The Sun. — London, England, 1856-07-02 00:00:00

1 4.. e i r.rJl r atitttOU ift. SUN OFFICE, Seven, o'Clock. NEWMARKET RACES—(This Day.) Cantrip Peter Pitapat (BY ELEOTI?Ie TELEGRAPH.) SWEEPSTAKES OF 10 SON'S. Three ran. MIDSUMMER STAKES. San FranciEco Bishop of Osnaburg Calypso colt - Four ran. Won by half a length. TOWN PLATE. Druid Indulgence Duvernay filly 701. HANDICAP PLATE Staff and Nonsence Bishop of Odnaburg Four ran. BETTING ON THE COURSE. GOODWOOD CUP. 7to 1 azst Yellow Jack (wanted) CARLISLE RACES.—(This Day.) (BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.) LOTTERY STAKES. Gaudy Gathercole Seven ran. SPECULATION PLATE. Queen of South . Florida .. . .-• . Four ran. STEWARDS' PLATE. St. Andrew.. Johnny Taft Seven ran. TALLY Ho STAKES (YESTERDAY).—The Stewards decision is that Confederate and Lady of Lodge divide the stakes. ARRIVALS AT WORCESTER. Filly by Phlegon out of Amarylise, 2 yrs, Ugly Mug, New Brighton, Crook banks, Bandalore, Alonzo, Diana, Oaklatids, Princes Mixture, Surgeon• General, Curious, Timotheus, His Piper, Octavia, Alembic, Deademona, Little Bird, Herculea, and colt by Cossack out of Whalebone Dam. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(This Day.) The SPEAKER took the chair at 10 minutes after 12 o'clock. PR me INS. The Lords' amen dn lVATE BUS ts to the Eastern Union Rail way Bill were considered and agreed to. Petitions were presented for and against the Bleaching Works Bill, which proposed to restrict the hours of labour.- - Colonel DUNNE presented a petition, signed by num bers of the Land Transport Corps, complaining that in jury bad been done them from the non-fulfilment on the part of the Government on the terms on which they enlisted, and praying that the house would have justice done to them. RIBBONISM, &c. Mr . AMR asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether certain roasters of National Schools in Ireland, in the-county of Donegal, had been arrested on a charge of unlawful confederacy and ribbonism ; and whether the said schools were in connection with the National Board iis non -vested schools ? HORSMAN said he had received no informa tion on the subject. JUDGMENTS EXECUTION BILL. This bill was read a second time. On the motion that it be committed, Col. DUNNE said it was hopeless to expect that the bill could be framed at that late period of the session, and suggested its withdrawal. Mr. NAPIER doubted the working of the bill in Ireland. The ATTORNEY. GENERAL for IRELAND gave it as hie opinion that the bill was sound in principle, and would be found beneficial to Ireland. The object of the bill was to render judgments obtained in England or anywhere within these realms effective in Ireland. Mr. I. BUTT objected to many of the details of the bill, and pointed out what he considered its defect. He moved that the bill be committed on that day three months. The LORD ADVOCATE supported the bill on the ground that it was desirable not to continue this system of law within the United Kingdom, as at present existed, with reference to this en ject, and expressed his surprise that any hon. member should otject to the re, moval of such an absurdity, admitting there were defects in the details of the bill. The principle of the bill, was sound; and as it was impossible to legislate against the possibility of fraud, he called upon the house to accept the prop ose d re f orm o f th e l aw re l a ti ng t o judgmenss.exe eution in Ireland. After some further remarks from Mr. Neran, Mr. BAINES said he hoped the house would allow the bill to be committed. The objections stated to the bill affected its details, which should be di-cussed in committee, and not on the present motion. He had the authority of the Attorney-General and Solicitor-General to state that they considered this a very proper bill, and er 3 o sound in principle. The Law Society of Ire land had withdrawn their opposition to the bill. Mr. G. BUTT was in favour of the principle of the bill, which was one that ought to be extended to the three kingdoms. It was necessary there should be a reciprocal- petver of enforcing jud ments in the three kingdonas. He thought the machinery of the bill would substantially effect what they all desired. Mr. VANCE opposed the commitment of the bill. The present law gave sufficient power to creditors over their unfortunate debtors. After some remarks from Mr. Hadfield, Mr. Craw ford, and Mr. Deasy, the amendment was withdrawn, and the bill ordered to be committed on Wednesday next. BLEACHING, &c. , WORKS (No. 2) BILL. The deb a t e on the sec ond reading of this bill was re. Slimed by Mr. BAXTER, 'who said he was not prepared to argue the question of the non-interference of the L eßifdAtare between master and servant, but stated his objections to the house proceeding further this session with the bill. All the masters on the east coast of Scot land had petitioned against it, and so bad sections of the operatives. He objected to Mr.Tremenhere's report on which the bill was hued, and the manner in which he had taken the evidence, as one-sided and partial. The hours of labour did not now exceed those pr Toeed by the bill, and so far from occupying 60 hours a-week, as stated in the report, did not amount to 50 hours a. week. The honourable member entered into many of the difficulties with which the manufacturers had to contend against, especially from the weather, and said that unless the hon. and learned member for Youghall postponed the bill and obtained further inf or- Illation on what he proposed to legislate, the bill in its present form would inflict material and serious injury on an important branch of trade. The provisions of the bill showed that those who bad drawn it up were not con versant with the subject. One of the effects of the bill would be to substitute female for male labour. Col. DUNNE supported the second reading of the bill. Mr. DUNCAN opposed the bill on the ground that it was uncalled for, and would not act beneficially for the teperatives. Mr. M.URROUGH supported the bill, and complained of the conduct of hon. members who expressed their ab horrence of slavery abroad, but did not trouble them selves about the slavery that existed in this country. He called upon the house to rescue the operatives in bleach ing and dying_ works from the slavery they were subject tr in these works. Sir J. GRAHAM thought there was no good to be effected by lengthening the discussion on this subject, becaus e it would be impossible to pass the measure at this late period of the session. Much benefit would re sult from delay and further consideration of the measure. The bill before the house did not correspond with Mr. Tremanhere's report, which bore on the face of it errors of so grave and palpable a character that, if the bill rested on it, he (Sir James Graham) doubted if the house could with safety adopt it. He looked_ upon the minimum of inter erence by Parliament in these matters as the maximum of wisdom, and he always looked with jealousy on measures of this kind. He was desirous of consulting the health, comfort, happiness, and wealth of the woiking classes, but if they uninten tionally and accidentally inflicted an injury on trade by legislation of this kind, instead of conferring the benefit they wished on the operatives, they would be inflicting per ixtanent evils, the effect of which on the working classes would be of the greatest- magnitude, and such as they could not foresee. The bleaching trade of this country was open -to the keen competition of foreign rivals, which was admitted by Mr. Tremanhere, and the error into which that gentleman bad fallen appeared t o b e this— : 114 whilst admitting the keenness of that competition, - he admitted that by following his advice the cost of production would be increased 10 per cent., and the finished article one per cent. That Mr. Tre matihere considered would have but a trifling effect on the trade. On a matter of trade he (Sir J. Graham) was .. not disposed to follo w bli n df o ld e d the advice of Mr. Tr ensanhere, for if it b e f o ll owe d i n this instance he (Sir J. Graham) predioted with confidence that by a hasty and wild legislation they would ensure the success of the trade of Saxony and Bavaria the rivals of this country. Se suggested that the question should be properly in. vestigated by a select committee. To appoint such a com mittee at this late period of the session would be a delu ti" and a fare-, Rnd hP thrlog;lt it better to p •stpone going into a elinthitt.te for :tx months. ( leer.) Mr. WDEGATE approved of the principle of the bill. He thought under the circumstances it would be better to accede to the Eugge: tio a of the right hon. b&ronet. idt Sir GEORGE GREY said be wished to know the course intended to he pursued by the hon. member for Youghall after the expression of opi❑ion on the bill that day. He looked upon the postponement of the consi de;ation of the bill in the early part of June as an abandonment of the measure for the session. Mr. I. BUTT defended his conduct in reference to the bill. Ile called upon the house to affirm the prin ciple of the bill by a second reading, to show the house was in a position to legislate on the subject, if they re fused after to proceed further with it this session. If, however, the house - was of a contrary opinion, he had no wish to press the second reading. Mr. DRUMMOND called upon the hon. member for Youghal to press the second reading, and not take the advice of fAlsefrisnds and withdraw it. Lord R. GROSVENOR supported the bill. Mr. CARDWELL supported further inquiry on this question before the house affirmed the practical operation of the bill and afterwards placed it in the statute-book. By so doing they would be consulting the interests and happiness of the operatives engaged in this branob of trade. Mr. COBBETT said he visited many of the bleaching. works in England and Scotland after the session of 1853. He then found that the operatives worked 16, 18, aid 20 trwrs a day, and in Pn atmosphere varying from 90 to 130 degrees. He had attended several meetings of the operatives on this subject, and from all he, had seen and heard he was of opinion the operatives desired legislative interference in the manner proposed by this bill. He learned from the working-men that they had frequently to carry three and four females a dap - from the "roasting alive" shops, as they were called, initt► the open air, on account of faintness from excessive heat. The heat was so great that the nails in the floors of the bleaching works got so hot that they frequently blistered the feet of the workpoople. The operatives were looking with greatanxiety to. this house for relief, and he asked the hon. and lea reed member for Youghall to go to a division on the sub ject, or, if not, to obtain a pledge from the Homo Se cretary that a committee of inquiry should be appal nted early next session. Mr. BAINES, on the part of the Government, said there would be no obstacles thrown in the way of the appointment of a committee early next session. It was desirable to avoid a decision on the question, so thrtt it may go before a committee without prejudice on either side. After some remarks from Mr. Kirk, Mr. Muntz, Lord Naas, Mr. Walter, Mr. NN%lkinson, Admiral Jones. Mr. Napier, Mr. Richardson, and other hon. members, The house divided, when the numbers were— Fir the second reading 65 Against it Majority against the bill REGISTRATION OF LEASES (SCOTLANIO) BILL. This bill passed through committee. SCIENTIFIC AND LITERARY SOCIETIMS BILL. The house then went into committee on this bill. Mr. BOUVERIE objected to the further proceeding with this bill, which was one to exempt certain socil3ties from local taxation. The effect of the bill would mu rely be to increase the rent of the premises, by whit►i. the landlords of the buildings would be the only patrties benefitted. On these grounds he moved that the cihair man do now report progress. Mr. HUTT defended the bill. Mr. HADFIELD regretted the opposition that had been given to the bill, which was one to benefit institu tions raised mainly by the exertions of working melt. rd LOVAINE objected to the bill. He tho Tight the decision arrived at, viz., notto exempt these soci tles from local taxatien, was light, as if this bill passed the number of buildings for which exemption would be claimed would be enormous. . Mr. BUTT objected to the bill. The law as it at :pre sent stood with respect to these institutions was as much as could be expected. Mr. BOUVERIE said this bill was net one to ex empt mechanics' institutions from the payment of taxes. It was the exemption nude by this bill to ss hick he ob jected.. By the present bill the exemption was. so vt ide that the end of it could not be seen. It was on this ground that he opposed the bill, and he trusted the hi:iuse would az-ee to the proposition he had made. Mr. EWARF maintained that the present law was unequal. A certain number of institutions were now exempted, and he thought it was but a Matter of juittice to the others that they should share in the benefit. He regretted that the hon. member, the. President of the Poor-law Beard, should have been the person who opp , : , sed this bill, because if anything more than another tended to decrease pauperism, it was education. On the ()nem ion when he brought forward a bill to enable parisho to levy rates in favour of public libraries, he was supported in his endeavours by the then President of the BJard on the ground that the establishment of such institutions would decrease pauperism. He trusted the present un equal law would be altered. Mr. HENLEY said the exemption by ttis bill %vas wide enough to exempt a nobleman's picture gal lery and her Majesty's theatre. The bill was, in fact, an attempt to make the law eqival upon unequal subject , , which he did not think it vas possible for the house to accomplish. If it was intended to merely exempt mechanics' institutions, why did :not the hon. member bring in a distinct bill for that purpose. Mr. STRUTT supported the bill. He did not think because there was some otjectionable words in the bill it was fair to throw it over for the session, without even an attempt to improve it in committee. TITE supported the bill. Mr. LIDDELL also supported the bill. Mr. „MASSEY said the committee was asked to ex tend the provisions of an act of Parliament beyond what was contemplated when the existing law was passed. He thought that exonerating all societies claiming to be established for the advancement of science, literature, and the fine arts very like permitting an injustice to be perpetrated at the expense of the ratepayers. He liras sorry to find from the Court of Queen's Bench tluat reading cheap penny newspapers at any of these insti tutions deprived them of the privileges of the present law, but he thought, on the whole, it would be far better to furnish these societies with the standard lite rature of the country than with the ephemeral publica tions referred to. He caw no reason for altering the present law. Mr. HILDrARD regretted the opposition that had been raised to the bill, all of which were untenable, and he hoped the committee would reject the proposition for reporting progress. Mr. JOHN MACGREGOR complained of the nar row views entertained by the members of the Treasury bench on this bill, and hoped the committee would ne gative the motion. Mr. HEADL AM said he was of opinion some altera tion should be made in the existing law, and that if the committee proceeded, amendments might be made in the bill to meet all objection. Mr. ATHERTON concurred in opinion with the hon. and learaed member for Newcastle. After some further discussion, Mr BOUVERIE withdrew his motion, and the com. mittee proceeded. Clause 1 was agreed to. On clause 2, Mr. BOUVERIE said he was at a loss to know how the building was to be described and bo exempt from rating, except for the "exclusive" use of scientific pur poses, &e. Mr. HUTT said that if the committee would pass the clause he would be prepared on bringing up the report to submit to the house a remedy for the difficulty. Ultimately Mr. BARRO W moved that the chairman do report progress. The committee divided, when the numbers were— For the motion 25 Against it 117 Majority —92 On the question that clause 2 stand part of the bill, Mr. H. BAILLIE objected to this loose system of legislation. It being a quarter to six o'clock, the committee (in accordance with the standing order) was postponed till to-mormw, and the house resumed. Mr. HENLEY said he hoped the bon. member (Mr. Hutt) would then commit the bill, pro forma, and re print it with the proposed alterations. PROCEDURE BEFORE JUSTICES (SCOTLAND) - - BILL. This bill passed through committee. RATING OF MINES BILL. The order for the second reading of this bill was dis- charged. DISTILLATION FROM RICE BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. OXFORD COLLEGE ESTATES BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. TURNPIKE ACTS CONTINUANCE BILL. Tuis bill passed through commitee. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned at five minutes to six &cloak. LLOYD'S SHIPPING.—(This Day.) LONDON, Jul't 2.—Wind this day at noon, N.; light breeze, ansi fine clear weather. PORTS/J*I3TH, July I.—Wind S.S.E. ived—Balfana (s.s, tpt.), from Constantinople. Sailed—Tasmanian Maid, for Australia ; Cape of Good Hope (s.s. tpt.), Wool wich. Off the port Benares, from St. John's, N.B. ; Devonshire, New York. The Bahiana (s.s. tpt.), arrived here, towed the brig Eamont, for Spithead, with batteries of artillery on board, to within 21 miles S.E. of Cape St. Vincent. PLYMOUTH, July I.—Wind E.N.E.—Arrived—Orrient, from London, for Adelaide, S.A.; H.M.S. Acorn, Sheer ness, for the coast of Africa. Sailed—Dunbar, for Syd ney, N.S. W. ; Johannes Antonius, Batavia. FALMOUTH, July I.—Wing S.E.—Arrived—Neptune, from Laguna ; Zebean, Rio Grande. SHIELDS, July I.—Wind E.—Arrived—Penza Menuto, from Havana. SWANSEA, July I.—Wind S.W.—Arrived—Valdellur, from Huasco. Sailed.—Sunbeam, for' Cuba; Pearl, St. Thomas. BsuwicK, July I.—Th6 Hope, of Perth, which got on shore on the 2:th June on Goswick Sands, proceeded to Newcastle. (PER ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.) SOUTHAMPTON, Wednesday Morning. Arrived —Simla, steam transport, from Portsmouth ; Jane; Swansea; Mechanic's Own,• Newport; Purveyor, Swanage ; John Daniel, Cardiff. Sailed — Caledonia, for Sunderland • Judy Macdonald, Melbourne; Milli cen t , Swansea ; Charlotte, Guernsey. Wind S. V. Lruirtpoor,, Wednesday Morning. Arrived—Paragon, from Akyab ; James Lumsden, Sin gapore ; Missionary, Benin ; Free Trade, Savannah ; Ame rica, Montreal; Foxhound, Dragomestee. CAPTAIN MAYNE REID. The Forest Exiles. By Captain Mayne Reid. With Twelve Illustrations. Bogue. 1855. The Bush Boys. By Captain Mayne Reid. With Twelve Illustrations. B.)gae. 185 G. Scene—Front of a bookseller's shop window in a country town. Persons—A casual passer-by and a couple of urchins (just home from schodol) on the look out for fun and frolic even in the streets. Time—commencement of the Christmas holidays, a period, as everybody knows, sacred to snapdragon and presents of story books, to tip, plum-pudding, and pantomimes. Loquitv r—one of the urchins aforesaid, spying (with a caper of delight) a bran new volume, prettily gilt and enticingly ticketted in the shop window—" 0 my ! here's capital sport —another of Captain Mayne Reid's books of ad venture !" Now, at once be it remarked, this is no imaginary sketch, but a mere homely and actual reality—what novelists sometimes designate (de lightfully) " founded upon fact"—telling us so through the pleasant medium of an asterisk and a foot-note. And no wonder the schoolboy jumped for glee when he caught sight of the familiar name on the new story-book. For Captain Mayne Reid has come to be a welcome name indeed upon the lips of those boy readers who are already book worms in their young way—children who can pore by the hour, enraptured, over the pictured pages of " Sandford and Merton," of " Philip Quarl," of " Peter Wilkins," and best of all of dear old " R)hinson Crusoe." The writer of books for boys we take Capt. Mayne Reid to be among all living meta-of-letters, at least in England. A wholesome, charming, imaginative story-teller, whose minor works in their way are not unworthy of being coupled with the goblin legends of the Brothers Grimm, and the fairy tales of dear Hans Christian Andersen. Acceptable, therefore, to every intelligent boy in the land will be these two last contributions of his to the book shelves of Young Hopeful, bookshelves already stored with such a very motley gathering of old and new literature. Grammars bound in roan and fright. fully dogseared ! Dictionaries yellow in calf and thumbed at the top corners, and freckled, inside and outside, with ink-splotches innumerable ! Here the Gradus and there the Delectus—there prim, old, catechetical Pinnock, and there again garrulous, gossipping Peter Parley, with his chat tering pages crammed from top to bottom with amusing anecdotes. Yonder the Pilgrim's Progress with those preposterous old woodcuts of Vanity Fair and Christian, and yonder the Arabian Night's Entertainments, as much a casket of marvel in themselves as ever was the brass casket they tell of, out of which the mighty Geni slowly rose to the awe and wonder of the pour fisherman. There they all stand that astonishing collection of belle lettres—the volumes ranged -ide by side upon the schoolboy's bookshelves. Volumes among which may be already recognised as especial favourites the earlier of Captain Mayne Reid's " Books of Adventures for Boys." First of all, " The Desert Home," being the adventures of a Family lost in the Wilderness Then " The Boy Hunters," being adventures in search of a White Buffalo ! Then " The Young Voyageurs," or the same boy hunters in the North ! And lastly, in duo succession, these two charming companion volumes, entitled "The Forest Exiles" and " The Bush Boys"—the former recounting the perils of a Peruvian Family amid the Wilds of the Amazon— the latter(changing theground completely)giving us the history and adventures of a Cape Farmer and his family in the Wild Karoos of Southern Africa. "From the sublime to the ridiculous there is but one step," said the Great Napoleon. It is but one step to Captain Mayne Reid from America to Africa ! Although the waters of the Atlantic roll between them, he strides across like Gulliver sauntering among the fishponds of Lilliput, or like a rover fresh from the land of Brobdignag. He is equally " at home " upon either continent, and relates all about the wonderful creatures seen in both, as well as the incidents met with here, there, and every where, among the Africans and among the Ameri cans, with the same ever-fresh and sparkling anima tion. And what things he does tell, to be sure ! Why the dullest boy reader in the world could not but be roused to some show of interest in adven tures such as those related by Captain Mayne Reid—particularly related as those adventures are with such a fervour of eloquence, and coloured as they are with such a glow of imagination. Here, for example, in "The Forest Exiles"—don't we " hear tell " of the Monkey Bridge, the suspension bridge made of living monkeys, along which old Jacko and young Jacko scramble safely across the water, far up in the air, from tree top to tree top ? Don't we learn, breathlessly, how Leon was saved from the Puma—how Guapo caught the nimble-peters—how the tapir fell into the trap—how the conder was captured—how the encounter with the anaconda terminated—how the armadillo escaped from the apparently certain perils of either seizure or destruc tion by curling itself into a ball and rollingover the edge of the precipice like a ripe pumpkin Again, 00, in " The Bush Boys," of which friend Stvartboy is the hero, as Guapo, we cannot but think, is the hero of " The Forest Exiles" —don't the boy readers listen with opened eyes and pricked-up ears, while Captain Mayne Reid tells them all about the deadly encounter between the elephant and the rhinoceros ; about the trap ping of a lion in a chimney ; about the blinding of a quagga ; and a b ou t T otty ' s escape i n t h e n i c k o f time from the horrors of being torn to pieces by a mob of apes, the ugly-visaged chacmas ? Yes— such are actually among the number of those sparkling tales of adventure which have been recently recounted by the old familiar voice of that most delightful story-teller, the author of the " Rifle Rangers," and the " Scalp Hunters," and the " White Chief "—Captain Mayne Reid, the idol of the Boy Readers of England, because par excellence and beyond all manner of comparison, the writer for them of these healthy, invigorating, delightful books of adventure. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS.--YESTEILDAY. The SMILER took t'ae chair at a quarter-past 12 o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Lords' amendment; to the Leeds Water Bill were considered and agreed to. Shipton's Disabilities Removal Bill was read a third time and passed. The order for going into committee on the Earl of Perth and Melfurt's Cimpensation Bill was read and discharged. JURIES (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND the order for the second reading of this hill was discharged, and the bill withdrawn. COURTS OF COMMON LAW (IRELAND) BILL. The committee on this bill was resumed. The remaining clauses, from 9 to 100 inclusive, were agreed to, and the bill passed through committee. DEEDS (SCOTLAND) BILL. This bill, consisting of only one clause, also passed through committee. The house suspended its sittings at 20 minutes to four, and resumed at six. QUESTIONS. Mr. J. EWART asked the Secretary of the Treasury whether any progress bad been made in the inquiry stated to have been instituted in the department of Cm. toms at Liverpool, and whether any steps were about to be taken in consequence thereof ? Mr. WILSON said the Commissioners of Customs had instituted an inquiry, and the result was a recom mendation for a revision of the services of the port and a considerable improvement in the payment of the offi cers. This recommendation bad been sanctioned by the Treasury, and he hoped it would give satisfaction to the parties concerned. Mr. OLIVEIRA. asked her Majesty's Government whether some substantial mark of approbation might not he given to Lieut.-Colonel Lake and Lieut.-Colonel Teesdale, for their distinrnished services at Kars ? Viscount PAL MERSTON was understood to say that the rank of colonel to which this officer had attained would enable him to receive the honour of the Order of the Bath, but that it was not usual to recommend Parlia ment to make a provisien for any officer who bad not the good fortune to be at the head of a force which had achieved success. Mr. COWAN asked the Lord Advocate if his atten• tion bad been drawn to the recent alarming increa4e of the crime of housebreaking in certain parts of Scotland, and to the difficulty hitherto experienced in its suppres sion ; and whether, in these circumstances, it was the intention of the Government, by the revocation of tickets of leave, by the establishment of a Scottish constabulary, or otherwise, to afford a greater measure of security to property than was at present possessed in some districts of Scotland ? The LORD ADVOCATE .said he knew nothing of the circumstances in question except what he had read in the newspapers. Last year there were many cases of housebreaking in the country districts and near Edin burgh ; but he believed the delinquents had all been apprehended. As regarded the ticket-of-leave system that was before a select committee of the house, and no doubt it would receive all the consideration which it merited. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON ENLISTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then moved the postponement of a!1 the motions on the paper, for the purpose of proceeding with the adjourned debate of the previous night, Mr. NAPIER complained that this course was very hard upon him, inasmuch as it probably prevented his getting another day for his motion on the subject of pre wing bills for legislation for the remainder of the ses sion. A resolution of the house had been come to on the let Feb. on the subject, but at the instance of the Go vernment he had deferred acting on it until the 6tatuto THE SUN, LONDON WED ESDA V EVE szi ,4 -'ll , JULY 2, 1856 Law Commission bad made its report. That report had been made; nothing was done, and since then legislation was getting worse on the subject. Hebad waited already `four months to redeem his pledge that he would bring the question before the house, and now found himself deprived of the opportunity which offered itself. Sir G. GREY said it was quite impo.sible the motion of the right bon. gentleman could be passed without a debate. The Government had opposed the adjournment of the debate on the previous night for the purpose of giving the right hon. gentleman and other bon, members the opportunity of proceeding with their respective mo tions, and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster would have been ready to state what bad been done, as a member of the C3mmon Law Commission, if the ques tion could have been brought on. If, however, the right hon, gentleman would on any future evening ad dress a question to the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lan caster, his (Sir G. Grey's) right hon. friend would be pre pared to state the position of the question and the pro bable course of the Government in regard to it. The motion for postponement was then agreed to, and the adjourned debate was proceeded with. Mr. M. GIBSON said he had moved the adjournment of the debate on the preceding night, because whatever doubt might exist as to the pr)priety of the motion, no doubt could exist on the proposition that once the discussion of the question was entered on it ought not to be prematurely concluded. A forcible appeal had boon made to the hon, member for Mayo not to bring on the motion, and doubtless the conviction which actuated those who made that appeal was that no good could arise from the discussion of the question at this moment, but pro bably some evil. He (Mr. Gibson) was himself averse to the motion on other grounds, but he could not admit that there was any Parliamentary ground hr shrinking from its discussion, betas re when the Minister of the Crown laid papers before the house relating to negotia tions with any foreign powers, pending or concluded, he invited Parliament by that act to express an opinion on the subject, and any member was therefore at liberty to elicit an expression of that opinion. The Government could not therefore complain of the question brou4ht un der discussion, because if publicity was deemed by them to be injurious to the cause in band, they ought not to have courted publinty, and because having, as it were invited Parliament to discussion, silence on the part of the house might ise taken as acquiescence in their course of policy. As the motion stood, therefore, it was impossible for any hon. member to shrink from recording his vote, The motion involved the questions, first, whe ther the operations carried on by her Majesty's Govern ment in enlisting soldiers for her Majesty's service in the United States were wise and politic ; secondly, whether, supposing them wise and politic, they were prudently and judiciously conducted ; and, thirdly, whether the re sults were such as to enable Parliament to approve of the policy of the Government and of its mode of proceed. icg. He (Mr. Gibson) had been opposed to the principle of the Foreign Enlistment Act from the beginning, be cause he felt that any attempt to carry it out would lead this country into international disputes of a serious character. He should not, however, permit his opinion upon that measure to bias Lis judgment in the present else ; because the bill having been adopted by Par liament it became the duty of the executive to give effect in some form or other to the intentions of the Legislature. The Secretary of State for the Home Department had thrown out an insinuation to the contrary effect as regarded the supporters of the motion ; and he had stated that the speech of his (Mr. Gibson's) friend the hon. member for Inverness might have been, and probably had been, delivered in opposition to the Foreign Enlistment Act. There was another statement of the right hon. gentleman in reference to the contents of the blue book, an 1 the papers laid before Parliament on the subject, in which he (Mr. Gibson) could not con cur either. The right hon. gentleman bad said that the friendly feeling of the British Government, and their un willingness to give any just cause of offence to the United States Government, was evident on the face of every des patch which bad been seat from the Foreign Office, and and that they had done nothing whatever to place them in the wrong with the United States Government. He (Mr. Gibson), however, found passages in those despatches of Lend Clarendon than which, in his opinion, nothing could be more insulting to the United States,or better calculated to produce irritation and bad feelinc , between the two countries. In the despatch of November 10, 1855, Lord Clarendon informed Mr. Crampton that Mr. Buchanan bad called on him to inquire why such large reinforce ments bad been sent to the We,t Indies, as he was ap• prehensive it would create excitement in the United States ; and that be had told Mr. Buchanan there was no intention on the pelt of her Majesty's Government to attack or menace the United States • but as they had reason to believe that ships were fitted out in United States ports for Russian purposes—as there was a great conspiracy in progress in the United States to create an insurrection in. Ireland—as a United States ship had recently been engaged in taking soundings in the ports of the West Indies—and as there had been a note from Marcy to Mr. Crampton, indicating a fixed purpose to promote a quarrel, her Majesty's Government thought it fit to be prepared for the course of events which it had done and would da nothing to provoke, and which they would still do their utmost to avert. (Hear.) He (Mr. G.) denied the accuracy of these statements. As regarded the first of them—namely, that ships were fit ting out for Russia in the ports of the United States— that charge, which had been made by Mr. Barclay, our consul, was made under false information, and it was re tracted by Mr. Barclay himself in a published apology in the newspapers. To sta'e, therefore, that this was a rea son why an increased force was sent out to the West In dies, was to assume tbo truth of the allegation without waiting for inquiry, and to act on that assumption was to insult a friendly nation. Then as regarded the great non• spiracy to promote insurrection in Ireland in the United States, he (Mr. G.) not only denier] the fact, but he con demned the terms as totally inapplicable to the Irish population, subjects of her Maje-ty, in the United States. A great conspiracy, to be followed by an armed invasion of Ireland ! Was there a man in the house who would say he believed it ? It was consequently an insult to im pute it to the United States, and to charge the United States Government with knowing it was in progress. As regarded the American ship taking soundings in the West India ports, that was a sheer absurdity; charts, accurate charts, of all the ports in the West Indies, could be had in any of the shops for the sale of such commodities without any trouble, and at a trifling cost. The cry about " soundings " was a periodical cry, hav ing been absurdly got up on many occasions in this country, more particularly just before the French Re volution, but without the least foundation for the alarm that was supposed to be felt. The tone now adopted by the Government was that what they bad done in the United States was what they were entitled to do, and nothing more. B u f h a d not t h e G overnmen t made mis takes in the Hanse Towns, and had not the Prussian Government taken our consul, and not only roughly handled him, but thrown him into prison ? And if they made one mistake might they not have made an other ? The Government wished the world to be lieve that all the British Government had done in issuing their proclamation was to "give informa tion "to the American people. But upon that ground every law might be broken. A man might say to an other, "I wia give you 10/, if you will vote for me," and say, with just as much reason, that that was only "giving information" to the voter. Tee right hon. gentle man the Secretary for the Home Department had told the house that nc persuasion had been used to induce the men t leave the United States ; but Lord Clarendon, in his despatches, maintained that the Government had an indis putable right to use persuasion and offer inducements to American citizens. If that were the opinion of the Govern ment why should that denial have been put forward ? If the British Government had power to do that, they had power to do all that the American G ,verument itself bad power to do. But ho (Mr. Gibson) thought it was highly necessary to inquire whether the recommendation of Lord Clarendon in the despatch of July 16, that there should be no concealment from the American Govern ment, had been followed up or not. Now Mr. Crampton bad had but one conversation with Mr. March (that of March 22) until September, and on that occasion in March, he told Mr. Marcy that numerous applications had been made, and Mr. Marcy said that persons might of course leave the United States, but he should enforce the neutrality laws. (The right hon. gentleman then read the rnieute of this conversation as read by the Attorney-General on the previous evening, in which Mr. Crampton said he had intentionally abstained from in forming Mr. Marcy of the means adopted by the British Government to induce Americans to join the British army.) Now that was really and truly the only impor tant matter that Mr. Marcy had any interest in know ing, because upon the exact means employed depeuded the legality or illegality of the proceedings of the British Government. It was now denied so very forcibly that anything wrong had been done, that he supposed the Government were prepared to do again that which they had done. He could see no reason for desisting from that which we had a perfect right to do ; but he believed that bad there been no United States municipal law at all, the British Government bad no right to make treaties with agencies of questionable character, but to communicate with the Government itself. He believed, after reading the works of the most eminent writers on international law, that no Government had any right to operate in the territory of another without the consent of that Govern ment. It had been stated in a pamphlet, the writer of which was prepared to verify his statements, that the operation of our Government there had cot about 40,0001., and that the net proceeds of the whole transac tion were 37 Germans who were now creating mutiny and disturbances in our garrisons at Plymouth. These men had cost about 1,00./. a-head, and could not be trusted with arms in the public streets. How any Bri tish Government could imagine that the English people would sanction their sending across the Atlantic in pur suit of Germans at that price he could not tell. [The right hon. gentleman then read some further passages from the pamphlet, stating that payments had been made to those persons who had gone to America, and returned after a fruitless journey.] Now when appli cations were made to the Government for situations, it was not usual to compensate the applicants who were refused, and he believed that some arrangement bad been made between those persons and the British Government. [ln support of that opinion the right hon. gentleman read a letter from the Hon. Joseph Howe to a Major Smolenski, promising him the colonelcy of the regiment when it was formed, and four dollars a man for every recruit he shipped from Boston.] Now there was an answer to the letter from Smolenski himself, who said—" I have received the annexed letter, and I under take to serve her Majesty the Queen as therein ex plained." This letter was signed "Joseph Smolenski." Ile (Mr. Gibson) maintained that if ever there was a con tract that was one, and if the thing had been legal it would have been a contract between two parties in the fullest sense of the word. It would have been a hiring and retaining. He found that Mr. Mathew, the con sul, admitted that be had paid money to Mr, Hertz through Mr. Howe, to whom the receipt was made out, and the most remarkablel part of the proceeding was this, that in acknowledging the despatch admitting this fact Mr. Crampton said he saw nothing wrong in any thing that Mr. Mathew had done, and in fact be took upon himaelf all the responsibility. Hertz, it appears, was on very friendly terms with Mathew, for Mathew said he went one morning int ) his bedroom and with oaths and protestations induced him to lend hies fifty dollars, but that he bad not the honesty to repay him the amount. Now, was it true that the Government had spent the public money in carrying out what Mr. Marcy had properly called these " unseemly contests ?" He did not know whether the Government had thus spent the public money or not. If they had, they of course s ai• witted that these men were their agents. (Hear.) Bet it appeared plain that Mr. Crampton had given Strobel money, and that S•Tobel by such means at once became the agent of Mr. Crampton, who was responsible for his acts. Mr. Crampton in one of his letters stated that on his arrival at Halifax Captain Strobel waited upon him and informed him that there were many Germans and others there who would gladly join if the requirements of the British Nation were only made known to them. Upon that representation Mr. Crampton gave him money to carry on his operations. He (Mr. M. Gibson) very much regretted that her Ma jesty's Government were mixed up with prooeediogs such as these, and he repudiated any enlistment whatever with the United States. At the same time he was very much surprised that when this course was decided upon the agents of her Majesty's Mini , ters did not atonee.put themselves in friendly communication with the American Government. The opinion of Judge Kane bad been ad verted to as sanctioning the proceeding of the English Government, but that icemen judge, in the course of the trial of Hertz, said he was surprised to hear that whilst the British press was fulminating against the Americans, there were agents of the British Government drawing away persons to fight the battles of a people who were not very courteously pressing siren them (the Americans) the duty of neutrality. He hoped nothing that bad oc curred would at all injure our relations with the United States. He believed it amounted to nothing more than a difference between the American Government and the Government of our awn country. The English House of Commons bad nothing to do with Mr. Marcy, Mr. Cushing, or President Pierce, but with their own Minis ters, and it was his deliberate opinion that they had not done well in picking this quarrel with the United States for the purpose of getting a few miserable Germans. Mr. BAXTER said there were considerations which might render it not inappropriate that he should make a few observations. He was intimately connected commer cially with the United States, and hat spent many years of his life there, with a view to obtain information upon the social and political condition of the States. He had no sympathy with those who spoke of the United States not as a child whom we ought to cherish, but as a rival whom we ought to ch a i n an d b r idl e . No doubt the constitution of the United States had many defects, which filled thinking men with dismay. But we should not be too sensitive or prone to find faint, but being ready to make all allowances, we should treat their shortcomings with generosity and magnanimity. He confessed that before reading the papers laid upon the table by command of her Majesty, he had a strong bias in favour of the Americans, but a careful perusal of them had led him to the conclusion that the House of Com mons had no right to pass such a censure, as that con tained in the resolution, on her Majesty's Government, and he had framed an amendment, which he understood by the forms of the house he could not put, to the effect that the resolution was unjust by implication to Mr. Crampton, and directly to her Majesty's Government. He regretted that Mr. Crampton did not communicate to Mr. Marcy what were the intentions of her Majesty's Government. He did not make such a communication, and therefore if there was any error in this matter, it certainly was at the door of Mr. Crarnpton himself. (Bear.) In saying this, however, he did not stand there as the apologist of her Majesty's Government, but for the purpose of expressing his own opinions as an inde pendent member of the House of Commons. Then, with respect to her Majesty's Government, and to the course they took in this matter. That Lord Claren don did make some unguarded statements could not be denied, but they were soon recalled, and the American Government had stated its full satisfaction with the ex planations her Majesty's Government had rendered. In every other despatch Lord Clarendon had adopted that conciliatory and generous tone which the people of this country had a right to demand. (Hear.) Then it must he recollected that Mr. Marcy, Mr. Attorney. General Cushing, Mr. Vandyke, and others—not newspaper edi tors, but gentlemen holding important situations under the federal Government—bad used language of the most insulting and irritating nature. He could not help coin ing to the conclusion that her Majesty's Government had acted in a most generous and conciliatory spirit to wards a people with whom this nation would always de sire to be at peace. If President Pierce and others had acted in a similar spirit, many of the difficulties that bad followed would have been avoided. He 'had no hesita tion in saying that while they were blustering about war with England, it was only civil war that they feared. (Hear.) Mr. PEACO'CKE did not mean to deny that Ame rica was a great and rising nation. He did not mean to deny that the Americani spoke English, or that they hospitably entertained the hon. gentleman who had just sat down. (Laughter.) But he did mean to deny the statement that had been made that this was an improper time for the discussion of this question. It was constantly said when the question was raised that the present was not the proper time for considering it ; but now there were no negotiations pending, for they had terminated most disastrously to the fame and honour of this coun• try. Mr. Crampton admitted that be had corresponded with Strobel in cipher, that he gave people instruc tions as to the beet way of being enlisted, that he made arrangements for evading the laws of the Unit ed States, and that he went to Halifax, there more fully to carry out his plan et operations. The hon. gentleman proceeded to read some extracts from the co - rre3ponden . ce with a view to show that the course of proceeding which Mr. Crampton carried out was part of a policy adopted by the Government at home, and carried out by their agents abroad. He then referred to the case of Mr. Curtis, our consul at Cologne, who was condemned for enlisting contrary to law, but was par doned on the declaration made by him that he was acting under the direction of the British Government. That was precisely an analogous case to that which had taken place in the United States, and he contended that if Mr. Crampton were right he should have been upheld at the risk of the loss of Mr. Dallas. If ho were wrong ho should have been recalled. Instead of that advice being taken, this country had adopted a mean course, at the suggestion of the noble lord at the head of the Govern. meat—the orator of Roinsey, and the rhetorician of the Mansion-house ; who had stated that he would protect the meanest of England's subjects, and yet had suc cumbed, when there was the slightest appearance of danger. Mr. SPOONER said he would not enter upon the merits of tbis question, for he believed that the more it was discussed the more dangerous it would become. The resolution visited her Majesty's Government with dis approbation, while the American Government was per fectly satisfied. (Hear, hear, and No, no.) An insult not intended was not an insult, and any one who re sented it when it was not intended knew the conduct of neither a Christian nor a gentleman. (Hear, hear.) If the Government had sent back Mr. Dallis*, they would have committed the most desperate act that could be conceived, and would have plunged the two countries into an inevitable war. (Loud cheers.) We could afford to be magnanimous and wait patiently under false accusations until, God grant, the diffarenca could be settled satisfactorily between the two countries, lie would not, therefore, enter into the merits of the ques tion ; he had his own opinions on the subject, and would not venture to express any opinion on the points so ably argued by the honourable and learned Attorney- General and the hon. and learned member for Stamf ,rd last night. He did not profess to 7n,:ierstand the legal bearing of the points in question. He would recommend those hon. members who laughed at this expression of his ignorance themselves to get up and point out in what respect either of these learned gentlemen were wrong. Believing that the present was not the proper time for arguing the question, he should decline to pro- nounce any opinion on the subject, and would vote for going into committee of su pply. Mr. GLADSTONE—Sir, the speech which has just been delivered by my hon. friend marks a feature in this debate so important, and so much connected with the vote that I shall probably give myself at its close, that although I am likely upon a division tb go into the same lobby with the hon. member, yet I think there is no impropriety in ruy following him in discussion. It ap pears to me that the two cardinal aims which we oughtto keep in view in the discussion of this question are peace and a thoroughly cordial understanding with America for one, the honour and fame of England for the other. 1 am bound to say that in regard to neither of these points am I satisfied with the existing state of things, or with the conduct of her Majesty's Government. A cordial understanding with America has not , been preserved ; the honour of this country has been compromised. Sir, I am not one who will set up the phantasm of honour in a case where the plea appears to me unreal, or who will condescend to separate between honour and the honour able conduct of which it ought to be the symbol. But as respects the honour of England, I assent—l cannot but assent—to the statement of the hon. and learned gentle. man who has already spoken from an opposite bench, that what is considered by the world to be an insult—. that which, at any rate, cannot but be called an insult— has been put upon EOgland by the Government of the United States. Ras it been put with or without a cause ? If with a cause,lt ought to be confessed ; if without a cause it ought to be resented. Sir, lam bound to say that upon this question my feelings are such that it would be impossible for me to meet with a direct negative the motion of the hon. member for Mayo. I could not say ' No" to a motion which states that the conduct of her Majesty's Government in regard to enlistment in Ame rica has not entitled them to the approval of this house. Nor do I mean simply to take my stand, when I say I am likely to vote with the hon. member for North War wickshire, upon the circumstance —though it is an im portant one—that we are not called upon to say "Ay " or "No" to that question. The question which you, Sir, will put from the chair, that we should go into CJramittee of Supply, gives to the matter the technical Parliamentary aspect of what is called the " previous I question ;" but, at the same time, I must say that I do not concur in the censures which have been bestowed ' upon the hon. member for Mayo with respect to the time of bringing forward his motion. (Hear, hear.) Yet the • question is one of the greatest difficulty. I cannot hay that there is no inconvenience attending emotion which criticises or assails the conduct of her Majesty's G. vernment engaged in transactions with a foreign country; but, before deciding the question whether the hon. mem ber for Mayo is open to the severe censures which have been cast upon him, we must consider whether the papers which have been laid on the table do not make us acquainted with all tbe facts of the case—whether the misunderstanding with America has not gone beyond the point of mere diplomatic communication, and has assumed Seism and action in the face of the world, and whether tlhe house itself, or at least those individual members who have familiarised themselves with the con tents of die blue-books, will not by declining to take this opportunity of expressing their opinion upom them become parties to the approval of the couduct of her I Majesty's Government ? (Hear, hear.) For myself, Sir, I frankly own that I have felt the greatest difficulty in considering the question what vote to give upon the present occasion. I never recollect a question more difficult as pressing upon my own under standing and conscience (hear, hear) but with my knowledge and experience of this house, I am convinced that those who feel with me cannot do better than throw themselves on the indulgence of the house, stating fully the difficulties which they experi ence, exposing themselves if need be to adverse criticism, but relying with confidence on the generous forbearance of the house to put a fair construction upon their language. (Hear.) At any rate, after what I have sai 1, I shall state in intelligible language why it is I expect to find myself voting with the hon. member for North Warwickshire. My hon, friend stated, at the commencement of the dis cussion, that he deprecated the beginning of it as lik e ly to injure the int e r es t s o f peace, and he likewise charac terised it as a party question, casting some discredit upon it on that acceunt. Is it, then, in point of fact, a party question ? Why, I appeal to his own example against his precept. He himself has risen in his place and declared that he will vote agai ns t th e mo ti on of the hon. member for Mayo. So far that is an indication that it is not a patty question. (Hear, hear.) Aaio, within the last few mi nutes the right hon, gentleman the memher for Man. chester, who, I apprehend, does not belong to the same j political school as the hon. member for Mayo, has declared his intention to support the motion. But if my right hon. friend and the hon. member for Mayo are making it a party question, on behalf of what party are tbey raising it ? Is it of the party opposite ? Does the hon. member for Mayo belong to the school of the right hon, gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire Why, sir, it is quite plain this is not a party question. And, sir, I am bound to say that, in my opinion, that i s a vital element in the consideration of the case. Disap proving the -conduct of her Majesty's Government in the management of the foreign enlistment question, I say here that I should be ready to express that disapproval by vote if I saw a motion to that effect made by a party ready to be responsible for the consequences of success, Now, sir, I say to the hon. member for Mayo, with out the slightest disrespect, that these questions of votes of censure upon Governments are matters of great importance, and that in considering them we must look not merely to the terms in which they are framed, but likewise to the quarter from which they emanate. (Hear.) I mean nothing disparaging to th• hon, member for Mayo ; but are we to regard his mo tion as the declaration of a party ready to be responsible for the results of its adoption, or is it merely the expres sion of the opinion of individual members of this house, who can have little influence upon the division, and who, if the resolution were carried, could not themselves be responsible for the consequences ? (Hear.) I think, sir, it is a good practical rule in Parliamentary discussions that we should not by our votes weaken the hands of Go vernment unless we are prepared to displace them from office. (Hear.) I think it is not desirable that in these foreign transactions the Government should be assailed by votes that tend to weaken their influence on behalf of their country, unless they are moved by those who are responsible for carrying those opinions into effect. I therefore should have approved the motion before the house if it had been moved by some party who were re sponsible for carrying the resolution of the lion. member for Mayo into effect. For a vote of censure on the Go vernment, as an abstract resolution, I am not able to vote, but if the motion had come before me supported by those whe were ready to carry out the principle it em bodied I should have felt it my duty to give effect to my opinion. But then I may be asked, " Why, admitting that we ought not to weaken the hands of the Govern ment in carrying on their difficult negotiations with a foreign country—why do you enter upon this discussion and express opinions contrary to the course taken by the Government ?" My answer is plain. I have no choice after the turn which this debate has taken. [An hon. member made a remark, which was inaudible.] My hon. friend says I am going to speak one way and vote an other. (A. laugh.) Well, Sir, I object to all votes of an abstract character, and which cannot be carried to a practical result. I believe it to be a wise rule that votes of censure on the Government should only be pro posed by those who are able to give effect to the prin ciple contained in those votes. I should not shrink from giving my vote in accordance with that opinion, but as matters stand I shall vote for going into Committee of Supply. The state of things with which you have to deal is this :—Upon the British Minister the penalty of dismissal from Washington has been inflicted. As far as the honour of this country is concerned, the state of things is therefore unsatisfactory. As far as regards the American Government, what is its condition ? Was the breach with America closed up by his dismissal ? Will any man say he believes it is ? It it were rightto retain Mr. Dallas, why do you keep our diplomacy in a state of half animation? Why do you not appoint a successor to Mr. Crampton ? I can conceive no reason for not send ing away Mr. Dallas that does not equally prove that you should appoint a successor t 3 Mr. Crampton. If the American Government had no cause to justify them in dismissing Mr. Crampton, why do yon retain Mr. Dal las ? If they had a cause to justify them, why do you not admit that they are right and send a successor to fill Mr. Crampton's place ? (Haar.) My right hon. friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department having spoken last night, I presume we are in possession of the views of the Government, and the Government were not content to debate this question except upon its merits. My hon. friend the member fur Warwickshire said he would not enter upon the merits of this question, and that is a perfectly consistent course for me to take or for my hon. friend to take. But the Government have en tered upon the discussion upon the merits of the case. That was a manly course, and I do not find fault with it. Whether it was a prudent course lam not so sure. That they declared their adherence to all that has been done and stated during the whole progress of this painful discussion. Nothing can be more explicit than the declarations they have made to this effect. The Attorney-General declared that, whereas there had been charges against the Government of violating both international law and the municipal law of the United States, he denied both those charges, and denied that either law had been violatei. My right hon. friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department was even bolder iriehis manner of dealing with this subject than the Attorney-General. He said that the officers of the Government had acted up to the spirit of the instruc tions that they had received. He said that no acts bad been done contrary to the American law, and that the apologies made to the United States' Government did not admit that such acts had been done, because her Ma jesty's Government felt all along that no wrong had been done. So that the doctrine of the Government is that their proceedings have been justified by their own in structions. - I am certainly not prepared to be respons ible for that opinion by the side of the evidence in this blue-book. I believe, indeed, that such an assertion is made in the teeth of the plainest evidence in every page of these documents. That is not only my opinion, but I believe it is in effect the opinion of a great many of the inembirs of this house who have given their time and labour to the perusal of these blue-books. Small is, I fear, the number who answer to that description. Theme are many things that the English people will d e They will sign petitions : they will attend meetings ; they will get up agitations ; they will pay taxes, and double taxes if need be. But blue-books they will not read. That is the case also with members of this house. I say fear lessly that the Attorney-General has not read these blue books. (A. laugh.) That is a fair challenge, and I will show that the references of the Attorney-General to these books—references evidently supplied to him at second hand—betray that he has never entered upon the study of these important documents. The effect of these declara tions of the Government is, that they keep alive the re collection of the differences between this Government and the . Gloierisment of America, and I am not prepared to asient to the opinion of those who say that it is not de sirable to remove these affairs from the hands of those who have hitherto conducted them. On the contrary, I think that no Government is so little qualified toconduct these negotiations with America to a successful. result, be , cause { of; the differences that have prevailed, because of Theeeourse of combined obstinacy and weakness which the Gbvernment have pursued, and because the recol leotion of these differences has been kept alive by claims which present a great difficulty in the further progress of the negotiations. My right hon. friend (Sir G. Grey) stated in is fair and cand.d manner a point of great im portance. I refer to the supposed apology of the British Government, It has often been said that the American Government cannot complain, because if any wrong has been done them it has been covered by a handsome apo logy. But that is not the language of my right hon. friend. He did not say that if any wrong had been done to the Government of the United States it bad been covered by an apology. On the contrary, my right hon. friend said, with the greatest candour and truth, that the apology offered to the United States' Government had always been a conditional apology, and was not an apology that implied or admitted that a wrong had been done, because her Majesty's Government, having been fully conscious that they had done no wrong, had not offered an apology that supposed that a wrong had been done. (Hear, hear.) My right hon. friend stated these were the apologies that had been made. They had been repeated in various despatches. They all run in one form. The British Government would regret deeply if, either intentionally or unintentionally, they have done a wrong to America. But they have not done a wrong to America. (Hear, hear.) If no wrong had been done I grant you that an apology so couched ought to be accepted, and that it would be a frank, generous, and conciliatory step, going as near as possible to meet the views of the American Government. But if a wrong has been done, such an apology s is no apology at all. (Hear.) Whether a wrong h been done, therefore, is the question upon which we have t _ to fall back. I maintain that if a strong has been done that wrong has not been atoned for by the apology. Let me say two things, which will shorten ray part in the dis cussion. In e first place, I will not, as a general rule, quote from these blue-books, bet fur every word I utter I am ready, if called u pon, to repeat th e chap ter and verse. 'lf I do not quote much, it is be cause it would be unreasonable iu me to trespass upon the indulgence of tbe house. In the next place, I forbear to discuss the question of international law, not that I think it unimPortvgi because I hold that no position is less defensible and no pretension lies tenable than that we may exclude the question of international law from the consideration of this subj set from the fri volous reason that the Americans have a municipal law. But as the case is clear upon the municipal law, I am ready to cmfine myself to that in the practical view of the case which I have prescribed to myself. I am sorry to say that the propositions that I have to support, as embodying my conscientious convictions, are unfortu nately propositions which attach very strong blame to the con'tuct of the Government. Sir, I shall not at tempt to qualify those opini ins by a,ey expressions of regret. Tune things are of little value in hostile dis cussion. It is better for a man to speak out what he has to say, and to tract to be contradicted, corrected, and exposed if he has not spoken the truth. What I have to say is this—le the first place, concealment was prac ticed towards the America , ' Government ; and, in the second place, not only was concealment practised, but the American Government were deluded and misled by representations, which I do not say were intended to mislead, but were evidently such that they must mislead, if properly consiclei ed. I say this-- - -that the municipal law was not only broken, but it was broken in defiance of the advice of those who were chosen as counsellors— it was knowingly broken on the part of she agents of the British Government. Ido not say that in these papers is to be found the proof that this was done under the di rection of the British Government. In that respect I venture to differ from the hon. gentleman the member for Mayo, and, permit me in passing to say, I could not but listen with regret to the observations exoressed fro - n the Treasury hi itch, not only on those portions. c f the S peech of the hen, member for Mayo in which he introduced, by Ivey of illustration, certain passages from Irish history—(a laugh)—but on the general tendency of that speech to throw blame on one particular member of the Cabinet. I inust say, in justice to the hon. mem ber for Mayo, that although it may be good tactics to strive to keep out of view one's own incapacity by in - troducing exiting matter, the hon. gentlema n h as no cause for any such expedient, because he has amply proved by argument his full ability to dial with the merits of the question. (Cheers.) But I differ from the hon. gentlemau in that point. I think he stated these things were done under the direction of her l‘fajesty's Government. I confess I do not discern that on the face of the papers. (Hear.) But, in my view, it matters little whether they were done under the direction of the Government or not, if the Government made themselves parties to the acts by their subsequent approbation. (Hear.) Anti here, sir, I cannot help regretting deeply the injustice done Mr. Crampton by the hon. member for Montrose. (Cheers.) One proposition that I state with the greatest confidence is this—that injustice was not done Mr. Crampton by any member of the Govern meut, but it was done by the hon. member for Mon tries°. (Hear.) The hon. member, with his regard for America, was not willing to inculpate America ; and, with his regard for the Government, was not willing to inculpate the Government. (A laugh.) So, following the example of President Pierce, and passing by both the British and the American Governments, he threw the blame upon Mr. Crampton, and said Mr. Crampton, when he took the lawyer's opinion, ought to have stopped the scheme of recruiting. I give Mr. Crampton credit for taking a lawyer's opinion. It was a wise and pru dent step, but when it is said he should have stopped the scheme of recruiting, did it rest with Mr. Crampton to disobey crders from home ? (Hear,) In my opinion Mr. Crampton sailed as near the wind as he could, and, in justice to Mr. Crampton, it must be remembered that ween he had taken the lawyer's opinion he sent home that opinion to his Government and wrote to Lord Cies tendon— " Your lordship will no doubt perceive that the provi sions of the Neutrality Act restrict our operations within very narrow limits." (Cheers.) 1 take it that it was a fair expression that in his opinion the whole thing should be abandoned. That suggestion was not adopted by the Government at home. Mr. Crampton had begun to act in the spirit of what he conceived to be there intentions, and the result is that her Majesty's Government are unreservedly acquitted by the Americans, and Mr. Crampton is no longer Minister at Washington. (Cheers.) But with respect to Mr. Crampton my proposition is this—that there is not one hair's breadth of distinction between the position of Mr. Crampton and the position of her Majesty's Government. (Hear.) I think, as far as I can jadge, that the zeal of Mr. Crampton, and, perhaps, what he believed to be the intentions of the Government, but were not the instruc tions of the Government, were the source of the evils which have arisen. (Hear.) Everything which Mr. Crampton did was approved by the Government at home; every claim that Mr. Crampton made was maintained by the Government at home, and I entirely decline to draw the least distinction between the original responsibility of Mr. Crampton, as the subordinate person, and the sub• sequent responsibility of the Government by its unre stricted posteri-r approval of Mr. Crampton's conduct. (Cheers.) But I say that, at first, Mr. Crampton concealed those proceedings from the American Government, and that in a point of great importance. (Hear.) The hon. member for Mayo has quoted a passage from Lord Cla rendon's despatch of the 15th July, in which Lord Cla rendon says that he has instructed Mr. Crampton, above all, to bave no concealment from the American Govern ment. My right hen, friend the member for Manchester says, that if that were so, then it was a high offence in Mr. Crampton to practise concealment. The American Go vernment, not doubting the assurance conveyed by Lord . Clarendon, said the same thing and laid on Mr. Cramp ton's shoulders this burden—that, having received strict instructions not to practise concealment, he did practise concealment. The hon. member for Mayo has stated that there does not appear in these papers any instruction to Mr. Crampton not to practise concealment, and he has called upon the Government to point out to him where that instruction is. (Hear, hear.) The Attorney• Gene• ral followed, and he did not answer that appeal. The Home Secretary spoke later in the evening, and did not answer that appeal. The appeal must be renewed, for this house has a right to know from her Majesty's Go vernment whether it is true that Lord Clarendon in struett.d Mr. Crampton to have no concealment from the American Government. If he did so instruct Mr. Cram ton, them undoubtedly the American Government are justified in the distinction which they draw ; but, if Lord Clarendon did not so instruct Mr. Crampton, and if the reference ;n the despatch of July 15 is erroneous, then it is impossible to find words to describe the injustice in flicted on Mr. Crampton, because Mr. grainpton has been made to bear the responsibility of concealment, which the hon. member for Montrose well said was the fatal error from the outset, whereas the responsibility of that concealment belongs to the Gavernment I frankly own I think it does belong to the Government, for, although reference is made in the• despatch of July 15 to some instruction not to practise concealment, there is no passage in any prior despatch, or indeed in any de spatcb, prior or subsequent to th;t effect. The material point in the case is, whether concealment as Or was not practised ? The Attorney-General said no concealment was practised, for Mr. Crarnpt ' poiutol orit to Mr. Marcy that the British Gov e r n .h a d' es t a bli s h e d, or intended to establish, a depot at alifax. And this is te. what induced me to say the Attorney• General had _not read the papers, because my hon. and learned friend gays two references to despatches, neither of which contain 0, .void as to the depot at Halifax ; but there hapPenif to be a third extract which does refer to it. I preauaisethe person who prepared the references fur the Attorney. -...- General had unfortunately placed the wrong figures in the margio, or they were wrongly supplied at the mo ment, and my hon, and learned friend, not . having read the papers, was un a bl e t o correct t h e error. -- (Laughter.) However, it is quite true Mr. Crampton did say to Mr. Marcy that the British Governmerkt intended to establish a depot at Halifax. It is not in , e'lle' ' bluebook, but it is in the 14th page of the le.stet3itpers presented to Parliament. 1 think there ieenei 'doubt it wits mentioned, but it is a fact, for which I doll 4 think Mr. Marcy had any great reason to feel obliged, inthimucth as this depot was the subject of great discussion in the - 't'" public journals, and it is just possible Mr. Marcy..might' . have acquired a knowledge of its existence withene, may _. such communication being made by Mr. Crampteme• The question is, did you conceal from the American Giirerne ' meat that which was the matter and the cause ofenicoms plaint ? The American Government never complainedeef the existence of the depot at Halifax. There is not a word which implies such a complaint on their part: 'They knew quite well that the establishment of such a depot at Hali fax, whether prudent or not, was perfectly within the rights anal competence of the British Government, and I am perfectly ready to say that I and my right hon. friend near me (Sir J. Graham) are responsible for that act j 4 conjunction with the members of the present Government, because that resolution was the last step -- within our edg e uisance before we were compelled to quit the Cabinetor — - my noble friend on a question arising _oil- the motion of the hon, and learned member for Sheffield: But that was never made the subject of complaint. What the American Government have complained of is the employment of an agency within the United States not only to give informa tion, but to tempt to induce by the oireikof valuable.con- - eiderations, the subjects of the United Stalies - z toie beyond- .- the United States for the purpose of enlisting. That is the subject matter of their complaint, and I want an answer to this question—Did Mr. Crampton tell the American. Government that he, on the part of the British Govern ment, was about to establish such an agency or not? Mr. Crampton says he did not tell the American Government the details. I must say that appears to me an unworthy t mode of dealing with the question. This is not a question about details. It is a question about a measure, conatitut• ~. ing the corpus of the complaint, on the part of the Ameri- :. can Government, namely—the employment of an agency within the United States for the purpose of disseminating ' information and inducing men to go beyond the United States to enlist. (Cheers.) Did Mr. Crampton communi cate thet a , or did he not ? If not, it is useless to talk of not concealing, when you conceal not a detail but the very head and front—the very ground and fonadation of the whole case. (Cheers.) I say, without the smallest, is doubt, Mr. Crampton did not communicate that to the American Go vernment, and I say so, because thete the declaration, express and positive, ` of the American Government, because there is nothing in the statement of Mr. Crampton himself which sustains the allegation that he made such a communi cation to Mr. Marcy. (Hear. hear.) This fact stands the '. ninthtehtie case—that te t s h , e fo g r oi t n h g e a p b clipose out to first great pror gen ßi e t y l° 3 7. American citizens to go beyond the border and o e establish t i a n b d t iuschi inducing g n be enlisted, was concealed from the American Governments That is the charge of concealment, and it will be well if the Government can give some answer to it. (Hear.) But concealment was not all. There was more, unfortn, nately. I request hon. gentlemen to look at the 14th page of the last papers which have been laid upon the table, and there they will find that Mr. Crampton, referring to his despatch of the 22d of March of last year, gives us a large part of a despatch which was not given in the original blues book. He there gives hie account of his conversations with Mr. Marcy, and states the substance of his communications with that gentleman. ale says he told Mr. Marcy that to the inquiries which had been addressed to him by persons in that country be bad invariably replied by referring them to the provisions of the act. After stating those provisions he goes on to sayconsequently all he could do was to give to such persons the information of which be was in Rorit• session as to the terms and the time and place atwhk they might, if so disposed, be received into th e service of the British Government. Therefore, Mr. 1 Crampton solemnly assured Mr. Marcy that i ill answer to .. ':~ •k. •