The Sun. — London, England, 1863-05-19 00:00:00

'ERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OP LORDS—Last Evening. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. THE WHITSUNTIDE HOLIDAYS. In reply to Lord CHELMSFORD, Earl GRANVILLE said he proposed on Thursday next to move, that the house at its rising do adjourn till the following Monday week. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Blackfriars Bridge, Elsecar, Wentworth, and Hey land Gas, Exeter Gaol, and Tees Conservancy Bills were read a second time, THIRD READINGS. St. Ives and Weet Cornwall Junction Railway, La Iv Life Assurance Society, Irish North-Western Railway, and Cheltenham Roads Bills were read a third time and passed. DUBLIN METROPOLITAN RAILWAY BILL. On the motion for the third reading of this bill, The Earl of CLANCARTY moved that it be read a third time that day six months. Lord LLANOVER said—Having been chairman of the committee to which the bill had been referred, he was of opinion that the proposals of the noble earl to refer the wh , le quest:cm involved in this bill to a royal commission, or else to have it recommitted, were quite unnecesary. The committee had taken the grea'cst care in the consideration of the various clauses of the measure, and they thought it would be a great gain far Ireland to have a through line with out break from Kingston to Dublin and Cork on the one hand, and Galway and the ncrth on the other. That was the precise question their lordships would have to consider, and he hoped as the committee had passed the bill, the house would reject the motion of the noble lord. The Earl of B.NDON and Lord BELUORE objected to the third reading. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE thought the same con sideration that was given to the proposals regarding the City of London ought to be extended to Ire land. It was too much, he thought, to say that because Dublin was smaller than London, it ought not to be treated in the same way. Lord REDESDALE said the opposition had come too late. The objection to the measure ought to have been raised before the bill had arrived at its last stage. He thought the house ought to support the decision of the com mittee, and read the bid a third time. Their lordships divided-- For the third reading Against Majority The bill 'was then read and passed. METROPOLITAN RAILWAYS. Lard CAMPBELL asked whether the Government in tended to appoint a commission upon the proposed metro politan railways similar to that of 1846 ? Earl GRANVILLE could not hold out any hope that the Government would recommend the appointment of any such commission ; at all events, not until after the report of the present select committee had been received. NORTH AMERICAN PRIZE COURTS. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE rose to move for copies of the reports of consular and diplomatic agents is North America as to the decisions and proceedings of the prize courts of North America, The noble marquis said he was aware he was approaching a delicate question, but the whole commerce of the country was in such a sate of confusion on the subject that interference of any kind must be ac ceptable to the shipping interest. He then quoted the cases of the Labuan, the Springbok, the Adela, the Peter hoff, and other vessels, which had been seized for a long time, and had not been adjudicated upon till now. The noble marquis also called attention to the recent proclama tion of the American Government, by which British ships Were prevented from carrying coal, and a large number of other articles, from a ny o f th e B r itish North American ports to any part on the American coast south of the 11 , 13 a. mas, from whence it might be suspected they would be carried for the use of the Confederates. When there had been mention made lately of sending a fleet to the West Indies, the noble earl (Earl Russell) told them that we were at peace and not at war. Did the noble earl mean to say that that was peace, when our trade was stopped and our flag insulted in a most irritating manner ? Earl RUSSELL—My noble friend has made a speech bringing very grave charges against the American Govern ment and the American prize courts. He has broaght, in fact, a charge that the American Government and the American Courts appointed for the purpose of judging these questions of capture and prize have set aside the whole in ternational law of the world—that they have given orders quite inconsistent with that international law, and he more than once stated that they had decided that they would in terrupt British commerce ; that commerce might be as law ful as they pleased, that it might be as fair commerce as could be carried on upon the seas, but the American Go vernment had decided that they would interrupt and put an end to it. Well, in one of those sentences my noble friend put in the word " almost," and that, like the word " if," is a great peacemaker ; so that they have not quite decided to put an end to British commerce. (A. laugh.) But when my noble friend came to give proofs of his assertion I thought he very much failed in so doing. There were, I think, three proofs on which he relied. One was in re; and to the Labuan. That ship was taken in the neutral waters of Mexico, and therefore Lord Lyons asked that both the usual and ordi nary course of sending it before a Prize Court should not be pursued, but that it should be set free. But it was stated afterwards to us that the American Government did not claim a right to seize ships in neutral waters, but that there were great doubts thrown upon the facts ; that it was as serted that the particular position in which the Labuan was found was not in Mexican waters, but in the waters of the United States, off Texas ; and, therefore, that the question must go before a Prize Court. Another proof of my noble friend related to an assertion of Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams, speaking in this country, and not concerned with the particular details of capture, it appeared, said on one occasion that it was no wonder certain merchant ships had been taken, because they were in the position in which many ships had teen found intent on breaking the blockade, and on carrying contraband goods to the enemies of the United States. Well, of course Mr. Adams did not mean that that was sufficient ground of capture, and his own Government, on a represen tation which had been made to Mr Seward, have said that they would direct that no merchant ship should be stopped in neutral waters, and also that it should be no sufficient ground for capture that information had been given that a ship was about to break the blockade or was carrying con traband to the enemy, but that there must be a regular search, and there must be, as the result of that search, a legal cause of capture before the vessel could be taken and sent tefore aPrize Court. So far from denying the principles of the law of nations, Mr. Secretary Seward fully and com pletely acknowledged them The only doubt I had was whe ther the officers of the United States navy were in every case instructed according to the declarations of the Secretary of State and to the instructions he had given, by order of the President, to the Secretary of the Navy; and for that reason, having had some doubts on the subject in the case of the Labuan, I desired th e Ad miralty to instruct Admiral Milne to send a ship or ships of war to Mexican waters, that British merchantmen in those neutral waters might be pro tected from unjustifiable sei zure . W ell, it does not appear that there have been since th a t ti me i n the waters of Mexico any seizures of which any great complaint can be made. There certainly was a report which the Admiralty sent the other day to the Foreign Office from one of the captains of our men-of-war, who had been at Matamoras, and which said that that port was crowded with merchant vessels en gaged in carrying on a commerce which now exists between this country and various countries of Europe and the Mexican side of the Rio del Norte. The next proof that my noble friend gives is the assertion of a United States captain with respect to the ships which he should take. But I submit that the assertion of a captain as to what he should de—that any idle boast or loose words of such a person about what ho feels authorised or intends to do, do not bind the United States' Government or the United States' Prize Courts to his doctrine. And I must hold that it would be a scat unjustifiable inference if my noble friend, having no thing to prove his case but the assertion of some naval cap. L . Bit, _should say t h at the United States' Government an d the t United States' tribunals, being bound to do justice ac cording t o the law of nations have entirely thrown aside the law of nations, and are prepared, against law an d aga i ns t justice, to int ertltß r itish ships carrying on a legitimate trade. The Marquis of CLAzaticAßDE__l quoted, not what the captain said he would do, but the official report of what he had done. Earl RUSSELL—WeII, that Was his r eport of what h e had done and his ju s tifi cation of it, Then my noble friend went into various ease, into w hi ch I ceerutaY don't mean to follow him. But h e re f erred to certain decisions said had been made. Th e case of the Adelans been brought under the notice of the Foreign-ol eo w i th r to the judgment stated to h ave b een given —a jades!'" which, if true, would be a very i m p roper one. But on ceontn suiting the law officers of the C rown, and receiving their report as to the legal effect of the matters submitted to them, I desired Mr. Hammond to write a letter to the owners of the Peterhoff, in which there was this passage :—. "As regards the allusion which has been made to the of the Adele, before her Majesty's Government can ;o a r " any opinion as to the judgment stated to have been given in that case, they must have before them a correct report of that judgment, it being impossible to rely upon the general representation of its effect contained in a newspaper para graph, founded on printed letters, especially as none of the other judgments of the United States' Prize Courts, which have been reported to her .Majesty's Government during the present war evince any disregard of the established principles of international law." I desired Mr. Hamm-2nd to write than letter, because such was.the substance of the report of the law officers of the Crown. I have been careful to refer every case of complaint that might come to us, whether through Lord Lyons or from the owners of vessels, to the law officers of the Crown, and they, after attentively watching all these decisions, say there has been no rational ground of complaint as to the judgments of the American Prize Courts. My noble friend, reviewing the proceedings connected with the trial in the case of the Peterh o ff, d ec l ares on hi s own author i ty t h a t the u l'nort pronouncinc , a certain person to be an alien enemy of the 'united States is a wrong decision, and he wishes the Government of this country to proceed upon the judicial determination that that dac'sion of the United States court is erroneous, 'Well, it may have been erroneous, but I con fess myself totally unable to judge whether : was right or wrong. But this I say, that a great cou '1 y like the United States having tribunals constituted older its own laws for the determination of these que ,Loris of prizes, those tribunals are not at once to be held 0 !;e of no value, and to have decided against the law of nations. On the contrary, our presumption must be that as their knowledge of international law is very great, so their impartiality and their desire to do justice must be for the present unques tioned. We may be told, and it has been very often re peated, that a judge sitting in a national court, and bound to decide according to the law of nations, decide for all other nations interested in these questions of interna tional law—that he does not decide solely for the benefit of England or of any one other country. Lord Stowell, in the great Swedish case, said, " I am saying in a Bri tish court what I would have said if I had been a judge in a Swedish court, and have felt myself compelled to decide according to the law of nations, and the authority of great jurists and established precedents." Are ae to sup pose that the judges of the United States courts, who are always quoted with respect and often with admiration by the great text writers on international law, whether in Europe or America —are we at once to conclude, because a navy captain has given a very faulty account of his cap tures, and because in one or two cases wrong has evidently been done, that the courts of the United States have sunk into such a state of degradation that they will not do jus tice to the subjects of another country ? My noble friend says that many of these vessels have been taken on very slight suspicion, and that this shows a foregone conclusion to interrupt British traders going to the colonies or to Ma tamoras on lawful voyages. With respect to that matter, I must ask this house to attend a little to circumstances which have evidently escaped my noble friend. Those circum stances are these : —lt has been a most profitable business to send swift vessels to break or run the blockade of the Southern ports, and carry their cargoes into those ports. There is no municipal law in this or any country to punish such an act as an offence. I understand that every cargo which runs the blockade and enters Charleston is worth a million dollars, and that the profit on these transactions is immense. It is well known that this trade has attracted a great deal of attention in this country from those who have a keen eye to such gains, and that vessels have been sent in the one case to Nassau, in order to break the blockade at Charleston, Wilmington, and other places, and carry contraband of war into some of the ports of the Southern States. 'Well, is it wonderful—is it a matter of which we can complain—that the cruisers of the United States look with suspicion upon vessels that are bound to Nassau, or are going from Nassau—that they very frequently stop them to ascertain fie m their papers whether they are not intending to break the blockade, or carry contraband of war to certain Southern ports ? Well, there are two posi tions in which some of these vessels are placed. They are sent out with a view to an attempt to break the blockade, and directions are given among the ships' papers that they are to break it. That is one position, in which they very often make a most fortunate voyage and lucrative trade; and they exult exceedingly on the immense gains they make. But there is another position in which the owners of such a vessel sometimes find themselves —viz., that their vessel is captured, when the owner immediately comes to the Foreign-office with all the air of injured inno cence—(a laugh)—declares that nothing was further from his thoughts than the breaking of the blockade, and asks that the strongest representations may be made to the Ame rican Government on his behalf. There are some instances in which I have no doubt the American cruizers have acted upon slight suspicion, and had no claim to seize the vessel, but that they should look with jealousy upon such cases as I have mentioned is by no means wonderful. We must be somewhat cautious in believing all the reports which are made to the Foreign-office by the owners of ships. Above all, I certainly am not prepared to declare, nor is there any ground for declaring, that the Courts of the United States do not faithfully administer the law, that they will not allow evidence making against the captors, or that they are likely to give decisions founded, not upon law, but upon their own passions and national partialities. Another case, into which I need not enter, is that of certain cargoes going from New York, and alleged to be contraband of war. The American Government say they will not allow American ships to leave New York with certain goods bound for certain ports, and, because they will not allow their own vessels therefore they will prevent British ships. We have argued: on the other hand, that the municipal law is not sufficient in the case of British vessels; and I think our argument is conclusive. My noble friend having introduced this subject very generally, I may state, in justice to Mr. Adams, that he thinks that what he did lately with respect to vessels going to the Mexican coast has not been accurately repre sented by me in the statement I addressed to your lordships some time ago. He says it would appear from my state ment as if he had proposed to interfere with British vessels, giving an advantage to one British ship over another, sup plying a sort of certificate of character to some merchants as against others. Now, Mr. Adams assures me he never intended to give any such advantage to one British vessel over another, but he thinks he had a perfect right to give certificates to American citizens with a view to a trade with Mexico. I do not know, of course, whether any person sup posed from my statement that Flriti.l. ~,, g Q4AIR wrra fn tao in terfered with by Mr, Adams. Upon that point his own letter was not quite clear, but I confess my own opinion is that the letter was one which ought never to have been written. (Hear, hear.) I may mention that the French Government were somewhat surprised at seeing an enter prise against the French in Mexico. spoken of rather in terms of praise by the American Minister in this country— (a laugh)—but they were satisfied the American Govern ment did not know anything of the matter, and, therefore, did not think it necessary to take those measures which in other circumstances they might have adopted. (Hear, hear.) With respect, then, to the complaint of the noble marquis, although in some cases we have reason to think the American cruisers were wrong, yet, on the whole the in dictment of my noble friend is not borne out, and there is certainly nothing to justify his charges against the Ame rican Government, as represented by the President and the Secretary of State, or against the American courts of law. We must wait and see what is the whole proceeding in the case of the Peterhoff and other vessels before we can judge fairly of their conduct. Meanwhile, Ido not think it would be right in compliance with the request of the noble mar quis to give such loose reports as we have from newspapers of the proceedings of the American Prize Courts. If we are to give anything to Parliament at all—and for my own part, I confess I think it extremely doubtful whether we should publish the proceedings of foreign courts—we should at all events take care that the reports are full and authen tic. (Hear, hear.) When we get authentic reports, there may, perhaps, be no objection to their production, should your lordships desire to see them ; but, in the meantime, we have no papers to lay on the table. A few more words and I have done. Let it be remembered that there is immense excitement in America about the proceedings of the Alabama and Oreto, which the Americans say have been fitted out and armed with the connivance of the British Government, and which are preying upon American commerce. I do not think that charge can be justified. The Foreign Enlistment Act is liable to be evaded by a ship being built here as a merchant ship and then taken elsewhere to be armed ; but still there is a strong opinion in America that the British Government intends to prey upon American commerce and take part in the war ; while here, on the other hand, there is just as strong and, I believe, quite as sincere an opinion that the American cruisers are preying upon British com merce, I cannot help thinking that the two nations are somewhat in the ease of the two respectable persons who last winter, when great alarm prevailed about garotting, met and attacked each other in the belief that each was a garotter. (A. laugh.) Your lordships will recollect reading in the newspapers how one of them, calling upon a friend rater in the same evening, complained of having been attacked by garotters, and how his friend condoled with him, saying that his own son was in bed upstairs suffering from a simi lar assault. Then, you will remember, it turned out that the two had mutually taken each other for garotters and had punished each other rather severely, (A. laugh.) So it is, I think, with America and this country. They are a little excited in the same way, but I am convinced the American Government do not really intend to di-turb our commerce ; while I am certain that neither the British Go vernment nor the British nation have any wish to interfere in the contest now going on in America. (Hear, hear.) I hope that, as in the case of the sham garotters, they will eventually be reconciled to each other, and that, seeing they are old and respectable friends, the little passing exc i tement under which they now labour will speedily end in the re storation of their ancient amity. (Cheers.) that iHe has e the The Earl of DERBY — I th ink the noble earl has satis trhaesnhloybiteomaassruqumise, shown clearly answered that theremarksof ought ot law and justice, and that we should make every allowance for the provocation whi c h th e Americans must feel from the large extent to which a contraband trade has been carried on with Confederate ports. There are two points, how ever, upon which I should be glad to have a word of expla nation. In the first place, did I understand the noble earl to say that there were cases in which British merchants had ap plied for the interference of our Government, though it subse quently appeared that among the ship's papers were instruc tions actually directing them to break the blockade ? I can hardly imagine that there have th been such cases. I suppose I must have misunderstood nleeadvertopuhterondbeotaenrdtiohnis.the noble earl, because, setting shipon a r e t 3 . y e a aside other considerations, surely British merchant would paperothwehich must inevitably be glad to hear that I have misunderstood the noble earl. Point, also, I shall There may be some reason to believe thar'l of the cargoes from this country to Nassa a u ar an a ugdei proportionileieate e o on li si u g t ne d d o i e n s the negobileemiieacanarl n a are intended t e t n h d e e d Confederate ultimately States, be c mean to say that on account of that suspicion the American cruisers are entitled to seize a vessel proceeding in that n direction ? If the vessel be really and in good faith bound for Nassau, whatever may be the character of her cargo, or whatever suspicion there may be as to her ultimate destina tion, the cruisers have no right to capture her. I hope the noble earl has not conceded to the American Government anything like an acknowledgment that render these circum stances they are justified in interfering with a vessel sailing from one neutral port to another, whatever grounds of THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 9, 1861 doubt there may be as to her future course. (Hear, hear.) I am sure that it will be a satisfaction to your lordships, and to the country, if the noble earl is able to clear away any misconception on the subject. (Hear, hear.) Earl RUSSELL—It is quite true that in one case at least an American captain found among the papers—not the re gular, but the private papers—of a captured ship an order to break the blockade. In regard to the other and more serious matter referred to, the noble earl certainly misunderstood me—(hear)—when he supposed I meant to say that a ves sel going to Nassau, intending afterwards to make another voyage, ought to be captured on her way thither. What I alluded to was a case of simulated destination—that is, a vessel pretending that she is going to Nassau when she is in reality bound for another port. (Hear, hear.) Lord CRANWORTH observed that Lord Stowell had laid it down very decidedly that if a vessel were actually going to a neutral port, whatever suspicion there might be as to her cargo or its ultimate destination, she ought not to be seized. (Hear, hear.) The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said if it was incon venient to produce the papers he had asked for he would withdraw his motion. The motion was then withdrawn. DUCHY OF CORNWALL MANAGEMENT BILL. This bill was passed through committee, as was also the Marriages, &c. (Ireland) Bill. Their lordships adjourned at 10 minutes past 8 o'clock HOUSE OF COMMONS—Last Evening. The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock. The following bills were read a second time :—Brecon and Merthyr Tydfil Junction Railway; Rumney and Brecon and Merthyr Tydfil Junction Railways; and Stir ling's Estate. The Milford Railway Bill was read a third time. PETITIONS. By Sir G. GREY against the closing of public-houses on Sunday; Mr. W. WILLIAMS, from Cook's Company against the amalgamation of the City with the metropoli tan police; a few in favour of the closing of public-houses on Sunday. Mr. BRIGHT supported it on the ground of civil and religious liberty. After a few words from Mr. NEWDEGATE and Mr. ADDERLEY, The house divided, when there appeared— For the third reading Against it Majority --29 The bill was then read a third time. THE CASE OF WM. STUART FARQUHARSON. Colonel NORTH asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if it was true that a convict of the name of Wil jam Stuart Farquharson alias Frederick William Stuart, had lately arrived from Bermuda, and was now in Millbank Prison ; and if so, what was proposed to be done with him ? This man, who had been acting as a curate of the Established Church upon the authority of forged documents, and who had likewise served as an officer in various militia regiments, was indicted at the Oxford Assizes, in 1859, for forging the endorsement of a bill of exchange, and having been found guilty he was sentenced by Mr. Baron Martin to twelve years' penal ser vitude. He hoped this man w uld be sent out of the coun try again, and that when he was sent out he would not receive a ticket of leave. Sir G. GREY said the convict Farquharson had been brought back to this country from Bermuda on the breaking up of the convict establishment in that island, and the hon. and gallant member might rest assured that, as regarded his future treatment, he would he dealt with in the same way as all the other convicts, and that, for some years to come at all events, he m ould not be entitled to a ticket of leave, THE COUNCIL AT MALTA. Sir G. BOWYER asked for information regarding thy circumstances under which the Royal assent was given to the extradition ordinance lately passed by the Council at Malta. It was important to notice that whereas the extra dition treaty with France and America only referred to three or four crimes of the greatest magnitude, this ordinance with the Council of Malta comprised 14 different offences. He had been told there was a clause in the ordinance by which no person could be tried for any offence except for that upon which ho was delivered up ; but such a clause was altogether a delusion, for, as there was no treaty with Italy on the matter, this country could do nothing for the person after he had been given up. That of which he complained was, that after repeated applications at the Colonial Office, he should be told the ordinance was like all similar extradi tion treaties, and that the ordinance should have received the Royal assent without giving hon. members a sufficient opportunity of reading the papers relating to it. The rapers had been laid on the table on the 16th of March, and on the 31st the Royal assent was given to the ordinance at Malta. Mr. C. FORTESCUE said he should be sorry if the hon. baronet thought that he had been deceived at the Colonial Office on the subject of the extradition ordinance with the Maltese authorities. The facts were shortly these :—Some time back the Governor of Malta had brought under the notice of her Majesty's Government that criminals were constantly arriving in Malta from Sicily and other parts of Italy, and suggested the expediency of having an extradition ordinance for the purpose of remedying the evil. The subject received careful consideration both at the hands of her Majesty's Government and also of the local authorities of Malta. The matter had also been dis cussed and considered at Turin, and negotiations were opened between this country and Italy, for it was essential to the validity of the ordinance that a corresponding decree should be passed in the Turin Parliament. After much discussion and consideration a modified ordinance had been passed to which the royal assent was given. The case was one of urgency, and her Majesty's Government did not think it well to delay any longer the royal assent. It was impos • sible that any abuse could arise under the ordinance as sup• posed by the hon. baronet. After some remarks from Mr. D. GRIFFITH, relative to the prerogative of the Crown in connection with our colo nies, the subject dropped, and house went into SUPPLY—THE DOVER PACKET SERVICE. Mr. F. PEEL moved the sum of £250,000 on account of the estimate for the packet service for the present year, "in part of the sum of £956,878 required for the year ending March 31, 1864, which sum includes provision for payments to Mr. Joseph George Churchward, far the conveyance of mails between Dover and Calais and Dover and Ostend, from April 1, 1863, to June 20, 1863, but no part of which sum is to be applicable or applied in or towards making any payment in respect of the period subsequent to June 20, 1863, to the said Mr. Joseph Geo. Churchward, or to any person claiming through or under him by virtue of a certain con tract, bearing date April 26, 1859, made between the Lords Commissioners of her Majesty's Admiralty (for and on be half of her Majesty) of the first part, and the said Joseph Geo. Churchward of the second part, or in or towards the satisfaction of any claim whatsoever of the said Joseph George Churchward, by virtue of that contract, so far as relates to any period subsequent to the 20th day of June, 1863 (in committee of supply)." He said he had departed from the usual course in naming Mr. Churchward's contract, for the purpose of stating that no portion of the sum to be voted should be applicable to or applied in payment of that service. The estimates contained four services, in respect of which new contracts had been agreed to be entered into, or were proposed to be entered into, viz., the Galway service, the Brazil service, the West India service, and the Cape service; but neither of them would be binding until the t c o o contracts a c resolutiont s hadb n e f e been h laid on us e t , h f e o r table nn n of month,the house, without according being csteb d huaea i a s bp.p p stjonie. osed of. He was not, however, able to lay them on the table of the house, and he should defer taking so much of the estimate as applied to them until they had met with the approvalof the house. The Galway contract was still the l Cape eetsl ngaiwodhdecomsrndt oaemeysetendrrfehod,pveoc:farbiariwvadreatnei acneaicceisustGdnoessivn ileoelpegtxahwsTvreai ptseaseivdhafidisprdenrpeeneoincrbridinciyodpfswi netincoe:tahnoenirthr ttetriecsehhtedwtebhteceoa, tepe t eohbeGa sb ttualnal eeneelfpovi nka t dovte w eerhobesh e nfeeamttee e hffrtotol n hehon eroßd t raeeoiduzet Government house, bnehieerryraalvnewaitdsn.oteu. Taludhn ens odto ohelinstruc tionsandndre which, a orot vieuvoceepnoi Govern- her contribution colony. bent Government t prepared r i Tee e p o shw u at e eyhr s l ydeyi Majesty's t ftmotv i ohhr n ereaedr u ninttl e the service unless the colony would pay one-half of the net less for carrying it on for the future. Un derstanding that was likely to be acceded to, and to pre vent a temporary interruption of the communication, ar rangements were made with the old contractor to continue the service until the Home Government had received a definite answer from the Cape. Upon receiving a satis factory answer from the Cape the Government entered into another contract with the old contractors, under which the mails would be carried for the future. With regard to Mr. Churchward's contract, the Government had adopted the present course for the purpose of giving effect to a reso lution of that house, which was tantamount to a declara tion on its part that it did not consider Mr. Churchward's contract ought to be fulfilled, having regard to the circum stance that he had resorted to a corrupt expedient for the purpose of inducing the Government of that day to enter it. It did not matter, so far as the question was concerned, whether the Government of that day was or was not in fluenced by those expedients, or was cognisant of them— but nevertheless they were resorted to for the extension of his contract, and he obtained it. The resolution to which he referred had not been rescinded, and it became the duty of the Government to follow it out, and they had prepared the estimate accordingly. In the beginning of 1859 Mr. Churchward was a contractor for the service from Dover to Calais, and also from Dover to Ostend, which contract, supposing a year's previous notice to be given, would have expired in June, 1863 (next month). He was paid under that contract £15,500 per annum for the ordinary service, and a rate of remuneration for the extra service fixed by the contract. In 1859 Mr. Churchward appeared to have been dissatisfied with the extra service remuneration. Mr, Churchward complained that the number of the Indian mails which he had to bring had increased considerably, and also that the bulk of the Australian mails had become so large, that once a month he was obliged to provide a special vessel to carry them over to this country. Under those circumstances, in June, 1859, he was called upon by the Government to state what he required, and his an swer was that in the first place his contract, which would terminate in June, 1863, should be prospectively extended to April, 1870; and secondly, that he should be paid for his extra duties at a commuted fixed rate of £2,500 a year. These proposals were favourably enter tained by the Admiralty, and they were forwarded to the Treasury by the Admiralty with a recommendation that they should be acceded to. After some delay the sanction of the Treasury was given to them, and a new contract was made out, which was to endure until April, 1870, and under which the subsidy was increased to £lB,OOO a year. It hap psned, however, that these proceedings with Mr. Church ward took place at a time when a general election was going forward ; and when the new Parliament assembled attention was called by an hon. member to the circumstances attend ing negotiation of the extended contract by Mr. Church ward. The consequence was a committee was appointed to investigate the extension of the contract, and towards the end of the session the committee made its report. The right hon. gentleman read an extract from the report of the com mittee, which was to the effect that the committee considered it proved that Mr. Churchward had volunteered to support the candidature of the Hon. Capt. Carnegie, who was a Lord of the Admiralty, for the representation of Dover, on con • dition that Mr, Churchward's contract was extended ; and then they submitted whether, under such circumstances— Mr. Churchward having resorted to corrupt expedients in order to obtain an extension of his contract—the house would feel called upon to vote the funds necessary for giving effect to the renewed contract. Shortly aftek the re-assem bling of Parliament in the next session, the late Capt. Lei cester Vernon moved a resolution declaring that the house having read that report, was of opinion that the renewed contract with Mr. Churchward ought to be fulfilled. That resolution, however, was negatived by a majority of 45, in a neie committee,, a t the price ri c ho use of ne ar l y 300 members. He must say t h at, i n hi s opi nion, the vi ew taken by the committee represente d t h e true state of th e case, viz., that Mr. Churchward offered to sell hihs:Jholoi house, political having 1 influence in the borough of Dover to Capt. Car thegcaemof the extension of this contract. (Hear.) T giv t ee a t k oe en ffthece i t n c t to o on otclhuoensisroiend:eorbmay a t m io e n nladr t ag h te e ioni r n e sa p jo o o r fr t itthy o e f i that it ought to committee. Now, he need not say that it would be under no ordinary c ircumstances that the House of Commons would be induced to break through a contract entered into by the Government, but he must say that if ever there was a case in which the house was both morally and legally free to act in such a manner, it was the present. Recollect what had been the offence of Mr. Churchward ; it was a breach of the privileges of this house; it was an attempt to inter fere with the freedom of election and the independent choice of a member of Parliament; and an attempt to enter into a corrupt bargain, which was to be binding not only upon the executive, but upon the House of Commons. (Hear.) Under those circumstances it appeared to him that the house might fairly refuse to make any further provision for the service to be performed under the renewed contract. The passage which he had read from the report of the com mittee showed that what they especially desired was that Mr. Churchward should not have the benefit of the exten sion of his contract from June, 1863 • until April, 1870. The hon. gentleman then read the correspondence which subse quently took place between the Treasury and the Post •office, and which settled that the service was to be continued by Mr. Churchward until June, 1863, without prejudice to the right of Parliament to reconsider the whole question at the expiration of that period. It only remained fur him to state the steps which the Government had taken in anticipation of the refusal to vote funds for giving effect to the contract of 1859. Having given a year's notice to Mr. Churchward of the course which they were now taking, they advertised for fresh tenders, and the result was an offer from the Belgian Government to perform that part of the service between Dover and Ostend, now devolving :upon Mr. Church ward for £4,000 a-year. That offer had been conditionally accepted. With regard to the Dover and Calais contract, they had received several tenders, and amongst the rest' oue from a Mr. Harrington, who undertook, provided the contract was to endure for a period of seven years, to perform the service for a sum of £5,000 a year. Well, if to that amount be added the sums payable as extras for the special conveyance of the China, Australian, and Indian mails, the contract with Mr. Harrington and the Belgian Government taken together would be covered by a sum of £12,000 against £lB,OOO, which was the amount received by Mr. Churchward under the contraet of 1859. (Hear,hear.) At the same time, Mr. Harrington had since applied to be allowed six months for the preparation of his vessels in case his contract should be accepted. Sir S. NORTIICOTE, in moving as an amendment to omit all the words of the resolution which related to the contract of Mr. Churchward, observed that the mode in which the question had been put before the committee would lead to the supposition that by the proceedings of the select committee and the vote of the house the merits of the case had been virtually decided, and that the house had no thing to do now but to confirm or reverse a decision already arrived at; but that was not a true view of the case, for the question was not concluded either by the committee's report or the vote of the house. In the debate upon Capt. L. Vernon's motion in 1860, Mr. Laing, the Secretary to the Treasury,himself stated that in 1863 Mr.Churchward would be in as good a position as any one else, and be able to com pete with ethers, or his contract might be renewed from year to year until the Government called for new tenders. This was confirmed and strengthened by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who gave an assurance that this year the merits of the case would be reopened ; and that was the posi tion in which this question now stood. If, however, the Government thought it necessary to set aside the contract, their proper course would have been to show that lit was their positive intention to do so. They well knew that the contract was legally binding, and that if they went into a court of law they would have con siderable difficulty in setting it . aside. They ought, there fore, to have brought in a bill to put an end to the contract. But instead of that, they allowed the service to continue under the contract of 1859, called upon Mr. Churchward to build new ships, kept the matter in abeyance because they thought that contract was more convenient than the pre ceding one, and had then turned round, thrown him over board, and given the contract to others. They had not, . _ therefore, fulfilled their promise to put him in the position of coming forward and making a tender; and he believed that if they went into a court of law they would have no good and valid defence against any action that Mr. Church. ward might institute, for there was no pretence whatever to say that he had m t performed the service efficiently and well. With regard to the bargain by the Belgian Govern ment, no doubt it would save the country some money, but Mr. Churchward had some time ago offered to perform that service for the same sum, whilst by the az rangement with Mr. Harrington the actual saving, he believed, would not be more than £lOO a year. The fact was that the Govern ment, by their proposition, were bringing about a collision between the House of Commons and the courts of law ; they were seeking to establish a precedent under which persons would find it impossible to enter into contracts with them; and they ran the risk of causing great detriment to the pub lic service without the prospect of any corresponding advan tage. In conclusion, the hon. barenet condemned the con duct of the Government as casting a slur upon a man upon whom a stigma ought not to rest, and as being equally un fair and un-English. Sir M. PETO was of opinion that Mr. Churchward ought to be permitted to continue the contract so long as he exe cuted the service satisfactorily. The ATTORNEY -GENERAL defended the proposal of the Government to proceed by resolution in committee of supply. He admitted that the proceeding was special and unusual, but so was the transaction to which it related. Mr. MALINS characterised the proceeding of the Go vernment as shabby and unbecoming, and hoped the house would refuse to give it their sanction. Sir G. BOWYER, regretted that the time of the house should be taken up with the affairs of Mr. Churchward. He had himself an important question to bring on, and an hon. member came to him to request he would postpone it in order that Mr. Churchward's case might come on before dinner hour. It was now nearly ten o'clock, and they were still considering Mr. Churchward's affairs instead of the business of the country. It had been his misfortune to be listening to the discussion, and he would tell the committee the impression that had been produced upon his mind by it. The impression was that he thought Mr. Churchward had many friends in that House. (Hear, hear.) Many people primed and loaded had come down to support his case. He thought it was one of those cases which ought to be left to the Government for the time being ; he would vote against Mr. Churchward , and for the Government; and that which induced him to do so was, that there seemed to be a sort of packed house on one side in favour of Mr. Churchward. (Cries of " No " from the opposition.) Mr. COBDEN said the question lay in a nutshell,and that which they were now discussing turned entirely upon the evidence of one gentleman. After having been two years out of Parliament, and not having taken any part in the general election, and the proceedings of that house, he had been en tirely unconnected with the previous discussion, which had given a party character to the question. It was on that ac•• count that he had been appointed chairman of the commit tee, for there were many gentlemen of greater experience than himself upon it, but it was probably thought that he occupied more of a neutral position. The first question that had come before the committee was a personal one, It appeared that early in 1869, in consequence of a remark from the right hon. gentleman the member for Droit wich, a letter had been drawn from Captain Carnegie, which had appeared in the public papers, explaining the reason why be refused to stand as a candidate for Dover; and this question got mixed up with the renewal of the contract for the Post Office packet service from Dover to Calais. The first thing which the committee had to inquire into was the renewal of Mr. Churchward's contract and the proceedings connected with Captain Carnegie. The whole question depended upon the testimony of Captain Carnegie, and everything outside that was surplusage. (Hear, hear.) Captain Carnegie had come before the committee reluctantly, and had given his evidence reluctantly. This was the statement he made : that at the time of the general election, in 1859, he filled the post of Lord of the Admiralty, and it was proposed to him to seek a seat in Parliament, and to try Dover. He described how in a public office, in the presence of a gentleman whose name he (Mr. Cobden) would no t mention, that Mr. Churchward had come up to him and spoke of the possibility of his becoming a candidate for Dover ; that Mr. Churchward then proposed to give him his support, and coupled with the offer the special condition of having his contract renewed for the postal service between Dover and Calais. The whole question was there--(hear)-- the question whether Captain Carnegie's testimony was to be credited. But what motive could he have, filling the high post of Lord of the Admiralty, in refusing to go to Dover ? In his evidence he stated it was the indiscreet pro posal of Mr. Churchward, which had induced him to decline becoming a candidate for Dover, It might be that he con sidered he would be called upon to exercise a kind of surveil ' lance over Mr. Churchward. (No, no.) Hon. members might cry "No," but he had more experience in these matters, and he would tell them how this was done. All the mail packets on their arrival and departure were inspected by the officials of the Admiralty, and there was power to levy fines or remit them. Captain Carnegie, from scruples of honour, might have thus shrunk from a proposal of such a nature as that made to him by Mr. Churchward. If it had been the question of renewing a service between this country and the West Indies or New York there would have been some excuse for looking a few years ahead ; but it was not necessary in the postal service between Dover and Calais, which might be arranged in six months. There was no necessity for the extreme haste which took place just at the critical moment of the election. According to the evidence given by Captain Carnegie before the com mittee, that gentleman clearly understood that Mr. Church ward's support was to be contingent on the renewal of the contract. If Captain Carnegie spoke the truth, this was an attempt to suborn a high functionary to dispose of the public money by the acceptance of the worst species of bribe. (Hear, hear.) It was a shallow view of the question when the hon. baronet the member for Stamford said that if Mr Churchward was to be stigmatised as guilty, he also was guilty. He thought there should be no doubt or hesitation about the matter. The committee suggested that the con• tract should be declared null and void, but then a legal difficulty would arise. Rather, however, than pay the money illegally, he would vote the money necessary to pay Mr. Churchward's expenses, and let them try the question, and establish, if he could, his claim. It was the duty of the house to express its decided opinion against the course that had been pursued by Mr. Churchward. Sir It, CAIRNS said two questions were involved in the discussion —one with regard to their form of proceed ing, and the other what was the duty of the Executive . G overnment. They were called upon to pass a resolution which was without precedent, and, as he presumed from the statement of the Attorney-General, en the advice of the law officers of the Crown. He warned the committee against passing a resolution which would anticipate the enactment of the Appropriation Bill; and when a similar course was proposed on a former occasion by the insertion of a clause in another bill, the proceeding was declared irregular by the Speaker. The committee had nothing whatever to do with the contract, but only to vote or refuse the money, and the present course had been pursued, thinking Mr. Churchward would bring an action at law. That was what Mr. Churchward wanted to do ; and the law officers knew very well that, if nothing more was done by the house than had been done up to that time, Mr. Churchward was certain to recover damages for a breach of the contract ; and the Appropriation Bill not being passed before the 20th June without the required amount being inserted in it, the Government would be at the mercy of Mr. Churchward—that being the day when his contract was to terminate—and therefore it was that the law officers had advised the Government to do in this case what had never been done before, to bring in a resolution to do the work of the Appropriation Bill, and enable them to show that no money had been voted by Parliament with which to pay Mr. Churchward, in accordance with the terms of the contract, viz., that he was to be paid out of moneys appropriated by Parliament for that purpose. (Hear.) That was something like what would be calicd by other parties sharp practice. Another point of equal importance, as regarded public faith, was the course taken by the executive Government in this case. The contractor was to be paid out of moneys to be provided by Parliament, but how was Parliament to have the option of paying or refusing the money unless it was asked for ? The Government, he contended, was bound to propose to Parliament a sum sufficient to fulfil their part of the contract, and they could not take any other course con sistent with proper constitutional proceedings in that house. He believed that at no distant day the report of the com mittee would be looked upon with amazement, particularly when it was borne in mind that Mr. Churchward's conver sation with Capt, Carnegie took place six weeks after his contract had been approved of by the Admiralty ; and, in conclusion, he called on the house, on the ground of public expediency and justice, to support, the amendment. Mr. HUBBARD was of opinion that the interests of the taxpayers had been overlooked by both Administrations in the hasty arrangement that they had made with Mr. Churchward. (Hear, hear.) He could not understand why, if the contract had been a loss to Mr. Churchward, he should yet have been so anxious to retain it. (Hear.) As a member of the committee, he might state that the clause in their report which charged Mr. Churchward with having acted from a culpable intention was only carried by a majority of two. Mr. NICOL, as one of the representatives of Dover, solemnly declared that Mr. Churchward never addressed to him a single word on the subject of the contract during the who'e course of the election of 1859. And he believed he might say the same with respect to his colleague in the representation (Sir Henry Leake). The fact was, the terms of the contract had been adjusted two months previously. (Ironical cries of " Hear" from the Ministerial benches.) The SOLICITOR• GE NERAL said, the one great ques tion which lay at the bottom of the whole controversy was whether the control of Parliament over the public expen diture was to be maintained in a substantial form. He quite agreed that, as a general rule, contracts which were bona fide entered into by the Executive would be adopted by Par liament; but he must protest on the part of the public against the idea that it was in the power of any Adminis tration to bind Parliament, and against their being told that the refusal to vote a sum in furtherance of a contract entered into by the Executive amounted to a breach of faith. He maintained that if ever there was an occasion on which Parliament should insist upon its right to determine as to a contract upon its merits, it was the present. The contract, as they all knew, was made in the heat of a general elec tion. (Cries of "No, no.") Well, the Treasury minute was not drawn up until the 16th April; Parliament was dis solved upon the 19th April—notice of the dissolution having of course been given for some time previously ; and the con tract was signed upon the 26th April, at the moment when the elections were going on. The right hon. gentleman oppo site, who was Chancellor of the Exchequer in Lord Derby's Government, when referring to the Galway contract, ex pressed his opinion that it was competent for the house to reject the vote for that contract whenever is was proposed. And with reference to the very contract now under con sideration, it had been statechon a former occasion that the contract was subject to ratification by the house. The ob ject of the vote now proposed, and of the terms in which it was expressed, was to have the contract rectified by the house. The contractor himself was supposed to have notice to that effect, and he should not have relied upon or made any expenditure upon it until he knew whether the house would ratify the contract or not. When the new Govern ment came in, and Parliament met, a committee was ap pointed, and it was in pursuance of the report of that com mittee that the last decision of the house had been taken. An hon. member who had differed from the committee moved that the house should supi ort the contract, which was an admission that such matters were subject to the decision of the house; and this was the very thing which the Govern ment were now doing. The learned gentleman next pro ceeded to consider the general merits of the case, and after giving a history of the facts he read an exti act from a letter written by the hon. member for Bridgnorth, (Mr. Whit more), stating, "We are anxious to expedite Mr. Church ward's departure for Dover to canvass." (Hear, hear.) There was also proof that he was pressing the subordinates of the Government to get the contract extended. Mr. Churchward's loose politics permitted him to vote for one Government candidate and one independent candidate, thereby neutralising his vote ; and he rather complained at being expected to vote for two Government candidates be fore the extension of his contract was granted. It was the duty of the house to discourage such proceedings for the future, and with that view he should support the vote as proposed by the Government. (Hear, hear.) Colonel DICK F. ON characterised the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman as a dissertation on local politics, and asked if such a dissertation could come from any hon. gentleman with less grace. (Cries of " Oh, oh," and laughter, which was increased by the deep acknowledgment of the compliment by the Solicitor-General, who took off his hat, accompanying the act with the lowest of bows.) The cenduct of a public servant was unjustly assailed in the vote, and he should therefore support the amendment. The committee then divided. The numbers were— For the amendment l6B Against it ...... 176 Majority against The announcement of the numbers was received with loud and continued cheers from the Ministerial side of the house. The vote was then agreed to. Mr. DISRAELI asked when the report would be brought up. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that it would be brought up to-day (Tuesday). Mr. WALPOLE thought the house would do well to provide for another opportunity being afforded for the dis cussion of the main question on its merits. Mr. DISRAELI reminded the Government that a very important question already stood for the day, and therefore it would be impossible to take the report of this resolution, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, while ad• , mitting the importance of the question to be raised that day, said the house must not overlook the fact that the service had to be provided for, and, that being so, he could not think of naming a later day for taking the report of the resolution than Thursday, the first day after the recess. The Chairman was then ordered to report progress. THAMES EMBANKMENT (NORT 1 1 SIDE) BILL This bill was read a third time and passed. VACCINATION (IRELAND) BILL. This bill was also read a third time and passed. OFFENCES (SOUTH AFRICA) BILL. This bill passed through committee. NEW ZEALAND BOUNDARIES BILL. This bill passed through committee. LAND DRAINAGE (PROVISIONAL ORDERS) BILL. This bill passed through committee. SALMON FISHERIES (scOTLAND) ACT CON TINUANCE BILL. This bill passed through committee. VICE-ADMIRALTY COURTS BILL. This bill was read a second time. ADMIRALTY COURT (IRELAND) BILL. On the order for going into committee on this bill, Mr. MAGUIRE was proceeding to show the necessity for placing the court on a better basis than at present, when An Hon, Member moved that the house be cotmtEd ; And there being only 33 members present, The house stood adjourned at 20 minutes past one o'clock. The Imperial Library of Paris has just received —and, we hope, also, our own British Museum—a copy of the splendid work issued by Czar Alexander 11. as a memo rial of his coronation at Moscow. It contains a series of chrome-lithographs surpassing in richness of design and gorgeousness of colour anything of the kind ever published. These chromo-lithographs, 30 in number, are said to cost, without letterpress, binding, &c., above a million of francs, —Athenceum. The celebrated French photographer Nadar, who lately had the catacombs of Paris illuminated by electric light for business purposes, is now—we learn from the Alhenceum—said to be preparing an immense balloon, in which he intends sailing, in company with 20 friends, into, or rather over, the interior of Africa to take sun-pictures. The start is to take place from the south of Algeria, Most of the Paris papers give this news ; which, however, has very muchthe appearance of a canard. [AnvEnTisEmxT.l—Holloway's Ointment and Pill s. — Help under Suffering.—No diseases which afflict the human body are more irksome to bear or more difficult to cure than skin diseases, whether superficial sores or deep ulcerations. Holloway's ointment has proved itself a ready remedy for these maladies. It at once assuages pain, cleans the wound, and works out a sound an d l asting cure, more certainly and more rapidly than any other appli cation. In old affections, debilitated habits, and constitu tional ailments, Holloway's pills ahould be taken to in crease the salutary effects of his unguent. These admir able remedies scarcely ever fail to perform the cure of what were considered incurable cases till Professor Holloway made his invaluable discovery, now most deservedly prized throughout the world. COTTON DISTRICTS. On the motion of Lord MANNERS an address for copy of letter from Mr, Baker, Inspector of Factories,to the Sec retary of State for the Home Department, on the present state of the cotton districts, was agreed to. THE NAVY. Lord C. PAGET gave notice that after 'Whitsuntide he should introduce a bill with respect to engineer officers con nected with the Royal Naval Reserve, and to give greater facilities to gentlemen owning large yachts, who were bona fide masters. CHINA. Lord NAAS gave notice that after the holidays he would, on going into Committee of Supply, call attention to the state of affairs in China. THE COTTON DISTRICTS. Mr. FERRAN D asked the President of the Poor Law Board, if he had received the report from the engineer sent down into the cotton districts; and if he would lay it upon the table of the house ? Mr. 'VILLIERS explained what he stated on a former evening on the matter, and stated that the report, in the production of which great industry had been used, as far as yet completed, had been received by him this day, and would be laid on the table to-morrow. GREENWICH HOSPITAL AND ITS FUNDS. Mr. LIDDELL asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether it was true that the late Accountant-General had been in the receipt of £3OO per annum from the fiends of Greenwich Hospital ; and, if so, what duties on account of the hospital he performed; whether his successor continued to receive the same salary and to perform the same duties ; and, if not, what arrangements were made for the proper auditing of the prize accounts, and under what authority the remuneration for the performance of such duties was charged upon the revenues of Greenwich Hospital ? Lord C. PAGET intimated that Sir Richard Bromley enjoyed an income of £3OO a-year as auditor of the Prize Fund, but it was paid out of the funds created by the 5 per cent. deducted for contingencies from bounty money. The money had nothing to do with the funds belonging to Greenwich Hospital. The salary thus paid was annually voted by Parliament, and thus came under its direct super vision. The course to be adopte lin the future was now under the consideration of the Government. BRAZIL. Mr. P. URQUIIART asked the Under Secretary oi _ _ State for Foreign Affairs whether the Brazilian Minister had demanded his passports, or made any communication to her Majesty's Government to the effect that he had in structions which might require him to suspend diplomatic relations between England and Brazil ; was any correspond ence pending; and would it be laid upon the table of the house when complete ? Mr. LAYA RD feared the only answer he could give was that the correspondence between her Majesty's Go- vernment and that of Brazil was still going on, and that, pending its completion, it would be highly inconvenient to lay the correspondence on the table of the house. (Hear, hear.) MODEL SCHOOLS (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. O'REILLY asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland when the returns relative to model schools in Ireland, which had been ordered, would be laid on the table of the house ? Sir R. PERL—They will he ready next Thursday. COMMISSIONS IN THE ARMY AND THE UNI- VERSLTIES OF SCOTLAND. Mr. DALGLISH asked the Under Secretary of State for War, why, in the recently published regulation for com missions in the army, the Universities of Scotland h a d been omitted from the list of Universities whose graduates holding the degree of B.A. or A.M. were enabled to get commissions without passing the usual examination? The Marquis of HARTINGTON replied that the alleged omission did not rest with the War-ofice. No communica tion had been received at the War-; ffice expressing a desire on the part of these universities to have their students in cluded in the list. Provided the students satisfied the re quisite qualifications they would be entitled to the privilege. CONCENTRATION OF THE LAW COURTS. Mi. A. MILLS asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether her Majesty's Government had arrived at any decision as to the course to be adopted with reference to the building and concentration of Courts of Justice, and the sites to be chosen for that purpose; and, if so, whether he would state what measures it had been determined to adopt ? Sir G. GREY replied that his hon. friend the Chief Commissioner of Works proposed shortly to introduce a bill on the subject, and that nest session Parliament would be asked for a vote to purchase a proper site. (Hear.) THE MAIL SERVICE BETWEEN DOVER AND CALAIS AND DOVER AND OSTEND. Sir S. NORTHCOTE asked the Secretary to the Admi• ralty whether any personal or written communication had taken place between the Post-office and the Admiralty, or between any officers of the Post-office and the First Lord of the Admiralty, with reference to the employment of Ad miralty vessels for the mail service between Dover and Calais, or Dover and Osten , ' ? Lord C. PAGET replied that a few weeks ago a personal communication was made to the Duke of Somerset and himself by the Post-office authorities, who inquired if any difficulty would exist in supplying the vessels specified in the qu , stion,and the reply given was to the effect that it would be highly inconvenient for the Admiralty to be called upon to furnish any part of that service. THE MACLACHLAN CASE. Mr. STIRLING asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the papers on this case, moved for as an unopposed return on the 4th of May, would be laid upon the table ? _ _ Sir G. GREY replied that the evidence and papers in connection with the trial and subsequent proceedings were very voluminous, but he hoped to be able to lay the whole of the documents on the table to-morrow. SMITHFIELD DEAD MEAT MARKET. Sir M. PETO asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he could inform the house why the corpora• tion of the City of London had not proceeded to construct the dead meat market in Smithfield, for which an Act was obtained in the year 1860? Sir G. GREY replied that he could not, he feared, satis factorily answer the question; but that afternoon he had received a letter from the Solicitor to the Corporation, whose attention had been attracted to this question, setting forth the steps which had been taken. if the hon. baronet would move for this letter he would produce it. THE VOLUNTEERS BILL. The Marquis of HAR TINGTON postponed the further progress of this bill until this day fortnight. SLAVE TRADE. In reply to Lord A. CHURCHILL, Mr. LAYARD intimated that the papers would be ready to-morrow. MR. ODO RUSSELL AND THE ROMAN BRIGANDS. Lord J. MANNERS enquired if the noble lord had any objection to produce the despatch of Mr. Odo Russell re ferred to the other night ? Lord PALMERSTON replied that he had looked at the papers, and they would not help the noble lord to base upon them the impression with respect to Mr. Odo Russell, which he desired to convey. Mr. LAYARD said he had referred to the reports of his reply the other evening as reported in the various papers, and none of them gave the purport of his speech as inter preted by the noble lord. Mr. HENNESSY pressed the right hon. gentleman to addu n c e e v t e he i information on which he based hi s s t atement the other Lord J. MANNERS referred to the words of the right ho s n i . r g G en . tl ß e o m l a v n .i . ,E H ß e a u a s k ed ed th th e o w r o i r g d h s t. " h m o rl g c on on ti v o i na ct a i onni : conviction." (Laughter.) ro esl: unds on which he based his expression "moral t Nt he r. m O o d t tw o ee n n or r re a l n y y doinse strteiarriattieeoCisgrt.dhaetPacgr:MEßSTON said he would reply to these in claimed any i a nt e e h li n ee t e i r r o s n: ) 1 t o aj givee Majesty's Government o h v o e n rn . m b e a n ro t ne e t n the information by which a quarrel might be got up be . Mr. BLit.CK l i an n it u sh s oa s t ell and the Papal and French autho litheMblllNllbSeTreEand S a t ß hi l r L d L time. moved that it be read a third time this day six months. Sir G GREY defended the measure. FIRES YESTERDAY. At 20 minutes past two yesterday morning tl inhabitant of Stepney were alarmed by seeing immense sheet of flame rising high into the En which induced them to believe that a fire had broke out in the West India Dock warehouses. It howevl was soon ascertained that the disaster had take place on the premises belonging to Messrs. M. Hurrell and Co., coopers, situated in the Horsefert Branch-road, close to the Regent's Canal, at Lim' house. The property covered a large space where c were erected the saw mills, steam-engine house, an sundry other buildings, whilst the open yard wi stacked with piles of timber. The discovery WI made by one of the Thames police, by seeing ti fire issuing from the windows of the steam sap mills, a range of brick buildings about 40 feet ion and 30 feet wide, fitted up with costly machiner: and filled with timber of different sorts used in t' trade. The constable at once sounded an alarm, an sent off messengers in many directions to c all tl engines, but the great light in the air became a 1.1 more speedy means of intelligence than those pa' ties sent as ay, and forthwith a general turn out the brigade took place. The lower steam floato engine, several hand engines, and two 1313 steamers, by Shand and Mason, were 1 the scene of danger in a comparatively 10 period, under the command of Captain Shaw, Fe ll men I. Gerrard, Bridges, Maidman, and other Lord Richard Grosvenor, M.P., also attended wi t Captain Shaw. Plenty of water having been 01 tallied from the mains of the East London Compaq and also from the Regent's Canal, the hand engin e and steam engines were set to work in an admirabl manner; but the fire had previously obtained to firm a hold to be easily extinguished, for the 01 mills and the engine house were in a blaze, and a fire was attacking with full vigour the piles of tin ber in the open yard. The land steamers and ti manual power engines at once set to work, 013 copious streams of water were so directed upon tb flames as to meet them at each point, and thereb prevent their further extension ; but the main bed. of flame could not be extinguished until the 04 and engine house were nearly destroyed, and t b ' contents severely damaged by fire. The stock the timber yard is also severely damaged by 61 ; . 1 water, &c. The origin of the fire is unknown. loss will fall upon the Hand-in-Hand, the Man cheater, the Royal, and the Queen insurance °fife Mr. Charles White, of the County Fire Office. ant Mr. Langham, of the North British and Mercani i ' Offices, were early in attendance, and assisted a firemen. A fire also took place in Limehouse, on the p re mises of Mr. R. C. Mansfield, No. 1, Exmouth-Pl aci Catherine-street. The engines of the parish fu ll London Brigade quickly attended, and they per set to work, but the firemen were unable to get t ! ' flames extinguished until a serious amount " damage was done. Insured in the Royal Exe l3lll4 Fire Office. The origin of this fire is also unke":, At an early hour in the morning another fi r broke out on the premises of Mr. W. Payne, 13 %T a dresser and tobacconist, carrying on business all 1, Inverness-place, Plumstead. When discovered ti l ` inmates were in their beds asleep, but fortunet e i, the police succeeded in arousing them in tittle allow of their making a safe retreat, but s t ; however, before the flames were rushing 11 g staircase. The engines from her Majesty's 00 0 quickly attended, and th e h ose ree l h av ing b ee t , attached to the reservoir of the Kent Compaq'', bountiful supply of water was throw n i n t o the b ur- il ing building, but the fire could not be extinguil lbe until the lower part of the building was burne o and the upper portion extensively damaged. 4 thi cause of this fire is also unknown. Fortunatel y sufferer was insured in the Liverpool and Len' o Fire Office. COUNTRY MARKETS. GLOUCESTER—MAY 16. tiro ° To-day there was a fair supply of English whe at fry farmers, which held for the prices of last week , ref fair trade. Foreign wheat also in fair demand, at fo'Lli rates. Spring corn of all descriptions firm, and pric es " - much the same as last week. COLCHESTER—MAN 16. At this corn exch ange t o -d ay t h ere was a fair It o of grain, with a d u ll t ra d e . B eans an d peas uncllol3 in value. Wheat, white. red g 2 6: Be m an id s d ,A le la ec za s g m an di. . 3 3 : 42 Barley —s —s Peas, white ...... 400 Oats ... 20s 26s gray ......358 CH ELM SFORD—MAY 15. in t tr We have to report a dull demand for English gr f4 leol ift day, at barely late prices. Spring corn of all kinds o' with an average supply. Wheat, old white 30s 53s new 35s 49s old red 37s 46s new 35s 44s Barley ..28s 36s Chevalier ..28s 40s Grinding 22s 31s Malt.... 6ls 67s Chevalier . 64s 69s Oats 20s 28s / 400 teas, Partridge 3 i g 400 White 39 0 4 91 Dun Boiling• 400 350 5/0 Ditto new ..... . -7, 1/ 30 0 Beans, Tick, old . ..... new 4OO Harrow Ticks 350 sBO Mazagan ......•30a KIRKCALDY GRAIN—MAY 16. t a We had small supplies of barley, but go o d o f whe a $ ele oats. Sales slow. Wheat and oats cheap e r. Darl rather dearer than last week. Wheat. Barley. Oats. First ....36s Od I 24s Od I 23s Od Second .. 38s Od 26s Od Od Third..,.--a Od —s Od Od .ARKET. the close of the m arket' 0. do COAL I Prices of Coal per Ton at a. d. 6 Walls End. .16 5 Haswell .. . ...... .16 s Hartlepool ....... . •.16 6 Trim don Hartlepool'. .16 6 Hetton .............. 0 9 Tunstall Framwellgate ........ s Heugh Hall .......... 16 9 South Kelloe ....... 1 6 6 Russel's Hetton ..... .. 16 6 South Hetton ......... 16 Braddyll's H e tton ..... 1 6 Stewart's ........... , K elloe ...... • •• ' Ships at market, 40 ; sold. 40. Dee Lambert's West Hart- -- 1ey.... 16 0 Carway . and Duffryn Malting , 19 6 Eden Main ...14 9 Buddle'sWest Hartley 16 0 Davison's West Hart ley 15 0 Cowpen Hartley 15 0 Hastings Hartley l5 0 Holywell 16 0 Wylam 16 0 North Felton. Gas 13 0 By a general resolution, to. day) the merchants will not a - - - I•morrow (being the Wend the market. Foreign Mail Packet List. MAILS DUE. . I d sl 1 14* tkunralia and Mauritius, via Southampton. ..... via Marseilles „.. &nil and Cape Verds, by British pachei........... 3.u .„n9. Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena..e l d 19. China, Penang, and Singapore, via Southampton- O ' O , J 14. via Marseilles ...MN' 4, Falkland Islands .. Jun e o. ............. Gibraltar, via Southampton ........... . ..... May lg. India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via ................Mai 14, via Marseilles.... Mai i i, India (Bombay), via Southampton ............ 1114 21, via Marseilles g il l e , Portugal Ltll l,ll. ... Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton ..... . 1 . - „,,, — ., 1 4 ' via Marseilles ..... day 13. Newfoundland .... ~..,..,„ .. PI" Oporto and Vigo U. S. and Briti s h N. A mer i ca, by Brit. packet A" . ""' by U.S. packet..• ... iv 10' by Canadian p a cket O. W.C. of Africa, M a d e i ra , an d T ener iffe lu" . Bahamas, via New York May j. l Mexico.. AU parts of West Indies, incl u ding Chili, Peru) 1 May California. and British Columbia.. .......... Births. Or el ' BINGFIAM.—On the 15th inst, at at North Che niTh S Mrs. Alfred Bingham, of a eon, tie 1 1°°. INGLIS.—On the 17th inst.. in Eaton square , t - iigrdloi Lady Inglis, widow of Major-General-Sir John Wilmot Inglis, of a son. WALROND —On the Mrs. Theodore Walro i n 7 d th , lse't .9g p WROTTESLEY.—On the 17th inst., at 30,`St. Jani e ' the lion. Mrs. Wrottesley of a son. . of in a st s ., on a . t 50, Sussez-b- SAMP S ON—MERIC.-o M n a th rr e ia l6 g th es inst., at St• -- 40 1 1 a norge ' ," •• square, Thomas Sampson, Esq• Hanover .of 31°° ' ter Victor de Merle, Esq., oh near Battle, Sussex, to Julia. theun s r g e ' es: d alig gieho r ' Gros• f Brook. t et lIDLIN—SCALES.—On the 16th inst , square. , ar tito lo , S CM mew's, Sydenham, Francis Xavier Saimidlin, -er Russell-place, Fitzroy-square, toMiss a t St. P, ol Solo ,Chest Villa, Sydenham. AITON.—On the lbth ins " : e , a at t P hil v; go -D ark, Es the 11 . 43' la se 3 co toa st John Aiton, DX., minister of olphinton, Lan° oVir rtil il36 N.B. ° FOLKARD.—On the 13th inst , at his resid ence; John Cope Folkard, Esq., aged . 66. , th Cral place, Kent, Western Wood, WooD.—On the 17th inst., at his residence, . 0° Gty ° Lonon, aged N. • the I tt ' / ' la WYATT.—On the 14th inst., at Cheltenhani, - A. Wyatt, aged 27. office. London: Printed and Published by WILLIA „„, ce . SO. 112 ' of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at TUE SUN Ctre coun ty 0 Strand, in the Precinct of the- Savoy , 131 Middlesex.—.Tuesday. May 19, WI ESC'', M.P. for the