaged to give a certain moral support to the late Govern ment of Mexico. That is to say, that our recognition of that Government and the presence in Mexico of a represen tative of this Government would assuredly give colour to that supposition. But when the office was vacant of a Mi nister in Mexico, I had asked Sir Chas. Wyke to proceed to Central America to settle questions which then required adjustment. I have no personal knowledge of Sir Charles. I only knew him from his public services. He had served for a great many years in a diplomatic capacity in tropical climates, and I recommended him to the Queen for the ap pointment in Mexico, but he did not come home from his duties in Central America till the month of May. When ho returned to England his health was so shattered by his residence in a tropical climate that he was unable to go, and asked for six months' leave of absence. With the view of restoring his health he went to Germany; and in the middle of winter I asked him to go out to Mexico, and, since that time, his health had been a good deal restored, and he would be ready to go out by the next packet. He had been 15 years in a tropical climate, and during that time he had only passed one year and ten months at home. It must be admitted, therefore, that he was fully entitled to the leave of absence. (Hear, hear.) In the interim, the conduct of affairs in Mexico has been left to a charge d'affairs, Mr. Matthew, who has discharged his duty with great ability. One great difficulty has arisen from their being one government in Mexico and one at Vera Cruz. I think it is a fortunate circumstance that there is now one Government, and that Sir C. Wyke, when he gets out there, will find that to be the case, and that the various cl iims by British subjects can be urged with some chance of success. (Hear.) I quite agree in what has been said by the hon. gentleman with respect to the Republics of South America. I agree with him that those Republics are of great fertility and natural wealth, and may be prosperous, but so long as they remain in the distracted state in which many of them are, nothing can be more difficult than for a foreign minister to get redress for the claims of British sub jects, because, when he seeks redress from a Government, he may find it dissolved and another put in its place. The hon. gentleman will therefore see I have not been able to send out Sir Charles before, but he will go out in April next. (Hear.) THE SUITORS' FEE FUND. Sir H. CAIRNS rose to ask a question relative to the in tentions of the Government with reference to the money of suitors in the Court of Chancery. There was a rumour afloat that it was the intention of the Chancellor of the Ex chequer to propose that some new stock should be created called the Chancellor's stock, and that the money of the suitors of the Court of Chancery should be in some compul sory manner invested in that stock at a fixed rate of inte rest. All he could say was that any such legislation was entirely at variance with the tenor of the legislation of the last few years. Last year an act provided for the investment of the funds of the suitors, not only in the Three per Cent. Consols, but in various kinds of stock, such as East India stock, and in mortgages. What he now wished to ask the Government was, what were the specific purposes which this commission was intended to work out, at what time it would commence its sittings, and whether the Government would object to follow the invariable rule of advising hor Majesty to add to the commission the names of some other persons, and particularly the names of some of the judges of the Court of Chancery, who would be willing to give the commission their assistance. (Hear, hear.) were various other important questions connected with \ this subject which made the appointment of the commis sion highly seasonable and useful. The hon. and learned gentleman regarded the question from the position of an able and successful advocate. He did not regard it from that of a minister of finance, though the proposal contem plated a large appropriation of money, and involved con siderable public liability. When it was recollected that the estimate for the houses of parliament began at £750,000, and ended, or rather had not yet ended, in an expenditure of £3,000,000 (hear, hear) they must com : to w t h h i e ch conclusion hadtocy arr that out a the p lraet o residuary du f a that t liability kin d thetat an important consideration. (Hear, hear.) He said without hesitation that it was the duty of the government o I and his own duty in particular, before consenting to the introduction of a bill for the concentration of the law courts, to take the best measures in his power for the pur pose of ascertaining that the management of the Chancery funds was a prudent management, in order that no un necessary burden might be imposed upon the public. (Hear.) There were ample grounds as to the state and use of those vast funds, apart entirely from the liability actual or possible of the state, to recommend a careful inquiry into the whole subject, and that was the opinion of his noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor and of the Attorney-General, as well as his own. Many persons were of opinion that the suitors were hardly used by the Court of Chancery, not from the fees they paid but in respect of the fruits and profit of their money whilst in the court. The hon. and learned gentleman said there were £50,000,000 of British property in that condition, and they said to the owners " we give you this option and this alone—either forfeit all fruits and profit whatever on these monies while in the Court of Chancery, or consent to place it in investment where the capital is variable, and therefore subject to heavy loss." The reason why this state of things had been borne so long was this, that for the last 60 or 70 years these funds, which had then a tendency to fall, had a movement upwards, with a brief interest, so that it was an investment which was sure to rise. But those who knew what happened 100 years ago must be aware what a cruel loss was inflicted upon them when the Three per Cents., under Mr. Pelham's administration, fell 30 or 40 per cent. Those who came into the court at the former period were subject to I Lebeeas loss at the latter. But they were now arrived at times when they could expect no such progres sive increase in public securities. If they could maintain their balance on that of the last nine or ten years. that was all they could expect. That which induced the suitors to bear their position up to the present time was that the funds were likely to rise. Now was it possible to give the suitors the option of investing in the funds or stocks with the risk of loss of capital which that involved, and the receipt of a moderate and low rate of interest on their money? That was a question which involved far higher considerations than any question connected with the reduction of £lO,OOO or £20,000 a year in the fees of the Court of Chancery. That was a question of immense importance to the suitors of the Court of Chancery, and in a published pamphlet by Lord St. Leonards on this subject, it was said "There might be given to such suitors a certain small interest of 2 per cent. while the funds will admit." He could not concur in the addition of the words "while the funds will admit," be cause who was to be the judge whether they would admit it or not ? Whatever was given must be in a clear and definite way. Then the system of accounts with regard to the funds in the Court of Chancery, which were regulated under the act of 1727—a piece of antiquarian curiosity in itself—would come under the consideration of the commis sion. There was no audit of the accounts, and the process of keeping them consisted in fitting and welding the opera tions of two bodies, who did the same thing in parallel lines. There was also the important question of the turn in the market, where the principal question was not one of broker age, as the hon. and learned gentleman seemed to suppose, but the profit of the jobber on each transaction, Now, with regard to the composition of the committee, he thought that one member of it (Mr. Crawford) had just given proof ofihis independence. But it was not so much for his inde pendence, or even his connexion with the City of London, as for his connexion with the Bank of England, which had a special department for the transaction of the Chancery funds, that his honourable friend was chosen. The right hon. gentleman then proceeded to defend the appointment of the other members of the commission, and especially that of Mr. Anderson, who had been described by the hon. and learned gentleman as by the right hon. gentleman the mem ber for Bucks the other night as a Treasury clerk. That designation was true in the letter but false in the spirit, for Mr. Anderson was entrusted with the highest and most responsible duties. He was discovered in 1830, by Sir James Graham, as a clerk in the Admiralty, and was the right hand of that right honourable gentleman in the reforms which he introduced there. No man was so well acquainted with the Accountant •General's department, and he had such knowledge of complex accounts and such natural gifts that no person was perhaps so well qualified to be on such a commission. With regard to the appoint ment of members of the Government on these commissions, he wished to express generally his opinion that on commis sions which involved important financial considerations affecting the State, the State ought to be represented. They had of late years examples of the mischief that resulted from the omission to act upon that principle. These commissions sat under the authority of, the Crown; but there was no one to represent the Treasury or the State, and then came forth reports recommending an expenditure of £3,000,000 or £4,000,000. (Hear.) The Government were thus often placed in seeming conflict with an authority appointed by the Crown. That was a state of things which it was desir able to prevent from arising, and there seemed no better way of doing that than by the appointment of some persons to represent the Government on these commissions. He be lieved the commissioners held their first sitting that day. He now passed, by somewhat of a violent transition, from the constitution of this commission to the alcoholic test— (laughter)—and he was sorry to say that while he reposed great confidence in the judgment of his hon. friend gene rally, upon this subject of the wine duty test they were at daggers drawn. His hon. friend said that he could produce a hundred instances of errors committed in the classification of wines. Suppose he could. Suppose there were 10,000 or 20,000 where there were no errors, the fact of there being 100 proved little against a system which was still new. His hon. friend produced one instance where two quarter-casks of the same wino were charged at different duty —one at 2s. sd. and the other at 2a. 11d. But he would remind his hon. friend that the cause of that distinction in the wine duty scale was not his invention, but that it was introduced at the special request of the wine trade last year. Previously to that, wine of 40 degrees was subject to a duty of 10s. a gallon, and it was at tho request of the trade that he made a distinction between wine of 40 degrees and 45 degrees. His hon. friend had said that this process would occupy a scien tific gentleman three hours, but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had not heard that from any other quarter, and ho believed that a Custom -house officer could perform the experiment in five or ten minutes. The hon. gentleman described the grave suffering and excitement among those connected with the wine trade in the City of London; but how did the matter stand ? Under the new law they intro duced as large a quantity of wine in the first two months of the present year as formerly had been brought in in five months. (Hear, hear.) He (the Chancellor of the Ex chequer) could not conceal from the house that there were now immense facilities for the introduction of wine into the country. He received yesterday m orn i ng a l e tt er f rom a merchant expressing a hope that the test now adopted would not be altered, and adding that he was selling good sound French wine at 14s. perdozen. (A laugh.) The mischief of the old duties was that they created an artificial system which had all the characteristics of a monopoly, and it was because the new law had brought in a real and free competition, that there was all this hubbub in the trade. (Hear, hear.) There were no more respectable gentlemen than those engaged in the wine trade, but their habits had been formed under the system to which they had been accustomed, and which confined the demand for wine in the country to certain limited selections. On the contrary, by the present sys tem, the market of Europe was open and free, and new mer chants were springing into existence and selling wines at less than half the price which the same wines were sold at two or three years ago. That was a great shock to the established habits and practice of the trade—Hine ilk° lachrymm. (Laughter.) The Government did not pro pose to accede to the prayer for a uniform duty on foreign wines ; but they did intend to adhere to the principle of classification by means of the alcoholic test at the different rates now enforced. Ile did not deny that the present sys tem had faults and inconveniences, but they were infinitely less than those which would arise from any other system which might be substituted for it. As to the scale adopted, it was not his intentiofi to propose any change in the pre sent session. They should have some reasonable expe rience of the new system before suggesting any alteration or modification. He had no objection to produce the me morial addressed to the Commissioners of the Treasury, and he would probably accompany it with the report and comments of the Customs. As ho had heard rumours that negotiations had been concluded with the French Govern ment for an alteration in the present scale of the wine duties, ho thought it right to state that no such negotia tions had been concluded or were on foot. perfect honour, and I regret very much that any person of his abilities and high character should, by circumstances over which he had no control, have been placed in a situa tion very irksome to the feelings of any man who had natu rally a high respect for himself. The course which Mr. Turnbull took was highly honourable to him. I think any man who finds himself placed in a situation in which, in the discharge of duties conscientiously performed, he dis covers that great amount of prejudice has arisen against him, and that he is the object of peculiar suspicion from a great number of persons—l think that that individual, if he possesses those feelings of self-respect which ought to actuate him, does rightly when he withdraws himself from a situation so invidious, and which naturally leaves him open to misrepresentation and prejudiced attack ; and, therefore, so far from thinking that Mr. Turnbull acted foolishly in tendering his resignation, I think that that was a course which any man of honour and self-respect would have pursued in the situation in which Mr. Turn• bull was placed. The hon. member has stated that he would not enter into the demerits or merits of this case. I will not do so either. Mr. Turnbull was appointed, not to an office, but to a temporary employment by the Master of the Rolls. The Master of the Rolls is not a servant of the Government. He holds an entirely indepen dent situation, over which the Government have no con trol, and over which it is not pretended that we have any control. He is not my servant, nor am I his servant. (Hear, hear,) Well, the Master of the Rolls having chosen Mr. Turnbull to perform a certain duty for a limited period, applied to the Treasury that he should be employed on his recommendation, and that a certain salary should be given to him. That was in August, 1859, Soon after that ap pointment took place it was sanctioned by the Treasury as a matter of course upon the recommendation of the Master of the Rolls. I knew nothing about it. It did not come within my cognisance, but very soon afterwards re presentations were made to me from various quarters that Mr. Turnbull was not, from the peculiar opinions which he entertained, and his peculiar characteristics, :a person who, could properly be employed to perform the duties which devolved upon him. (Hear, hear.) I com municated immediately afterwards with the Master of the Rolls to let him know the representations which had been made to me. Those representations came frequently, and from very large bodies of persons in England and Scotland, and those persons were entitled fully to entertain the opinions which they expressed, just as Mr. Turnbull was entitled to express his own opinions. I felt it right to let the Master of the Rolls know the current of opinion which had set against the employment of Mr. Turnbull in that particular duty. Several letters passed between me and ; the Master of the Rolls between September, 1859, and the month of January in this year. Those letters were private letters, aid most of them were written from my own residence in the country. They were not letters from the Government, nor letters ex pressing any opinion of the Government, but were letters which I, as an old colleague and friend of the Master of the Rolls, thought myself entitled to communicate to him, and he answered them in the same way. The object of my letters was to urge upon the Master of the Rolls that the appointment which had been made by him upon his own responsibility had been an unfortunate one—that it had created a great amount of public misunderstanding; and I earnestly urged upon him to employ Mr. Turnbull in some other way, in the performance of which he would not be liable to the same suspicions, unfounded as they might be, and to the same amount of prejudice in regard to the em ployment he held. (Hear, hear.) The Master of the Rolls answered those letters giving his reasons why he did not think it expedient so to do. (Hear, hear.) The Master of the Rolls was perfectly competent, upon his own respon sibility, to take that line. Towards the end of September I wrote the letter to which the hon. member has more par ticularly alluded, and in that letter I repeated again what I had stated before, that I had received petitions signed by some thousands of people, and representations from various quarters against Mr. Turnbull's appointment, and I said I thought it very probable that the matter would be brought under discussion in this house, and in that case, that it would be necessary for him to furnish somebody with arguments in favour of the course which he had taken. I think there was nothing unbecoming in that statement of mine. (Hear, hear.) If I employ an officer, naval, military, or diplomatic, in the performance of any duty, under the instructions of the Government, and I believe that officer has performed his duty under whatever difficulties he may be placed to the best of his judgment, it is my duty to defend him in this house ; and anywhere else, to the utmost of my power—(hear, hear) — and I trust I have always performed this duty. (Cheers.) Because a person in such a position is acting under my in structions, and I am reponsible for him, and for the man ner in which he performs his duties ; and if I thought he did not perform them in a proper manner, or act up to my instructions, I should be bound to recall and dismiss him. But here is a case of a totally different kind, of a public servant who upon his own responsibility declined the advice which I gave him, not to dismiss Mr. Turnbull, or do any thing which might affect his private or public character, but to employ him on some different work, where he would not be liable to the same objections. Tho 3/suitor of the Rolls, acting upon his own responsibility and judgment, told me he saw no reason for doing that, and he did not choose to do it. (Cheers.) Why am lin that case to come down here and give an opinion Ido not entertain, having told the Master of the Rolls repeatedly that I thought his selection unfortunate, and that he would act more judici ously both for Mr. Turnbull and himself in employing him in some other occupation ? (Hear.) Why am Ito come here and say black is white, and give an opinion diametri cally the reverse to the advice which I had given to the Master of the Rolls? (Hear.) I think such a course would. have been neither manly nor honourable ; but, on the other hand, it would have been, in my opinion, disgraceful. (Cheers.) I repeat, I am not the servant of the Master of the Rolls. I defend my own opinions, but I am not bound to defend the opinions of an independent authority when I do not think that authority right nor his conduct judicious. (Hear, hear.) I have put the hon. gentleman in possession of everything which ;he could know if the letters were produced. Ido not choose to produce those letters, for the reason that they are private letters, most of them written in private intercourse at my own house, and totally different to other letters written on the part of the Government. I think this is not a correspondence which it will be expedient to make a precedent to produce to Par liament. They are pi ivate and confidential communications between public men. If every man in a public situation is liable to have produced to Parliament all the written com munications which from time to time are sent in the confi dence and unreservedness of private intimacy, I am sure I need not explain to the house what a bar it will be to friendly intercourse among us. (Hear, hear.) It is not that I shrink from an avowal of my opinions. I have stated them, and as fully and substantially as they were written. (Hear, hear.) But, as a matter of principle, I protest against this house calling for the production of private correspondence taken out of the drawers of my table and out of the pigeon holes of my desk in my own house, and which are in no respect public documents or that kind of papers which it is advisable for Parliament to call for. (Hear, hear.) I am not responsible for the appointment of Mr. Turnbull. T admit it was my duty to make known to the Master of the Rolls the objections which were taken to the selection which he made, and I concur to a certain degree in those objections. Ido not concur in the objections which might have existed in some quarters, that Mr. Turnbull would really, in consequence of the peculiarity of his opinions, swerve from an honest performance of his duties. Everything tended to show that he would perform those duties honestly. But it appeared to me inexpedient, in a matter connected with the historical records of the country,in a matter connected with the compilation of documents which were to serve as guides to those who are to study the history of the past transactions in which this country has been concerned, that a person should be employed in whose fidelity a large portion of the community entertained doubts that might affect the trust and confidence which ought to be reposed in the accuracy of his labours. The Master of the Rolls himself, in the papers produced, tells Mr. Turnbull, in his first letter after his appointment, that it is of great import ance that there should be no imperfection or inaccuracy in the records which he would have to draft, and therefore I think it was unfortunate that a person should have been chosen against whom it was possible to imagine that that work would not be correctly and perfectly rendered. (Hear.) I:again say that Mr. Turnbull acted as a man of honour, and I am far from throwing any blame upon him for re signing, but having resigned from motives of his own personal convenience, I do not think that the Master .f the Rolls has a right to urge on me to press him to continue in his office. Be it remarked, that in the letter in which he explains the cause of Mr. Turnbull's resignation the Master of the Rolls says distinctly that he will not press upon me to continue him in his office, or point out to me what course should be taken ; but having said that in his letter to the Treasury, the Master of the Rolls goes on to suggest a course which he earnestly presses ine to pursue, which is, that I should beg Mr. Turnbull to remain in his office. (Hear, hear.) I think it would not be consistent with Mr. Turn bull's comfort, or to his character, or to the interests of the public, that he should be urged by me to continue in the performance of duties which have exposed him to an amount of public obloquy —undeservedly if you will—and which have not been consistent with his own feelings of personal satisfaction. _ _ _ Mr. NEWDEGATE, as one of those who had signed the memorial to Lord Palmerston, justified the conduct of that noble lord, and ridiculed the idea of re-appointing Mr. Turnbull, and thus making him his own nominee, which ho had never been befot e. Mr. ROEBUCK thought that as the correspondence of the noble lord was in his character as Prime Minister, and had relation to a charge made against a public servant, it ought to be produced. The motion for the adjournment of the house was then agreed to. HARBOURS AND PASSING TOLLS. Mr. MILNER GIBSON moved, is committee of the whole house, " That leave he given to bring in a bill to facilitate the construction and improvement of harbours, by authorising loans to harbour authorities, to abolish pass ing tolls, and for other purposes." He would content himself with simply stating the general features of the measure without any unnecessary detail. It was a mea mre fairly indicated on the notice on tb,e papers, It 44(1 appeared to the Government that the State in past times had been very generous, perhaps lavish, in its grants for the construction of harbours of refuge, but very little had been done to improve existing harbours by the aid of loans. From a return in his hand it appeared that from 1851 to March, 1861, the sums voted for the construction of har bours of refuge amounted to £3,144,190, while the sum lent did not in England exceed £14,000 or £38,000, and he believed in Ireland also it' was very trifling. What was now proposed was simply to grant powers to the Public Works Loan Commission to grant loans to harbour autho rities upon easier terms than they were now empowered to do, and also to spread the repayment of the loan over a longer term. There had been a committee to inquire into harbours of refuge, and a commission as to the sites of these harbours. Both the committee and the commis sioners had recommended that loans should be made avail able for the purpose. And if it were possible to make the harbours, especially on the eastern coast, more accessible, by these means a large saving of life and property must take place. If by these loans we can assist local efforts we shall effect a great public benefit, and confer great advan tage on those connected with the coal trade and shipping of the ports and harbours thus improved. To effect this object it was proposed that a sum of £360,000 should be annually placed at the disposal of the Public Works Loan Commissioners, to be advanced to harbour authorities at 3} per cent., and a period of fifty years be allowed for repayment. It was also intended not to insist upon the repayments having priority over any other loans, as was now the case with loans advanced by the Public Works Loan Commission. It had been the case in some instances for the Government actually to derive a profit from these loans, but in this instance it was not proposed to derive any profit, but simply to allow the credit of the country to be used by the autho rities of the harbours in aid of their own efforts. Great loss of property takes place in consequence of the want of har bours of refuge. This proposal of loans upon these terms would be of great advantage, and from the evidence given before the commission, he believed that great importance was attached to the proposal. As to the next subject, that of passing tolls, it was proposed that tolls on ships that passed, but did not enter harbours, should cease to be levied after 1861. (Hear.) The report of the commissioners on merchant shipping recommended that these tolls should be abolished. The right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Dis raeli) when in office, condemned these tolls, and said it was the intention of the Government of Lord Derby to bring in a bill to abolish the payment of these tolls. It might fairly be considered that both sides of the house had given their assent to the abolition of these tolls. The large proportion of ships that passed Ramsgate harbour could not enter it, and it was most unjust to levy such a toll to support such a harbour. The four ports principally interested in these tolls were Dover, Ramsgate, Whitby, and Bridlington, and these ports received at the rate from these tolls of about £38,000 a year. The Government, in abolishing these tolls, had taken care to protect the rights of creditors, and they had provided that the creditors should not suffer, but should have the better security of the Consolidated Fund. (Heat., hear.) Dover had the means of maintaining its harbour without these tolls. If Ramsgate should require any aid it would be contributed by the Government. The other two harbours, Whitby and Bridlington, had sufficient local means to meet any expense that might be required. He should hope, therefore, that the principle of the abolition of passing tolls would meet with the sanc tion of the house. Another part of the bill related to the payment of dues by ships to charitable institutions in which they had no interest, and could not derive any benefit from. The two principal charitable institutions were the Trinity House of Kingston-upon-Hull, and the Trinity House of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. It was provided in the abolition of these dues that recipients of bounties or pensions should continue to receive them during life, and as they died off that the payment of these dues should cease, and it was calculated that in that way the shipping interest would be advantaged to the amount of £lB,OOO a year. They proposed to give a further relief to the ship ping interest in Ireland, but not to a great amount. Some £3,000 or £4,000 a year was levied upon the trade of Dub lin for the keeping np of Dunleary Harbour, now Kings town, and it was proposed that that charge should be en tirely abolished. It was also proposed that the Trinity House of Newcastle-upon-Tyne should not be enabled any longer to levy dues upon the port of Sunderland. (Hear.) It was further proposed to abolish what were called diffe rential tolls or dues, according to which foreign ships paid higher tolls than English ships did, and this change they proposed in accordance with what was now the recognised policy of the country. (Hear, hear.) 2 he right hon. gen • tlernan then referred to the various reciprocity treaties which England had made with the maritime Powers from time to time. The amount of income derivable from those differential dues was very small 'and inconsiderable. In fact, the intention of those differential dues was not for the benefit of those harbours—but the real object was to keep foreign ships away. (Hear, hear.) Now the advantages that would result from levying single dues on ships would be very great—far greater than the levying double or differential dues upon the few foreign ships that came to English ports. With regard to the free trade policy, it was the means of conferring great benefits upon shipping in respect to those dues. The right hon. gentleman here referred to the charter of the Trinity Corporation of Hull, showing the power of the corpo - ration to levy a fine of 2) nobles upon people for using foreign ships. That body were now receiving £12,000 a year as compensation for the abandonment of the power to impose those differential dues, and they had actually received £200,000 froM the Treasury in that way. (Hear, hear.) Well, they had given that power up, and the ground upon which they had given it up was this, that when they came to Parliament to ob tain private bills for any works, they were informed that unless they gave up the power to levy those differential , dues upon foreign shipping, their object to obtain private bills would be opposed. Well then, in order to put an end to that state of things, he put it to the house whether it was not desirable to abolish those differential dues alto gether. (Hear, hear.) Taking the present recipients of compensation for the abolition in some ports of those dif ferential dues, it appeared that the sum received by them since the commencement of 1826 ; out of the Consolidated Fund, was £lO,OOO a-year. That was all that was paid to those recipients. But this year they would have to pay £60,000 to them. Was the country, he asked, prepared to pay that sum, nay more, perhaps £lOO,OOO a-year, to those recipients, and thus fix an increasing charge upon the Con solidated Fund. Those dues had now increased to £60,000 a-year ; and the increased number of foreign ships coming into British ports would increase them still more. What justice, he asked, was there in those dues ? It did not ap pear to him that in justice there was any foundation for those annual payments to the different ports. (Hear, hear.) The Government proposed, therefore, to discontinue those payments. They, however, proposed to touch the matter with a very tender hand, and therefore he would say that at the.end of the next five years thole) compensations for differential dues should cease. (Hear.) He further proposed that for the next five years the sum to be paid to those parties should be the amount which they received chzring the last five years. If they had in 1826—since when those dif- ferential dues had increased to a great extent—paid ten years' purchase for them they would now have bought off £200,000. He therefore thought that they had been dealt with most properly. He hoped that as they were, for the benefit of harbours, putting on increased charges on the Consolidated Fund, and thereby relieving the shipping interest, the house would see that it was high time to give some relief to the Consolidated Fund. (Hear, hear.) A portion of the compensation money for charitable purposes had been allotted in payment of pensions, and although it was de terminated that this arrangement should cease at the end of I five years, the payments would be continued during the lifetime of existing pensioners. (Hear, hear.) The Govern ment proposed to relieve shipping from unjust and ob noxious charges and payments made for certain dues. As to the Hull Dock Company, the Government had agreed that there should be fixed payments made to them for these dues, and the Treasury did not intend to disturb that ar. rangement. He would now move for leave to introduce a bill to facilitate the construction and improvement of har bours by the abolition of passing tolls. (Hear.) Mr. LIDDELL thanked her Majesty's Government for the large measure which they proposed to introduce. The Government had begun at the right end, but, in proposing a grant of £350,000 for the improvement of existing har bours for the saving of life and property , they appeard to act with too much caution. He though t the country could right hon. a much larger sum for so good a purP"°. The vas e hon. gentleman, however, said that this small proposal only initiatory, and that something on a larger scale would expenditure t d l i a tur rg e e propounded oamebefore t b h y e th h e o G us oze h r: schemesn bwent. t ed W the lle e n x :a would be carefullrwatched, a nd that care would be takers there would be no w asteful expenditure. The sut proposed now was £1,100,000, while the whole sum recom mended by the comrnissionf or Jersey and Alderney was funds placed at the disposal nearly £560,000 less. He trusted that due ecotuemy would t d , is b p u o t sal at o t f h al e ly same time, considering that o b f e the observed G o Government, n ra the en £1,500,000 was lost every year for the want of proper har bours and places of refuge, there should be no parsimony. The loss of that sum to the nation was a great less, and he hoped that steps would be taken to diminish its annual amount. What occurred with regard to our school grants would occur, he feared, with respect to these harbours of re fuge, namely,that the wealthy places would receive the large grants, and the poor very little, no regard being had to the necessaries of the case. (Hear, hear.) He was glad to say that France and Spain, and other nations, were dis posed to follow the example of England in reference to dif ferential duties upon shipping. He had only, in addition, to express his thanks to the Government for the plan pro posed by the hon. gentleman. Mr. LINDSAY expressed his regret that the Government had not fully followed out the recommendation of the Royal Commission, but still he thanked his right hon. friend for the proposal he had submitted to the house. He hoped the right hon. gentleman would take care to whom he made the loans, and that he would pay especial care to the saving of life, and that the loans would be directed to where this end would be effected. He thought that if the Government I would spend the first £lOO,OOO in improving the harbours of refuge, they would do well ; and he would suggest that attention should be paid in the first instance to the harbours of Waterford and Arlingford. The losses for the year by wrecks amounted to a million and a half of money, and the annual loss of life amounted to 1,000 souls. This year it was far greater. He repudiated the idea of making Alderney a harbour of refuge. It had swallowed up a large sum of money, and had not produced the result which had been anticipated. It would take 5,006 soldiers to hold Alderney in the case of the long looked-for invasion, -and we should want 5,000 men elsewhere. The probability was that we 'should not hold it, and the loss of it would damage the prestige of England. After therefore spending £1,100,000 on it, it was of no great use. To go on with Dover on the present plans would cost £6,000,000. If it were finished as a packet harbour much money would be saved in that direction. Passing tolls ought to be abolished, because nine-tenths of the ships taxed derived no benefit from the money so expended, and in fact were in some cases taxed when they did not even pass the places. At Bridlington a steamer drawing five or six feet of water was not able to enter the harbour of refuge ; they got into the little boat and were not able to enter it even in that, and were obliged to be carried in on the backs of fishermen. Such was a so-called harbour of refuge, levying £3,000 a year in the shape of passing tolls. He next came to Rams gate harbour, which was to be under the control of the Tri nity Board, wnich had already enough to do with its own large business. He thought it had better be left to local parties interested. Sunderland had been taxed from time immemorial, though it owned double the amount of ship ping and did double the amount of trade; nor did Sunder land derive the slightest benefit from the money so paid. The injustice of this tax was obvious. As to the differential duties, he thought the right hon. gentleman was dealing in a very liberal spirit. (Loud cries of " Divide.") He objected to what was called " compulsory pilotage," because the public were better served where no such regulations existed. Lord HOTHAM expressed his regret that the right hon. gentleman the President of the Board of Trade should not have followed in the footsteps of the right hon. gentleman the member for Kidderminster. He had no more right, however, to deal thus with the corporation of the Trinity Board of Hull than that corporation would have if it were to seize the right hon. gentleman's yacht, should he do that port the honour of a visit. He protested against the viola tion of vested rights, which he feared the right hon. gentle man contemplated. Sir F. GOLDSMID wished to knew what burden the abolition of passing tolls would throw on the Consolidated Fund. Mr. VANCE observed that it would be of the utmost importance to the Dublin trade to abolish the 2s. 6d. duties, by a resolution of the house, in anticipation of the bill passing.' Mr. M. GIBSON said that it was intended that the bill should apply to Ireland. As regarded the charge to be . thrown on the Consolidated Fund, it would amount to £45,000. The Dover Debt was charged at present upon the passing rates, but the creditors would have a security on the Consolidated Fund. The resolution was then agreed to, and leave given to bring in the bill. COUNTY VOTERS (SCOTLAND) BILL. Sir E. COLEBROOKE asked leave to bring in a bill to amend the law regarding the registration of county voters in Scotland. Mr. HOPE thought such a subject ought to be taken up by the Government instead of by a private member. Leave was then given to bring in the bill. GRAND JURIES, &o. (IRELAND) BILL. Colonel FRENCH obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the laws regulating grand juries and grand jury presentments in Ireland. DIPLOMATIC SERVICE. Mr. M. MILNES moved the nomination of the Select Committee on Diplomatic Service. Mr. WHITE opposed the nomination as proposed by the hon. member, and suggested that the motion should be pos'poned. He concluded by moving that the debate be new adjourned. Mr. M. M ILNES opposed the motion for the adjourn ment, and said he had used the best means to make the committee as satisfactory as he could. He had no personal feeling in the matter whatever. The house divided, and the numbers were— For adjournment of the debate l3 Against it Majority .... —4O On the motion that Lord J. Russell be a member of the committee, Mr. WHITE objected to the name of the noble lord being placed on the committee, and he should avail himself of every form of the house to defeat the appointment of the committee. _ _ Mr. AYRTON hoped the hon. member would not perse vere in his opposition to the appointment of the committee. Mr. BRAD Y hoped his hon. friend the member for Brighton would persevere in his opposition to the nomina tion of the committee. Mr. M. MILNES regretted that there should be such difference of opinion on so important a subject. Mr. CONINGHAM said the manner and tone of the hon. member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton) was ex.. tremely ill•becoming. After a short discussion, in which Admiral DUNCO3II33 and Mr. BENTINCK took part, Sir J. LLPHINSTONE objected to the name of Mr. Clay being retained as that of a member to serve on the committee ; and in doing so he begged to say that be did not entertain any animosity to the hon. member. Mr. CLAY having explained, Sir J. ELPHINSTONE withdrew his objection, and the following names were agreed to, as those appointed to serve on the committee, viz., Lord J. Russell, Mr. Disraeli, the Judge Advocate, Lord Stanley, Lord Harry Vane, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Layard, Sir James Fergusson, Sir John Acton, Sir Minto Farquhar, Mr. Hankey, Mr. Hope, Mr. Grant Duff, Mr. M. Milnes, and Lord Claud Hamilton. Power to send for persons, papers, and records ; five to be the quorum. _ SUPPLY. The report on supply was brought up and agreed to. CONSOLIDATED FUND. The Consolidated Fund (L 4,000,000) Bill was brought in and read a second time. MUTINY BILL. This bill was brought in and read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Monday. The other business on the paper having been disposed of, the house adjourned at half past one o'clock. THE WINE DUTIES. Mr. CRAWFORD drew attention to the complaints of the wine trade, and the nature and object of the alterations desired, concluding with an inquiry as to whether Govern ment intended a compliance with the prayer of the wine trade for a uniform duty on foreign wines, and whether they intended to adhere to the existing principle of classifi cation by means of the alcoholic test. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, before giving his reply to the hon. gentleman who spoke last on the subject of the wine duties, adverted to the other topic which had been opened by the hon. and learned gentleman (Sir H, Cairns), namely, that of the Suitors' Fund in the Court of Chancery. Except in a question asked the other day by the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire, he had never before heard from any quarter of the existence of such an alarm as that which seemed to exist in the hon. and learned gentleman's mind, and he was exceedingly sceptical as to its general prevalence. The hon. and learned gentle man said that many Chancellors of the Exchequer had had a lunging after the Chancery funds. Now he (Mr. Glad . stone) was not conscious of any such sentiment, nor had he ever known any Chancellor of the Exchequer who had any such longing. But he would tell the hon. and learned gen tleman this—that he had had a feeling of a very different sort with respect to judicial funds. A burnt child would dread the fire, and unfortunately when defalcations occurred in those judicial funds, or funds in the custodyef the courts of justice, recourse was had to the Chancellor of the Exche quer; and he himself was obliged, six or seven years ago, to ask the House of Commons to vote £60,000 or £70,000 of public money for the purpose of making up the defalcations in a judicial fund—namely, that of the Court of Admiralty. And then, when they complained of the insufficient arrange inents for the security of those funds, they were told that the judges were not financial officers, and that it was the fault of the State, or of the House of Commons, for not having adopted wiser rules to prevent such defalcations. In fact, it was the State that:was ultimately liable for all these funds—that at least was the practical working of the system. Therefore, although he did not entertain any such feeling as the hon. and learned gentleman supposed with regard to those funds, he did feel very great anxiety that the management and security of them should be placed on the best footing, and he thought it was his duty, in the office he held, to provide, as opportunity should offer, against any recurrence of such very disagreeable incidents. Now, as to the appoint ment of the Chancery Funds Commission, undoubtedly it did not arise from any suspicion on the part of the public or the Government that there had been any neglect or de ficiency whatever on the part of the Accountant-General or the officers of kis department ; on the contrary, he be lieved their duties were performed with great integrity, accuracy, and zeal, and that they were entirely equal to their task. But the hon. and learned gentleman had not correctly apprehended the answer which he (Mr. Glad stone) gave to the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) on a former occasion, for, in addition to the two reasons alluded to, he gave a third reason, which was more general, and sufficient itself to justify the appointment of the commis sion. It was true that the most important recommendation of a committee of that house had remained to this hour un fulfilled, and he did not believe that it was a matter that could prudently be settled by an order of the head of the court, but one to involve a more extensive change, to get rid of all those transactions in the market. The hon. and learned gentleman had heard a report that the Govern ment had some plan for the creation of a Chancery stock, in which it should be obligatory on the suitors to have their moneys invested. Now he would have the satisfaction of telling the hon. and learned gentleman that he had been en tirely misled by such a rumour. The Government had no such idea wh a t ever; so far as he was concerned in the finan cial arrangements, and so far as he knew the opinions of the Lord Chancellor and th e A ttorney-General, there never had been to his knowledge anydream or notion of any such sc h eme as the creation o f a Chancery stock, or above all, that of any interference with the liberty at present enjoyed by the suitors. On the cont rary, if there was any object which they cherished more than another, it Would be to give a greater extension to that liberty, and to improve th.„ position of the suitor, But he must not be roi6unJe37,tood. The hon. and learned gentleman bad referred to the legis• ,La from la it oftion .N last o w y , ea aa r, i a t n app dh e o a p r e e d d t t h o e h y i mwe\rteh neoc incellor of th e Exchequer) to recede Exchequer) that was most extraorka ry legislation in regard to its bearing on private tr:aSis ; and he had never assented to its principle, for he thought it involved a very great error. The immediate occasion out of which the commission arose was indeed the concentration of the courts of law, but if that was the only point they would not be justified in proposing a commission which presup posed the passing of a measure for that purpose, There FAMINE IN INDIA, Mr. W. EWART asked the Secretary of State for India what information it was in his power to give respecting the administration of relief to the sufferers by the famine in India ; and whether works of irrigation will be vigorously promoted, as the best means of preventing. such calamities in future. Sir C. WOOD said it was true that there was an appre hension of famine in India, but the accounts by the last mail were more favourable, and the sufferings of the people wwild be confined to a smaller area than was anticipated. The Government had adopted every possible means to alle viate the distress. THE CASE OF MR. TURNBULL. Mr. MAGUIRE made inquiry concerning a correspon. dence between the Government and the Master of the Rolls relative to the appointment and resignation of Mr. Turn bull, which was not included in the return. Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, I am quite ready to answer the questions of the hon. gentleman ; and, in the first place, I may be allowed to say that, though I have no knowledge of Mr. Turnbull--I never saw him, and only heard of him in consequence of the discussion which has taken place in regard to this appointment—l believe him to be a man of COUNTRY MARKETS. LIVERPOOL--Mancir 15. There was a fair attendance of both the town and country trade at this morning's market, and we had a mo derate business in wheat, at the full rates of Tuesday last for most descriptions. Oats and oatmeal slow of sale, but at the previous currencies. Barley, beans, and peas were unchanged. Indian corn held for 37e 6d per qr for mixed, 38s 3d to 38s 6d for yellow, and 39s per 4801bs for white. An inactive demand for flour, at fully late rates. WAKEFIELD-MARCH 15 The supplies of grain here this week were fair, but wheat was again firm, and for good descriptions there was a moderate demand, at is advance on the former rates; other kinds a limited trade. Fine barley at late quotations, but other sorts 1 s cheaper. Beans steady. Oats for seed at late rates, but other kinds at lower values. EXETER—MA.Rat 15. Wheat, white.. 7s 6d to 8s 6d 1 Barley ..4s 3d to'ss 9 d Ditto new .6s 6d to 8s Od 1 Oats 2s 9ct td 3s Od Flour, fine, 48s to —s; seconds, 46s to —s per sack. CATTLE. There was a good supply of cattle, with a dull sale, at about last week's currencies. Fat beef,p score, 1 , sto 1156 d Ewes, per lb 6id to 71 4 Pork carcases, do lOs to 1186 d Wethers, d 0...... nd to $a- Sheep, per lb. Od to —d Fat calves, d 0.... 6d to 61 1 Rough fat, 41d per lb. [ADVERTISEMENT.] Pills and medicine invariably lig gl avate and perpetuate diseases ; their annoyance, dis appointment, and expense may be avoided by persons IX indifferent health sending only their address to E. S. Barry, Esq., 77, Regent-street, W., London, and they will receivP gra tis and free by po st the " INVALIDS' Owie dinDE," or Natural R es torer, without medicine or ex Pmse, of per f e ct digestion, strong nerves, sound lungs, and t constipation , enfeebled, insuring the r emov e. liver complaints, o re l fie in s dig hin e g st s i lzp ( , d to ys th pe e ps T a 7 nausea, epilepsy, paralysis, debility, nervousness, palpitation, cough, asthma, consumption, dropsy, flatulency, diarrhass. dysentery, biliousness, fevers, sore throats, catarrhs, ooldfi. noises in the ears, rheumatism, gout, impurities, eruptions. hysteria, neuralgia, irritability, s2eeplessnese, acidity, palpi tation, heartburn, headache, despondency, cramps, spumy!, sinking, fits, bronchitis,— "Unauestionably the safest Guido to health " B 1 11 T 11 S. 1;.7.A.ND.—0n the 13th inst., at Bedford-hill House, Ba l. ht.: 111 , Surrey, the wife of James Brand, Esq., of a son. Himc.s. —On the 14th inst., at Streatham-hill, Mrs. Francis Hicks, of a son. WATSON.---On the 14th inst., at 9, Craven-hill-gardens) Mrs. T. C. Watson, of a son. MARRIAGVS. FARLEY—Borrolt.— On the 14th inst., at Croydon parish cburch, Thomas Fat ley, Esq., of Thornton - heat h, to Frances, daughter of the late Thomas Boyton , Es q ., H.I.E.C.c. S. 0 inst., at Wellington, So - H O WARD—FOX. —On the 14 merset, Robert Luke Howard, Esq., of Tottenham. 0 Henrietta Maria, daughter of Henry Fox, Esq., of Tons' dale, near Wellington. DEATHS. BovlLL.—On the 13th inst., at Woolston Lawii, South ampton, James Bovill, Esq., LP., aged 74. ErzisoN.— On the 13th inst., at Sheffield, Michael Olson, Esq., aged 74. EvroN.—On the 1 2 th inst., at Bath, Lieut.-Col. B. W' Elton, late 59th Bengal N. 1., aged 53. LYNOTT.—On the 10th inst., at 24, Camden-road - W lls ' Camden-town, Richard W. Lynott, Esq., aged 6 6 . MILLS.—On the 9 th in st., at Bri g hton, Augusta Milli, aged 59. at L OND ON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, No. 112, Strand , Printer , at THE Surr Office, No o. 112, idlelelr' Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy , in the County la Saturday, March 16, 1861. ~~ ;, •~ h