The Sun. — London, England, 1863-03-28 00:00:00

Uovernment would deem it expelient to accept. Negotia tions, however, were still pending. BARRACK MASTERS. Colonel FRENCH asked whether barrack masters, of late employed as public accountants, bankers, and lawyers, having charge of public property, paying and receiving rents, underwent any examination as to their fitness to carry out su many professions never before united in the Bann person ? Sir G. C. LEWIS replied that barrack masters had been employed in the way mentioned, but not certainly as lawyers and bankers. (Laughter.) They were examined as to their competency, and were assisted by competent soldiers from the ranks. A competent accountant, with a salary of £4OO a-year, had been appointed to the Pimlico establishment. POLAND-ADJOURNMENT FOR THE HOLI DAYS. Lord PALMERSTON moved the adjournment of the house until the 13th of April. Mr. HENNESSY called attention to the policy of the Go vernment with respect to Poland. He blamed the Govern ment for not following the desire of the people of this country, supporting the et deavours of the Poles to obtain their indepeudence. Throughout all the evils of Poland the noble lord at the head of the Government had taken a part inimical to the aspirations of this unhappy and down trodden people. BUILDING WAR SHIPS FOR THE CONFEDE RATES. Mr. W. E. FORSTEIt rose to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the attention of her Majesty's Go vernment had been called to the danger of our friendly relations with the United States, resulting from the fitting out in our ports of ships of war for the service of the self-styled Confederate States, in contravention of the Foreign Enlistment Act, and of the policy of neutrality adopted by this country. The hon. gentleman entered at great length into the sub ject, and blamed the Government for their supineness in connection with the undisguised building of those ships. He did not ask the Government to infringe the right of any British subject, but he asked them to act as the Americans did towards us during the Russian war, not permitting the construction of ships of war for Russia that might be used against us. The hon. gentleman then referred in de• tail to the progress and adventures of the Alabama, There was no doubt she was built in a British port, and with British money. She had a British crew on board, and she not only sailed under the British flag, but lured her enemies to destruction ender it. She had never been into a Con federate port, and he asked the Government to state what steps they had taken to ascertain how she had changed from a British to a Confederate ship. He could not see that she had ever ceased to be a British vessel, and as such she was subject to British jurisdiction. She had made good use of her time—(cheers)—having up to Sept. 16 captured and burnt 10 vessels. The circumstances attending the build ing and equipment of the ship were such as to naturally excite ill-feeling on the part of the American Government and people, and to induce them to believe that the English nation ought to be held responsible for the damage she had inflicted. He, however, did not think we were responsible for it. (Hear, hear.) Had this been the only ship, he should not have troubled the house about it; but as it had been announced that other ships of the same class were to follow, it became a serious and grave matter as between this country and the United States. (Hear, hear.) Indeed, in the intercepted despatches, which gave a confirmation of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's prophecy in his speech in the north in October last, 'I that the south would soon have a navy," they were informed that contracts had been entered into for six iron-clad ships (which was a fleet in itself), to be constructed in this country. The question was what could be done to prevent it, and all he asked was of her Majesty's Government to carry out the law strictly, and, if the law were net sufficient for the purpose, to ask that house for further power—(hear)—similar to the ex ample of the United States at the time of the rebellion in Canada, when they passed a temporary law, to be in force two years, to prevent armed persons passing over the fron tier from the United States into Canada. A similar course was also adopted by America towards England during the late Russian war. She then interfered, and pre vented American ships sailing under the Russian flag and destroying our ships and commerce. During the Crimean war there was a schooner, the Morea, which was being fitted out in New York, and which was much sus pected by our consul. Well, upon the mere lodgment of information with the Customs Department, the ship was put in charge of the United States marshal until our consul was convinced that she was not intended for the Russian service. Subsequently the New York Chamber of Commerce met and passed resolutions to the effect that, if such a breach of international law as was suspected had been intended, it would have been disgraceful to the cha t/toter of American merchants; and, secondly, upholding the administration of the State in acknowledging that the law as to neutrality were binding in honour and conscience, those who violated them as disturbers of the peace of the world. (Hear.) Under such circumstances it was not sur prising that the New York Chamber of Commerce should have passed such a rssolution as it had recently done. But while he did not ask the Government to infringe the rights of any British subject, he must say that, if the Customs' authorities at Liverpool had shown anything like the vigi lance displayed by the American authorities, the Alabama would never have gone to sea, nor would the six vessels now fitting out ever go to sea. Nay, if they even exercised the same vigilance as they did to prevent the smuggling of a bale of tobacco, the same result would happen. What would have been the feelings of Englishmen if the Ameri cans had dealt by England in the same manner during the Crimean war ? Why, the indignation of the country would have been so great that it would have been all but impos sible for any Government to have kept peace with the United States. Nor could he help thinking that the Custom House authorities, who were principally responsible for the law being put in force, were acting upon a wrong principle. They supposed that they were to wait for the action of the United States Government ; but that was not so. It was not a question of sympathy for either North or South, but a question of obedience to the British law. It might, however, be said that the Government of the United States had now too much on their hands, not to permit these things to be done with impunity. Well, suppose that to be true; but let the house remember what a precedent was being established for the future. England might be at war again ; and if so, did they suppose she would be met by con duct on the part of America similar to that of the Russian war. However,he could hardly suppose that such an argu ment would be set up in that house. English feeling would revolt against it. At the same time he doubted that America was too much occupied to bo compelled to meet such treat ment with impunity. He admitted that the Government had hitherto preserved neutrality in this horrible war under great temptations, and under no little provocation—(hear, hear)—but he hoped that their future efforts towards the same object would be no less effectual. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said his bon. friend who had just sat down had referred to the strong feeling which existed in the United States on the subject of the Alabama, and the important interests which he thought might bo com promised if this country did not exert the powers which she possessed to prevent the fitting out of similar vessels ; and he said that we could not be surprised that the American merchants and the American public should hold this country responsible for the acts of that vessel. He would take the liberty of saying that we should have reason to be surprised that so extraordinary an error should prevail in the general mind of the American public, if it did not happen fortunately that we were able to trace that error to its source. The ac cusations that had been made against this country with re spect to the Alabama, and which he hoped to show to the house were entirely groundless, were but part of a series of accusations of systematic breaches of neutrality which un happily the Government of the United States had per mitted themselves to make from, he might almost say, the beginning of this war against this country. (Hear.) In their diplomatic communications, made through Mr. Adams, to her Majesty's Government, and which he deeply re gretted to say constituted no small part of the contents of the book which he held in his hand, and which had been laid before Congress by the American Government, he found repeated, over and over again, a catalogue of griev ances, of which the Alabama formed only a single item. It was indispensably necessary, in order that the house should appreciate the truth of the allegations respecting the Ala bama, and to see how utterly destitute of any solid ground were the complaints that had been made of the conduct of the Government, that he should show in what company the charges were found. He would only mention two or three examples. On the 13th February last they had Mr. Seward writin g to complain of the exportation from this country of munitions of war and arms, and which he represented as a breach of neutrality, and which the Government was bound to prevent. On May 1, 1862, Mr. Seward complained that money had been provided by subscription, in Liverpool, for the purchase of arms and munitions for the Confederates. On May 12 Mr. Adams wrote to Lord Russell, complaining of the supply of men and ships which he mixed up with arms and money for one of the parties in the war. On June 2 Mr. Seward sent to Mr. Adams the report of a gentleman, who gave along account of the purchase of arms, munitions of war, and military stores, which had been ship ped from England to the Confederate States, and only as late as the 30th December, 1862, Mr. &dams while engaged in correspondence with Earl Russell on the subject of the Alabama, annexed to his despatch a great number of docu ments, giving an account of a large quantity of military and other stores which had been exported from this country t o the Confederate States. It was true that Mr. Adams en deavoured to give some colour to that complaint by m i x i ng it up with the question of the blockade, but he reiterated the same complaints, and that was the way in which from first to last, in their diplomatic correspondence with this country, the United States thought it not unworthy of them to complain of this country as guilty of breaches of neutra lity. They had in that correspondence done no more nor less than to deny to this country, in this war, those prin ciples as neutrals which were invariably recognised in inter national law by all nations, and by no nation more strongly than by the United States themselves. (Cheers.) He had given the house the dates of the several complaints and their nature. He would now mention other dates. On the 22d November, 1862, the Mexican Minister at Washington addressed a complaint to Mr. Seward to this effect I have the honour to inform y ou th a t m y G over nment has given me instructions to communicate to that of the United THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCEI 2s , 1861. States, that the Mexican Government has reliable information to the effect that the chief of the French expedition which is invading the republic has sent emissaries to New Orleans and New York to purchase mules and waggons for trans porting the cannon, war materials, and provisions into the interior of Mexico. My Government thinks that if such purchases should be realised the neutrality which should be observed would be violated by the sellers." What was the answer of Mr. Seward to the remonstrance ? On the 24th November Mr. Seward in his reply quoted sundry extracts from well-known authorities, and these he considered his answer to the complaint of the Mexican Minister. What were they ? The first was an instruction to the collectors of customs, issued by Alexander Martin, the Secretaty to the Treasury, August 4, 1793, as follows :—" The purchasing and exporting from the United States, by way of merchan dise, articles called contraband, being generally warlike in struments and stores, is free to all parties at war, and ought not to be interfered with." (Cheers.) "If our citizens undertake to carry the'm, they will be abandoned to the penalties which the laws of the country authorises." Had this country not abandoned to the penalties which:the laws of the country authorised all those ships which had been taken on the high seas, and which were subject to such penalties? (Hear, hear.) The next extract was dated July 8, 1842, from Mr. Webster :—" It is not the practice of nations to undertake to prohibit their own subjects from trafficking in contraband of war. Such trade is carried on at the risk of those engaged in it, under the liabilities and penalties prescribed by the law of nations." (Cheers,) There they bed Mr. Webster's instructions, and according to them, if American merchants in the way of commerce sold munitions of war to Texas, the Government of the United States were not bound to prevent it, and could not prevent it without a manifest departure from the prin ciples of neutrality. (Hear, hear.) The next extract was from President Pierce's Message to Congress in 1855: " The laws of the United States do not forbid our citizens to sell to either of the belligerent Powers articles contraband of war, or to take munitions of war or soldiers on board their private ships for transportation ; and although in so doing the individual citizen exposes his pro perty or person to some of the hazards of war, his acts do not involve any breach of international law, and do not of themselves implicate the Government." Complaints had been made as to loans of money to the Confederates. What did Mr. Webster say on that subject in the year 1841 ? "As to advances of money or goods to the Government of Texas, or to its citizens, the Mexican Government hardly needs to be informed that there is nothing unlawful in this, or that these are things which no Government un dertakes to restrain." (Hear, hear.) The American mind would be better prepared to appreciate the justice and spe cific calue of the complaints made as to the Alabama by an application to them of those acknowledged principles of in ternational law. The Government of this country were de term 4red to enforce our own laws according to law and adher ing to constitutional principles and precedents. The Foreign Enlistment Act was confined to this country, and had refer ence only to British subjects. If it had been violated America had no more right to complain of that than they had toipre vent its enactment or repeal. The United States had a Foreign Enlistment Act, which, being older than ours, had been oftener the subject of judicial decisions. In 1815, in the Supreme Court of the United States, the highest tri bunal in the country, it was decided that a neutral nation might, if so disposed, without any Lreach of its neutral character, grant permission to both belligerents to equip vessels of war within its territory. But without such per mission the subjects of such belligerent Powers had no right to equip vessels, because that was a violation of the sove reign rights of the neutral Power. That was the principle on which the decision was based. If, a priori, ships, like cannons, or arms and munitions, might be sold, unless the neutral State interfered to prevent it, what was the right which a foreign Government derived from the existence of the Foreign EnlistmentAet? Simply this, that it might appeal to the friendly feeling and disposition of the neutral Power to enforee its own laws within its own territory, and upon its own subjects; but it could not complain if the law was enforced upon the only principle recognised in this country— upon evidence, not upon suspicion; according to law, not ac cording to presumption ; upon well-founded testimony, and not upon the suspicion or complaint of a foreign Minister. It was not the right of a foreign Government to insist that the Foreign Enlistment Act should be enforced any more than any other law in this country. He would not enter into the difficulties of enforcing the law. Two things must be proved—first, that there had been what the law would con sider a fitting out, arming, and equipping of the vessel; and, secondly, that it was intended for the service of a bel ligerent Power. Upon these points they had a decision by Judge Story in the Supreme Court of the United States in 1832. The first case to which he would refer was that of a ship which was originally a privateer, and employed as such in the war between the United States and Great Britain. That war came to an end ; and after the capture of the vessel she was turned into a frigate, and was sold, and for a short time was used for purposes of commerce. Then a war having broke out between Spain and her revolted colonies in Jan., 1816, this vessel was loaded with munitions of war by her new owners, who were inhabitants of Baltimore, and was armed with 12 guns, which constituted part of her original arma ment. She was sent from that port, under the command of a citizen of the United States, to Buenos Ayres, which was then at war with the United States. By written instructions the cargo in that vessel, and the vessel itself, were autho rised by the owners to be sold to the Government of Buenos Ayres, if a satisfactory price could be obtained. She arrived at Buenos Ayres, having committed no acts of hostility on her voyage. She sailed with the United States flag, and was sold to the Government of Buenes Ayres. She assumed the flag and character of a publio ship, and from that was employed in war—the same captain and the greater part of the same crew navigating her. Well, what was the judgment of Mr. Justice Story in that case ? lie said it was apparent that if she was sent to Buenos Ayres on a commercial ad- venture she in no shape violated the laws of international neutrality, but if she had been captured by a ship of war during her voyage, she would be justly condemned as a prize if engaged in a traffic prohibited by the law of nations. But he said there was nothing in the United States law or in the law of nations that forbade their citizens from sending armed vessels and munitions of war to foreign ports for sale. That was a commercial adventure which no nation was bound to prohibit, and which only exposed the person en gaged in it to the penalty of confiscation. Supposing the voyage of the ship in question to have been for a commer cial purpose, and that the sale to the Buenos Ayres Go vernment was a bona fide sale, there was no pretence for saying that the original venture was illegal. He (the Solicitor-General) would refer to another American deci sion, namely, that in the case of the De Quinsey. The cl,.ctrine laid down in that case was—if the defendant, who was accused of having violated the Foreign Enlistment Act, was entitled to an acquittal it these facts should ap pear :—lf it were found that when the ship was being fitted out and equipped at Baltimore, the owner aad equipper in tended to go to the West Indies in search of funds with which to arm and equip the vessel, and that no person em ployed it as a privateer, but intended, when it was equipped to go to the West Indies to endeavour to raise funds to pre pare her for a cruise as a privateer. The intentions of the owner must be fixed and not conditional, or dependant on some future event. The legality or criminality of the act must depend a good deal upon whether the adventure was of a commercial or warlike character. If any violation of international law had been committed, the United States Government were entitled to say to our Government, " You have laws, the violation of which may be injurious to us and we submit to you a case of such violation ;" and the Government were always ready to listen to any evidence of a violation of such laws. But let not the house be misled, and he trusted the Americans would not be misled so far as to suppose there was any reason fer complaining of an in fraction of international law, merely because ships of war which carried on their belligerent operations came from this country. There was no such reason for complaining. (Hear.) The United States Government would have reason to complain if her Majesty's Government, directly or indi• rectly, were concerned in fitting out such belligerent ships. But when individuals did so, there was no infraction of in ternational law. His hon. friend had said that the Alabama was not the first ship which had escaped from this country. (Hear.) It was true that the Oreto did so, but under what circumstance ? On the 18th of February the first in formation was communicated to our Government by Mr. Adams respecting that vessel, and such a case was made out as clearly called for inquiry. Accordingly the Commis sioners of Customs were called on to make inquiry on the 24th February, and the circumstances which they learnt tended to show that she was going to Italy and not to the United States. At that time she was not fitted for the re ception of guns, and had only coals and ballast. There was no case to justify her detention, nothing beyond suspicion. Well, the Oreto sailed on the 22d March, and from infor mation laid before the Government, after her departure, by Mr. Adams it became perfectly clear that she was intended for the service of the Confederate States, and that the Go vernment immediately sent out to Nassau, hearing she was taking in stores, and although the case was very doubtful, still to prove our good faith the Oreto was seized. What was the result ? She was tried and acquitted. There was no evidence against her. Did we show any want of good faith in this ? Now, with respect to the Alabama, the main facts were these. It was true that on the 23d of June Mr. Adams first called the attontion of Government to inforrna- Lion which he had received about the building of the Ala bama. Now, down to that time, it had often been eaid that there were many ships being built in this country for the Confederate service ; but no evidence was ever produced except in the case of the Oreto ; and, what was more, there was no ground for supposing that there were any more ships built for the Confederate States. Well, upon Mr. Adams' information, the Government directed the Cornmmissioner of Customs to make an inquiry with respect to the Alabama. The inquiry was made, and on the let of July a report was delivered, in which it was stated that it was perfectly evi dent that the ship was a ship-of-war, and it was believed that she was for a foreign Government ; but the builders would give no information, and there was no other reliable source or intelligence on the subject. - Were they wrong in not seizing upon the vessel then? Let them recollect the decision of Justice Story —the circumstances being exactly similar in both oases. There being nothing but suspi clef], it would be perfectly unwarrantable in the law to seize her. Lord Russo)] Communicated this to Mr. Adams, and said that, if Mr. Adams could furnish any better evidence, he would proceed to action. Now the Government had been accused of unnecessary delay. Was there ever a more un just accusation ? Mr. Adams's first information was on the 23d June. He should have been ready with his evidence from the beginning. Lord Russell sent Mr. Adams the re port of the commissioners on the 4th July. How long did Mr. Adams take to collect his evidence and submit it to Lord Russell ? From the 4th July to the 21st—a period of 17 days, and it was not completed until the 24th, and Mr. Adams's letter was not received by the Government until the 26th. Well, in the meantime Mr. Adams had got two opinions from the hon. and learned member for Plymouth (Mr. Collier). Of the six depositions transmitted on the 26th July only one was good for anything ; that was one from a man named I'assmore, and that, in his (the Solicitor -Gene ral's) opinion, was quite sufficient to prove the material facts. Two more depositions, corroborative of Passmore's evidence, were received on the 24th. Now what was the delay of which the Government was accused ? The com pleted evidence was not in Lord Russell's hands until the 26th—that was on the Saturday. Sunday was on the 27th, and on Monday, the 28th, he told Mr. Adams he would communicate with the law officers of the Crown. He did so, got their opinion on the 29th, and the same day the noble lord sent down a telegraphic message to stop the ship. He was willing to make allowance for the natural irritation which existed among the people of America, and he was as I anxious that the Governments of the two nations should stand straight with each other. But he was shacked at the perversion of mind which, in the face of these facts, could accuse our Government of unreasonable delay. His hon. friend had referred to the case of the Mores, as an example of the good faith of the United States during our war with Russia. But if they examined it it would appear that they did nothing whatever which was not exactly parallel to what we had done in the case of the Alabama. Information was given by the British Consul on the 11th of October, 1855, that this was a ship of war intended for the Russian service. Ihe United States Government tele graphed immediately to the proper office at New York, " not to give her a clearance at present." Did we give a clearance to the Alabama ? She sailed without a clearance. We were not guilty of any delay in arresting her departure. It was only by stratagem, by violating the ordinary laws of the port that she was enabled to escape. So far there was a difference between the two cases. When was it that the Mores was really arrested ? Not till the 17th—a longer delay than happened in the case of the Alabalaa. Ho won tioned this circumstance to show that each Government had acted with promptitude and despatch, and that there was no reason to suppose that either one or the other had been guilty of delay. His hon. friend had asked what we proposed to do with respect to other ships that were sup posed to be building in this country for the Confederate States, and whether they considered the Foreign Enlist ment Act was only to be enforced at the instance of Foreign Governments. He had no hesitation in answering that the Government by no means looked upon it as an act to be en forced at the instance of foreign Governments. Her Ma- jesty's Government were most anxious to enforce that act to the best of their power, but of course they must have legal grounds for acting upon it. It would not do to tell them that six iron-clad vessels were going to be built in this country, unless the Government had the means of knowing where and by whom, and evidence to show that by being so built they involved parties in viola- tion of the law. (Hear, hear.) The Government would be glad to receive information on that sub ject from any quarter ; and he did not fear to express his in dividual opinion, as being in accordance with that of his hon. friend, that it would be well if the merchants of this country who might be invited to become parties to violate the law, and at the same time calculated to involve the Go vernment in dangerous relations—at least in relations which might lead to the interruption of amicable and friendly feelings—he repeated that it would be well and desirable that they should reflect that merchants, as well as others, should respect the laws of the country, and have regard to the interests of peace, and some regard, at all events, to the feelings of foreign belligerent nations. He believed that the Government, without partiality and favour, whenever they discovered a clue to any such proceedings, would be pre pared and anxious to put the law into force as against any persons in respect to whom they had such evidence as would lead to a conviction. If the law was defective it ought to be altered; but as it was the same as the law of the United States, which Mr. Adams said did not require altera- tion, our Government did not see that it would be desirable to alter it unless the United States altered their law in this respect. It would be unjust to blame a Government for all the acts of individuals. Who, for example, would blame the United States Government for the filibustering expedition of Walker ? In times of excitement, and when the love of adventure and commercial speculation strongly animated a people, no Government could restrain them. It would be quite unfair to hold our Government responsible for what the Alabama had done—a ship that did net receive her armaments until she arrived at a foreign port. The people of this country had reason to congratulate themselves that, so far as their Government were concerned, the strictest neutrality had been observed, and that with two exceptions the people had been strictly neutral also. (Hear.) He believed that there were a great many British subjects who had entered the service, not of the Confederates, but of the Federals. (Hear.) Mr. Seward, in his letter, passed very lightly over the conduct of an American capt sin who had induced British subjects to enter the service of the United States, y et our Government made no complaint about the matter, He hoped the house would be satisfied that our Government had acted in good faith, and that what had been said that evening would tend to remove false impressions from the Americans and their Government, (Hear,) Mr. BARING regretted the tone of the hon. and learned gentleman's speech, because he thought it would not tend to calm the indignation of the American people. It was more an indictment of their policy than an apology for our own. Mr. BRIGHT said there was a great difference between that speech and another made by the Solicitor-General last year, and he should think the effect of it would be to bring to Mr. Seward's mind what he would have done in another court with a brief in his hand. The hon., gentleman then read two letters which he had received, one from a Mr. W. L. Nicholson, of the United States survey, dated Washing ton, March 5, complaining that the Oreto had seized a ves sel while flying the British flag, and had afterwards run up the Confederate colours. Captain Small, the master of the vessel, had, only in 1858, been presented with a silver mounted telescope by the British Government, for saving lives when an English vessel was in distress, and he thought it hard that the Alabama should be allowed thus to violate the British flag to do damage with impunity. The other letter was from a Liverpool merchant, and mentioned the names of a number of rams and vessels of war, with their builders, which vessels, the writer said, it was well known in the trade were for the Confederates. There was only one other point to which he would call attention. The Solicitor-General thought he had gained a great triumph over the hon. member for Bradford, when ho stated it was not necessary to make any alteration in the Foreign En listment Act. It might not be necessary in the sense in which the hon. and learned gentleman regarded it, but it was a common thing for all Governments to make or alter a law to suit special cases. He recollected that the Government of which the present Foreign Secretary was the head bad brought in a bill for making "open and ad vised speaking" felony, which before was only sedition. In the year 1837 the United States Government found that . . their Enlistment Act did not give them power to act as sum marily as they liked to prevent any difficulty between them selves and this country with reference to the affairs of Ca nada; and they accordingly passed an act to meet the exi gencies of the case. The hon. and learned gentleman had said that the Foreign Enlistment Act had nothing to do with the law of nations, and that the alteration of it would not prevent the building of ships. He did not know whether this was true as regarded this country, but it was not so as regarded the United States. He would not go into further details; but he was satisfied the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman would not give greater satisfaction to many persons in this country than it would to very many in the United States. He was further satisfied that if anybody in this country was building a ship of war, and there was a suspicion it was intended to help the revolutionary party in the little kingdom of Portugal—Portugal was always a pet kingdom with the English Government—he had not the slightest doubt the Government would step in and stop it. He said, then, that theirneutrality was a cold and unfriendly neutrality ; and the time had come when the Government should look this question in the face, and exert all their in fluence in preventing this country from being embroiled with the United States—a nation, of all others in the world, they had the greatest interest in being on terms of peace with. Let them not think that because the United States were in a great calamity they would not come out of it a great nation. Let them not believe that acts like these would be forgotten, either now or hereafter. There were people in America who were interested in creating ill-feeling towards this country. Why, there were two millions of Irishmen in America; and wherever en Irishman planted his foot in a foreign country there stood an enemy to England. (Great laughter.) Lord North had made a speech at the time ofthe first American war, in which he stated that those who were most hostile to England were the emigrants who had gone from Ireland. (Hear, hear.) There were elements of hos tility also in this country, and he would say the man was not worthy the name of a Minister who, instead of speaking with a cold and unfriendly tone, did not know that all the living world and all posterity would judge and condemn him if he omitted anything he could do to preserve the peace between the United States and England. Ho was not afraid to stand there, not to defend Mr. Seward's despatches, but in defence of the great claims which the people of the United States had upon the generous forbearance and sym pathy of Englishmen. The hon. member then referred to the enthusiastic meeting held the previous evening in St. James's Hall, where upwards of 3,000 of the most intelli gent of the artisans of London assembled to express their sympathy with the Northern States, and concluded by ap pealing to the noble lord at the head of the Government, who, after a long life, ruled the affairs of the country with greater concurrence of opinion than perhaps any Minister had enjoyed, to rise in his place and utter such friendly words—words which he knew so well how to utter—as would give greater confidence to the friends of peace, not only upon the other side of the Atlantic, but to the vast number who hung upon his utterances in this country. (Cheers.) Mr. LAIRD —After tho discussion that has taken place about the Alabama I shall not trouble the house with many remarks. I can only say, from all I know and all I have heard, that from the day the vessel was down to her completion everything was open and aboveboard in this country. (Cheers.) I also further say that the officers of the Government had every facility afforded them for in specting the ship during the progress of building. When the officers came to the builders they were shown the ship, and day after day the Customs officers were on board, as they were when she finally left, and they declared there was nothing wrong. (Hear, from Mr. Bright.) They only left her when the tug left, and they were obliged to declare that she left Liverpool a perfectly legitimate transaction. (Hear, hear.) One point has been overlooked in this discussion. If a ship without guns and without arms is a dangerous article, surely rifled guns and ammunition of all sorts are equally— (cheers)—and even more dangerous. (Cheers) I have referred to the bill of entry in the Custom houses of London and Liverpool, and I find there have been vast ship ments of implements of war to the Northern States through the celebrated house of Baring and Co.—(loud cheers and laughter)—Brown, Shipley, and Co., of Liverpool, and a variety of other names, which I need not more particularly mention, but whose Northern tendencies are well known to this house. (Hear.) If the member for Rochdale, or the hon. member for Bradford, wishes to ascertain the extent to which the Northern States of America have had supplies of arms from this country, they have only to go to a gentleman who, I am sure, will be ready to afford them every informa tion, and much more readily than he would to me or to any one else calling upon him—the American Consul in Liver pool. Before that gentleman the manifest of every ship is laid, he has to give an American pass to each vessel, he is consequently able to tell the exact number of rifles which have been shipped from this country for the United States— information, I doubt not, which would be very generally de sired by this house. (Loud cries of Hear, hear.) I have ob tained from the official Custom-house returns some details of the sundries exported from the United Kingdom to the Northern States of America from the Ist of May, 1861, to the 31st of December, 1862. There were :—Muskets, 41,500 (hear, hear); rifles, 341,000 (cheers); gun-flints, 25,500; per cussion-caps, 49,982,006 (cheers and laughter) ; and swords, 2,250. The beat information I could obtain leads me to be lieve that from one-third to a-half may be added to these numbers for items which have been shipped to the Northern States as hardware. (Hear.) I have very good reason for saying that a vessel of 2,000 tons was chartered six weeko ago for the express purpose of taking out a cargo of "hardware" to the United States. (Cheers.) The exportation has not ceased yet. From the Ist of January to the 17th of March, 1863, the Customs bills of entry show that 23,870 gun• barrels, 30,800 rifles, and 3,105,800 percussion-caps were shipped to the United States. (Hear.) So that if the Southern States have got two ships unarmed, unfit for any purpose of warfare—for they pro cured their armaments somewhere else—the Northern States have been well supplied from this country, through the agency of some most influential persons. (Hear.) Now it has been stated—and by way of comparison treated as mat ter of complaint—that during the Crimean war the Ameri cans behaved so well. The hon. member for Bradford and the member for Birmingham both lauded their action as compared with that of our own Government. Now I have heard that a vessel sailed from the United States for Petro- pauloveki. (Cries of " Name.") If hon. members will allow me I will go on, and first I propose to read an extract from the Times, written by their correspondent at San Francisco, dated the 29th of January. 1863 : " Now this case of the Alabama illustrates the saying that a certain class should have a good memory. During the Crimean war a man-of-war (called the America, if I remember) was built in America for the Russian Govern ment, and brought out to the Pacific, filled with arms and munitions, by an officer of the United States navy. This gentleman took her to Petropaulovski, where she did service against the allied squadron ; and she is still in the Russian navy. (No, and hear.) We made no such childish fuss about this act of hostility by a friendly Power, which we could not prevent, as our friends are now making about the Alabama, whose departure from England our Government could not stop." The America was commanded by a Lieut. Hudson, who— if my information is correct, and I have no doubt that it is —was then, or had been just previously, a lieutenant in the American navy; he was the son of a most distinguished officer in the same service, Captain Hudson. lam further informed that some doubts having arisen about the charac ter of this ship, the American men-of-war in the different ports she called at protected her; and, on her arrival in Russia, the captain who took her out was, I know, very handsomely rewarded for his services. (Hear.) Now, I will go a step further about the Northern States. In 1861, just after the war broke out, a friend of mine, whom I have known for many years, was over hero, and came to me with a view of getting vessels built in this country for the Ame rican Government—the Northern Government. (Hear.) Its agents in this country made inquiries, plans and esti mates were given to my friend, and transmitted to the Secretary of the American navy. I will read an extract from this gentleman's letter, dated July 30, 1861. It is written from Washington, and states : " Since my arrival here I have had frequent interviews with our Department of Naval Affairs,' and am happy to say that the Minister of the Navy is inclined to have an iron-plated ship built out of the country. (Hear.) This ship is designed for a specific purpose to accomplish a defi nite object. I send you herewith a memorandum, handed me last evening from the Department, with the request that I would send it to you by steamer's mail of to-morrow, and to ask your immediate reply, stating, if you will agree to build a ship as desired, how soon, and for how much, wi , h such plans and specifications as you may deem it best to send me." (Loud cheers.) The extract from the memorandum states that "the ship is to be finished complete, with guns and everything appertaining." (Renewed cheers and laughter.) On Aug. 14 I received another letter from the same gentle man, from which the following is an extract : " I have this morning a note from the Assistant-Secre tary of the Navy, in which he says,' I hope your friends will tender for the two iron-plated steamers."' (Hear, hear.) After this, the firm with which I was lately connected, having made contracts to a large extent with other persons, stated that they were not in a position to undertake any orders to be done in so short a time. This was the reply : "I sent your last letter, received yesterday, to the Secre tary of the Navy, who was very desirous to have you build the iron-plated or bomb-proof batteries, and 1 trust that he may yet decide to have you kuld one or more of the gun boats." (Loud cheers) I think, perhaps, in the present state of the law in America, I shall not be asked to give the name of nay correspondent—(hear)—but he is a gentleman of the hon. member wishes, I s h h ig o h ni e d st ha r v e e sp n e o ct h ab es il i i t t a y tion l i f n ha aa nding the whole correspon dence, with the original letters, into the hands of you, sir, or the First Minister of the Crown, in strict confidence, be cause there are communications in these letters, respecting the views of the American Government, which I certainly should not divulge, which I lave not mentioned or alluded to before. But seeing the American Government are making so much work about other parties, whom they charge with violating or evading the law, though in reality they have not done so, I think it only fair to state these facts. (Cheers.) As I said tefore, they are facts. (Hear, hear.) Ido not feel at liberty to state those points to which I have referred, as being of a confidential character; but, if any hon. gentlerr an feels a loubt regarding the accuracy of what I have stated, I shall feel happy to place the docu ments in the hands of the Speaker, or of the First Lord of the Crown, when he will see that they substantiate much more than I have stated. (Cheers.) Ido not wish to oc cupy the house longer; but I must say this, that to talk of freedom in a land like the Northern States of America is an absurdity. Almost every detective that can be got hold of in this country is employel. (Hear, hear,) I believe there are spies in my son's waits in Birkenhead, and in all the great establishments in the country. A friend of mine had detectives regularly on his track in consequence of some circumstances connected with his vessels. It that be freedom, I think we had better remain in the position in which we now are. (Cheers and laughter.) In conclusion, I will allude to a remark which was made elsewhere last night—a remark, I presume, applying to me, or to some body else, which was utterly uncalled for. (Hear.) I have only to say, that I would rather be handed down to pos terity as the builder of a doeen Alabamas than as the man who applies himself deliberately to set class against class— (loud cheers) --and to cry up the institutions of another country which, when they come to be tested, are of no value whatever, and which reduce liberty to an utter übsurdity; (Cheers.) CAPTURE OF THE PETERHOFF. Mr. S. FITZGERALD, in rising to call attention to the capture of the Peterhoff, expressed his dissatisfaction at the speech of the hon. member for Huntingdon (Mr. T. Baring), and at the language of the hon, member for Birmingham, which would produce a very injurious effect in the United States. The hon. member for Bradford had elicited the general concurrence of opinion in that house that her Majesty's Government had acted strictly within the law, and that, anxious as they were to show their sprit of neutrality, they declined to act as the United States had done, on suspicion, but to have strict legal evidence to guide them. With regard to the Peterhoff, there was no attempt on her part to break the blo3kade. She was one of a line of ships which Messrs. Pyle, Spence, and Co. of London (not the Mr. Spence or any relation to him, who was known to have strong Confederate tendencies), had advertised to sail regularly between this country and Matamoras in Mexico; and he had been told by a gentleman who had sent out goods in her that it was such as lie had been in the habit of send ing out every three months during the last twenty years. There was nothing connected with her voyage which showed any desire on the part of axyone connected with her to en gage in an improper trade, but. on the contrary, every cir cumstance showed it was a 'D ona fide, straightforward com mercial transaction, there being nothing in fact of any description of the nature of contraband on board her. She as commanded by a lieutenant of the naval reserve, who was not likely to engage in anything contraband. She went to St. Thomas for coals, and whilst going there she was stopped by the Federal steamboat Alabama a very favourite name with both parties—who overhauled her papers, and, after examining them, endorsed them as all right, and allowed her to proceed on her voyage. After taking in her coal at St. Thomas she was about to leave, when, unfortunately for the good understanding of the two countries, Commodore Wilkes (a name not unknown in this country) captured her and forwarded her to Key West for adjudication as lawful prize—a greater outrage than which could not be conceived. He complained that her Majesty's Government had not done their duty with reference to former captures, or this would never have happened ; for it was notorious that Federal officers had declared that they had received orders from Washington, to capture particular vessels, and they must do so, when ever and wherever they could catch them ; and there could be no doubt that Commodore Wilkes only acted in accord ance with instructions when he captured the Peterhoff. The hon. member for Birmingham had spoken with considerable asperity of certain captures in neutral waters, and this was an additional fact against the United States Government, that this capture took place in neutral waters, first by the Alabama, and afterwards by Commodore Wilkes. No doubt her Majesty's Government would say that, under the cir cumstances, she must be left to the decision of the prize court. He, however, was not disposed to go into the prize courts of the United States; and where those courts were above all suspicion, and there was a certainty that the law would be impartially and justly administered, it was but little satisfaction to the owners. The hon. gentleman re ferred to the delays in the United States prize courts, and observed that he confessed he had no faith in obtaining jus tice from them. He urged that, from the correspondence that had been laid on the table, it was evident that they were not in possession of all the information it was in the power of her Majesty's Government to give them, and that something which had been kept back had passed between Earl Russell and Mr. Adams relative to these captui es, and that a plan had been spoken of by them as emanating from Mr. Seward, and communicated to Earl Russell, for the guidance of Federal officers in the captures of British ships, which the noble lord spoke of as satisfactory. He censured the Government for withholding the information, and com plained that the house had not been treated fairly with re gard to the correspondence generally. All they had been furnished with was the papers relating to the Alabama ; the despatches between Mr. Mason and Earl Russell; and a reprint of the information by the United States President to Congress so far back as December last. There were matters o great importance of which the house ought to be informed, viz., the refusal of clearances from New York to Nassau, and the convention between this country and America with the view to an adjustment of the claims to neutral rights. It was evident that something had passed between the two Governments with regard to raising recruits in this country, but no information had been given to them on it- It was also evident that information relative to the ship Peterhoff had been kept back, and it was curious that in the list of suspected vessels communicated to Earl Russell, when the satisfactory arrangement for their capture was communi cated to him, were the names of the Springbok, the Adela, and the Peterhoff, all of whom had been captured ; and to the last-named ship was attached a note stating that she was loading for ➢Tatamoras. No doubt her Majesty's Go- vernment were responsible for the seizure of this vessel. In the course of last year representations were made to Earl Russell, either by the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce or or by a body of Liverpool merchants, that the Federal Go- vernment had established what was in effect a blockade of the port of Nassau. Well, Earl Russell replied that Nas sau had been made a depot for the reception of contraband of war, and he, therefore, recommended the Liverpool mer chants, as their best defence against capture, that they should not engage in trade with Nassau. Now that was a letter conceived in the spirit of insult ; it had nothing to do with the matter complained of, namely, that the legitimate trade of these gentlemen had been interfered with. The noble lord was perfectly aware what was the law on the subject; nevertheless, he evaded the question. If, how ever, the noble lord, instead of lecturing those Liverpool merchants, had declared to them that all such illegal acts would be resisted, did any one suppose that the conduct complained of would have been repeated ? He had no doubt that they should hear that evening that the Govern ment regarded this as a most serious case, and thet they had acted with respect to it with great energy . He aid not doubt that they had; for the case was so gross and so grave, that no Government could maintain itself in office which acted otherwise ; but it would have been far better to have pre vented its occurrence by evincing in the outset the determi nation of the Government to uphold British merchants in the exercise of their legitimate commerce. He hoped that all the papers bearing upon the general question would be produced as speedily as possible. Mr. CRAWFORD was able to give some information with respect to the cargo of the Peterhoff. The vessel was advertised to sail in the usual way, with a general cargo, for the port of Matamoras. She carried a mail, and her ar rangements for taking in a supply of coals at the West Indies were such as to satisfy any one that her intention was make as speedy a voyage as possible. Her owners had placed in his hands the " ship's manifest," as well as other documentary evidence on the subject, which made it quite plain that the cargo was of a most miscellaneous character, The Mexican law required that in the case of a cargo sent to any of the ports of that country, the full particulars of every package in the ship should be distinctly stated. Well, he had had an opportunity of perusing the ship's manifest, and therefore he could state that he was quite satisfied as to the character of the cargo. But, moreover, he had the full assurance of gentlemen connected with the ship, who had waited upon him, that there was nothing whatever of a con traband character on board. He might add that there was a reason which occurred to him to account for the ship having been stopped, and that was, that the Americas Go vernment deeire..i tr. prevent all interference with the very oatoneivo trade just now carried on between the port of New York and Matamoras. Mr. GRIFFITH asked whether her Majesty's Govern • menthad received any information of the passage of Rus sian troops through Prussian territory in order to attack the Polish insurgents, and whether it was true, as was stated, that a British subject had been seriously injured by the Russian troops while pursuing his lawful avoca tions in Poland. This person, whose name was Ludwig Finkeston, and who was furnished with a passport signed by Earl Russell on the 27th March, 1862, had been seized while travelling in a carriage, had 25 to 26 bayonet wounds inflicted on him, and had been robbed of 5,000 or 6,000 roubles (L 1,000), and then taken on to Cracow in a very much injured state. Mr. LAYARD rose to answer the question put by the hon. member for Horsham, and to reply to two or three ob servations he had made which required contradiction. As regarded the Peterhoff, the facts which he had mentioned, and which had been submitted to the Government, were the ex parte statements of the owners of the vessel. Of course he did not mean to call in question the accuracy of those facts; but he thought the house would agree with him when he stated that her Majesty's Government could take no immediate action on statements of such a nature. The facts as stated by the owners had been submitted without a moment's delay to the law officers of the Crown. When their opinion was known, such representations would be made to the Government of the United States as seemed desirable. The hon. gentleman said that her Majesty's Government had shown no energy in the matter. Now, as this case had only been brought to their attention two days since, he should like to know from the hon. member what more could have been done than had already been done. The hon. member talked about an arrangement made between her Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States regarding the proceedings of the American cruisers in stopping English vessels. He had stated that Earl Russell had admitted a list of suspected vessels, cone ceding, as it were, the right of the United States to stop those vessels. The hon. member was labouring under an entire delusion as regarded this arrangement. He (Mr. Layard) had never heard of any such arrangement what ever. The hon. member had quoted certain papers laid be fore the United States Legislature, which had been reprinted by her Majesty's Government, in which allusion was made to certain arrangements made by the United States as re garded their own cruisers. It was perfectly true that her Majesty's Government had strongly objected to the pro ceedings of the cruisers of the United States, and, as, a consequence of these objections and protests, the United States Government had issued orders to their cruisers, , which orders Earl Russell had considered more satisfactory than they had been previously. With regard to the list of suspected vessels that had come in an enclosure from Mr. Adams, they did not commit her Majesty's Government, who had nothing whatever to do with the matter. He dis tinctly denied that any such arrangement had been made by her Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States as the hon. member had alluded to. With respect to the question put by the hon. member for Devizes (Mr. Griffith), he must say it related to one of the most disgraceful and cowardly outrages he had ever heard of. It appeared that Mr. Finkeston find a lady wanted to cross the frontier to go into Cracow, and got his passport pro perly vised. They fell in with some Russian troops convey ing Polish prisoners, who took them into custody. They were kept all night, and the next day, on being sent on, some insurgents came in sight. Some firing took place, upon which the Russians immediately killed the whole of the Polish prisoners at the cart wheel, bayonetted the lady, and left Mr. Finkeston for dead on the ground. Whether the lady was killed is not known ; but Mr. Finkeston, being found by some of Langiewicz's party not dead, was sent on to an hotel, There was some doubt about this gentleman being an English subject ; but Lord Bloomfield had sent a person to take down his statement, and make further in quiries, and, if it were correct, no doubt compensation would be obtained. (Hear.) do not understand that the house has reCOmmended any other sort of action. (Hear, hear.) We . are also in cOri.T 3- pondenee with other Governments who ate parties to the Treaty of Vienna, for the purpose of ascertaining whether they will bo disposed to support the views which we have offered. (Hear, hear.) It would be inexpedient for me to go into detailed explanations of the particular communications which have been made; but I hope that after Easter mat ters will be in such a state that we shall be able to lay on the table papers showing what has passed. I trust that whatever may have taken place up to that time will be deemed satisfactory to the house. Now, sir, turning to the much more important and practical question raised by my hon. friend the member for Bradford, I cannot but express my regret at the tone of his remarks, and still more at the tone of the hon. member for Birmingham. There is no con cealing the fact, and there is no use in disguising it, that whenever any political party, whether in or out of office in the United States, finds itself in difficulties, it raises a cry against England—(hear, hear)—as a means of creating what in American language is called "political capital." That is a practice, of course, which we must deplore. (Hear, hear.) As long as it is confined to their internal affairs we can only hope that, being a rather dangerous game, it will not be carried further than is intended. When a Government or a large party excite the passions of one nation against another, especially if there is no just cause, it is manifest that such a course has a great tendency to en danger friendly relations between the two countries. We understand, however, the object of these proceedings in the present instance, and therefore we do not feel that irritation which might otherwise be excited. But if this cry is raised for the purpose of driving her Majesty's Government to do something which may be contrary to the laws of the country or which may be derogatory to the dignity of the country in the way of altering our laws for the purpose of pleasing another Government, then all I can say is that such a course is not likely to accomplish its purpose. (Hear, hear.) I very much regret, therefore, that the speech of my hon. friend the member for Bradford, and more particularly that of the hon. member for Birmingham, are calculated to encourage these complaints which I think are totally un founded on the part of the American Government. (Hear, hear.) I should have hoped that gentlemen bringing this question before the house would rather have tries to allay the irritation, instead of making out, as they endeavour to do, that the Americans have reason to blame England and the English Government. (Hear, hear.) My hon. and learned friend the Solicitor •General, in that admirable speech which we all listened to with the greatest delight (hear, hear), has demonstrated indisputably that the Americans have no cause of complaint against us. He has shown that the British Government have done, on the report of the American Minister here, everything which the laws of the country enabled them to do. I can easily under stand that in the United States, where the civil war has produced so much agitation, and where the coarse of prat • tice has been to set aside the law, men have been led to for get, in a great degree, the obligations of the law, and are not disposed to give that weight which is due to our argu ment—that we cannot go beyond what the law prescribes and authorizes. Yet I think that the house at least will see that the statement of my hon. and learned friend proves that we have, in enforcing the Foreign Enlistment act, done all that the law enabled or permitted us to do (Hear, hear.) Hon. members have argued as if the seizure of a vessel were equivalent to its condemnation. They ask, " Why did you not seize the Alabama when you were told that it was knows and believed that it was intended for warlike purposes on the part of the Confederates." Now, in the first place, you cannot seize a vessel under the Foreign Enlistment Act unless you have evidence wanting in this case. The American Minister came to my noble friend the Foreign Secretary and said, " I tell you this and I tell you that ; I'm sure of this and I'm sure of that ;" but when he was asked to produce evidence on oath, which was the only thing on which we could ground any pro ceedings, he said that the information was furnished to him confidentially, that he could not give testimony on oath, but that we ought nevertheless to act on his suspicions. What would happen if we were to act in that way? When a vessel is seized unjustly and without good grounds there is a process of law to come afterwards (hear, hear)—and the Government may be condemned in heavy costs and damages. Why are we to undertake an illegal measure which may lead to those consequences, simply to please the agent of a foreign Government (Hear, hear.) I say if there was any fault it was on the part of those who called on us to do a certain act, and yet withheld the ground work on which that act could alone be based. (Hear.) I have myself great doubts whether if we had seized the Ala bama we should not have been liable to considerable de meges. It is generally known that she sailed from this country unarmed and not properly fitted out for war, and that ehe received her armament, equipment, and crew in a foreign port. Therefore whatever suspicions we may have had—and they were well founded, as it afterwards turned out—as to the intended destination of the vessel, her condi tion at that time would not have justified a seizure. (Hear.) I can assure the house that her Majesty's Government have no indisposition to enforce the provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act. The hon. member for Birmingham re proaches us with exhibiting a cold and unfriendly neutrality. I do not know what the meaning of those terms may be, but they appear to me to be a contradiction In themselves. (Hear.) If neutrality is more than friendly towards one party, it is something very different towards the other— (laughter, and hear)—and cease to be what, in common par lance, is meant by neutrality between contending parties. But whether our neutrality is warm or cold, friendly or un friendly, ic is sincere and honest. (Hear,) I can assure my hon. friends and the house that whenever it is in our power to enforce the Enlistment Act legally and justly we shall not be found wanting in the performance of our duty. It is a great mistake to suppose that we can view with plea sure any transactions which have a tendency to violate not only the letter but even the spirit of the Foreign Enlist ment Act. It would have been much more agreeable to us if all the supplies that have been so well enumerated by the hon. member for Birkenhead, and which have been furnished in abundance to one party and very scantily to the other— (hear)—had been withheld, and if the whole of the United Kingdom had remained in a state of perfect neutrality. But when we are blamed so heavily for not having acted on sus picions, is it fair to say that as far as suspicions go, we have been informed, perhaps erroneously, that not only have arms been despatched to the Northern part of the United States, but that efforts have been made in Ireland to enlist persons to serve in the Federal army and navy ? (Hear.) Unquestionably a great many cases have occurred in North America in which British subjects have been seized and attempts made to compel them to serve against their will in the civil war. Feeling as we must do the greatest desire ' that the most friendly relations should continue to be main tained between this country and the United States, regret ting exceedingly any circumstances of any kind which should have caused irritation in the minds of the people of the Northern Union, we can only say that it is impossi ble for us to go beyond the law. The law is in this case of very difficult execution. (Hear, hear.) This is not the first time when that has been discovered. When the contest was raging in Spain between Don Carlos and Queen Isabella it was my duty—the British Government having taken part with the Queen—to prevent supplies from being sent to Don Carlos from this country. There were several cases of ships fitted out in the Thames, but, though I knew they were intended to go in aid of Don Carlos, it was impossible to obtain that information which would have enabled the Government to interfere with success. (Hear) I hope, therefore, that those gentlemen who have made themselves in this house the mouthpiece of the North will use the influence which they are entitled by the course they have taken to exert to prove to their friends on the other side of the Atlantic that the charges made against the British Government are not founded in reason or in law. (Hear.) I trust they will assure them that her Majesty's Government will continue, as I maintain they have done hitherto, to en force the law whenever a case shall be brought before them in which they can safely act upon good and sufficient grounds. There must, however, be a deposition upon oath, and that deposition must be made upon facts which will stand examination before a court of law, for to call upon us arbitrarily and capriciously to seize vessels with respect to which no convincing evidence can afterwards be adduced is to ask the Government to adopt a course which would cast discredit upon them, and lead to much subsequent difficulty and embarrassment. (Hear, hear.) I hope the people and Government of the United States will believe we are doing our best in every case to execute the law, but they must not imagine that any cry which may be raised will induce us to come down to this house with a proposal to alter the law. (Hear, and a laugh.) I have had some experience of what a ny attempt of that sort may be expected to lead to— (laughter)—and I think there are several gentlemen sitting on this beach who would not be disposed, if I were so in clined myself, to concur in any such proposition, (Cheers.) Lord FERMOY thought the natural consequence of what was taking place would be the complete independence of Poland. (Cheers.) Sir F. GOLDSMID believed that, under the existing state of things, if there were not treaty obligations on this country, there were moral obligations from which no first rate Power could recede without injury to its own position. Mr. NE WDEGATE objected to the course taken by the advocates of Poland, and he believed that the causes of the misery of that country must be ascribed to its internal dis sensions. There was no middle class there, which was the essential element of constitutional government—and more over there was the same disturbing cause which:prevented England from producing content in Ireland. Sir H. VER NEY said the hon. member was trying to turn the insurrection in Poland into a religious war, but the people of this country would net be led away by such an argument. Those in England who defended the Poles believed that they were acting right in their endeavours to gain their freedom and independence. He hoped this country would combine with France and Austria in order to give to Poland one frontier upon which she could depend, and that some good would result from the course about to be pursued by her Majesty's Government. Sir H. STRACEY, in referring to the observations of the hon. member for North Warwickshire, said that if we supported the treaty o f 1815 wo mus t su p por t th e religion and the clergy of Poland. Much delicacy had been shown towards Prussia, but why, he was at a loss to know, seeing that Prussia was as cu l pa bl e , or near ly so , as ßussra.The in nationality of Poland had not been preserved Prussia. Mr. H. GRENFELL said, that, notw ithstanding what had been said by the lion. member opposite, he believed the noble lord at the head of the Government was perfectly able to satisfactorily deal with the cause of Poland, and they m i g ht leave in his hands, with safety, any negotiations that might uadertaken in behalf of the oppressed Poles. He objected to any ,;!her action by thi s coun t r y than that of giving sound constitutioi.l3 l advice. The motion for the adjournment of the house to Monday, April 13, was then agreed to. SUPPLY-THE CHATHAM MURDER. On the motion for going into supply, Mr. BLAKE called attention to the recent trial of Bur ton for the murder of a child at Chatham lines, and asked if an application was not made at the trial for the examina tion of the prisoner by Dr. Forbes Winslow or some other physician of experience in insanity, and refused by the judge ; and whether, taking into consideration the fact then stated of Burton's mother being confined in a lunatic asylum and his brother not being of sound mind, it was his inten tion to order such an examination to be now made. Sir. G, GREY said he had never heard of such an ap plication as that referred to in the first part of the ques tion. The jury, after hearing the evidence, and under the direction of the learned judge. had found the prisoner of sound mind, and guilty of murder; and no facts had been laid before him (Sir G. Grey) to justify him in ordering such an examination as that referred to. The motion was agreed to, and the house went into com mittee of supply pro forma. SAVINGS BANK-; ACTS The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose to move the following resolution as the foundation of a bill embodying the provisions to which it referred :—" That it is expedient to amend the laws relating to the investment of the money of savings banks, established under the Act 9 Geo. 4, c. 92, to create a charge for such savings banks upon the Consolidated Fund, in place of certain perpetual annui ties now standing in the names of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National uebt for such savings banks, to give powers for converting certain other amounts of such perpetual annuities into certain other annuities, and to pro vide for the due payment out of the Consolidated Fund of any deficiency which may arise from insufficiency of the securities to meet the legal claims of the trustees of such savings banks." The right hon. gentleman then proceeded to explain in detail the provisions of the bill which he should ask leave to introduce. Its first object was to extend the principle of the conversion of perpetual annuities into ter minable to a degree farther than it had been yet carried. The operation contemplated by the Post-office savings banks of the present year was to convert about one-sixth of the income from the stocks purchased on account of the savings banks, into the form of terminable annuities, and he now proposed to apply the same principle to a portion of the funds held on account of the old savings banks. The effect would be to add £120,000 a year to the present charge on account of the national debt; but, with a view to the ultimate discharge of a portion of the capital, his next enact ment was to convert £24,000,000 of savings banks moneys into a passing charge resembling the debt now due to the Bank of England. In the next place, the bill provided that, in case of a demand arising on account of the savings banks, which could not be met out of the proceeds of the securities or cash standing to the credit of the Commissioners for the National Debt, such demand should become an effective charge upon the Consolidated Fang. Lastly, the bill authorised the commissioners, in cases where it might be desirable, to meet the demands of the savings banks out of the moneys in the exchequer, instead of going into the market for the sale of stock. The resolution was agreed to. SUPPLY. Mr. MASSEY brought up the report on supply. On the vote for the salary of the Civil Service Chi3f Com missioner, An HoN. MEMBER mond that the house be counted, and it being found that there were only 34 members present, The Speaker left the chair at 10 minutes before 1 o'clock; and the house stood adjourned to Monday, April 13. COUNTRY MARKETS. .k,,-. LIVERPOOL-MARCH 27. At this day's market there was a fair attendance of the town and country trade, and wheat met a slow de mand, at Tuesday's rates. Flour was not improved, and prices nominal. Indian corn in fair demand, at late rates. Oats unaltered, and oatmeal in favour of buyers. Barley and peas easier. Egyptian beans 6d per qr cheaper. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. Mr. VAN SITTART rose to call attention to the removal of the seat of Government of the North-Western provinces from Agra to Allahabad, and produced a despatch ordering that removal. He wished to know how the right hon. gen- - _ tleman (Sir C. Wood) reconciled that with the answer he had given on Tuesday, that Ile had not ordered it to be re moved. Sir C. WOOD said the hon. gentleman had asked, as he thought, whether he personally had done so, and he replied literally "No," which was the fact, The truth was, that the alteration had been made by the Indian Go vernment on its own responsibility, without asking the Secretary of State.. POLAND AND AMERICA. Lord PALMERSTON said,—Sir, with regard to the question put to me by the hon. member for King's County as to Poland I am afraid I can add very little to what I stat3cl to him on a former occasion. As I then told him, her Majesty's Government have made a communication to the Government of Russia on the subject of Poland, very much to the same effect as the opinions which I expressed to the house when the question came under consideration. We are also in communication with the Government of France, with a view to joint action in the matter—(hear, hear)—action, of course, of a diplomatic character ; for I WAKEFIELD-MARCH 27. The wheat trade ruled quiet to-day, and prices were about the same as last week. Barley dull ; prices weaker. In other articles there was no alteration. Averages for the week : Wheat 3,616 qrs., at 46s 3d Barley.... . 124 Rye — Beans Peas Oats EXETER-MARCH 27. Wheat, white.. 6s 3d to 6s 4d Barley.. 4s 3d to 4s Od Ditto red. .6s Od to 6s 3d I Oats .. Flour, fine, 36s to 37s ; seconds, 348 to 35s per sack. CATTLE. 1 Fat beef, p sc., 10s0d to 10s9d Ewes, per 'lb ....sid to 61d Pork carcases, 7s 6d to 8s 6d Wethers, d 0..... 6jd to 7d Lamb, p 1b.......—d to d Fat calves, d0...61d to 7u. Rough fat, 31d per lb. STAMFORD—MARcH 27. New wheat, 48s to 49s red, 44s to 46s per 36 stone. Barley, malting, 38s to 425; grinding, 31s to 33s per qr. Oats, 22s to 26s per 24 stone. Beans, : old, 42a to 44s per qr. ; new, 38s to 40s. COAL ARKET. the close of the market. Prima of Coal per Ton al s. d. Cowpen Hartley 14 9 Byass's Bebside West Hartley ...14 9 Carway and Duffryn Malting . 19 6 Lambert's West Hart ley 14 9 Davison's West Hart- Walls End. 0. d. ley ..14 9 Tanfield Moor 12 0 Tanfield Moor Butes 12 0 Walker Primrose 11 3 Holywell ..15 6 Haswell .. , 16 6 Hetton l6 6 Cassop .. 15 0 Ridde11...~, Hartlepool.. l6 3 South Hartlepool 15 0 South Hetton l6 6 Braddyll's Hetton 15 3 Framwellgate ....14 0 Tximdon Hartlepool ..16 6 Tunstall Eden Main l4 6 Kel loe Russel's Hetton 15 0 South Kelloe l6 0 146; sold, 75. Walls End. Harton 13 6 Ships at market Foreign Mail Packet List. MAILS DUE. Australia and Mauritius, via Southampton,. ...... Apr. 18 via Marseilles ......... Apr. 12. drazil and Cape Verds, by British packet. Apr. 6 Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena.. Apr. 1. China, Penang, and Singapore, via Southampton. Apr. 4. via Marseilles ...Mar. 29. Falkland Islands Gibraltar, via Southampton India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Southampton Apr. 4. via Marseilles Mar. 29. India (Bombay), via Southampton Mar. 28. via Marseilles Apr. 4. Portugal.... Apr. 6. Malta, _Egypt, and Aden, via So u th am pt on Mar. 28. via Marseilles Mar. 29. Newfoundland .. Apr. 1. Oporto and Vigo U. S. and British N. America, by Brit. packet.... Apr. 1. by U.S. packet.... by Canadian packet. Mar. 27. W.C. of Africa, Madeira, and Teneritle Apr. 10. Bahamas, via New York Apr. 9. Mexico Mar, 31. All parts of West Indies, including Chili, Peru, I Mar. 31. California, and British Columbia.. Holloway's Ointment and Pills. Indisputable re medics for old wounds, sores, and ulcers. If used ac cording to directions given with them there is no wound, ulcerous sore, or bad breasts, however obstinate, or long standing, but will yield to their healing and curative pro perties. Numbers of persona who have been patients in. several of the large hospitals, and under the care of eminent surgeons, without deriving the slightest benefit, have been thoroughly cured by Holloway's Ointment and Pills. For glandular swellings, tumours, scurvy, and diseases of the skin, there is no medicine that can be used with so good an effect. In fact, in the worst forms of disease dependent upon the condition of the blood, these medicines are irre sistible. Births. CHARRINGTON.—On the 26th inst., at Great Gearies, Barking Side, Essex, the wife of Spencer Charrington, Esq., of a son. GRANT.—On the 25th inst., at Easter Elchies, Craigellachie, N. 8., the Hon. Mrs. George Grant, of Grant, of a son. LIDDELL.—On the 26th inst., at the Deanery, Christ Church, Oxford, Mrs. H. G. Liddell, of a son. Marriages. BARRET—CHINNOCK.—On the 26th inst., at Trinity Church, Marylebone, Alexander Barret, eldest son of the late A. Barret, Esq., of Henderson, Kentucky, U.S., to Emma Ellen, eldest daughter of Frederick Chinnock, Esq., of 8, Mansfietd-street, Cavendish-square, W. CARPENTER— SOWTON.—On the 26th inst., at Bexley, Kent, William Addison Carpenter, Esq., to Jane Eliza beth, the youngest daughter of George Sowton, Esq., of North Lodge, Bexley-heath. Deaths. e a d6 JOHNSTONE.—On the 23 d inst. , at Boulogne-su r - mer , Cap.. inst., ~ " a s a t Esqg, cha e e l r t , enham, John H. Parmenter, . , aged 77. pr Ao t wß a i mE n LE R. T. _ B E Ro . Johns tone, . ri__ tohne 2th4teh2 5t s n h int.t The G 9. Newport, Mon mouthshire, Thomas Powell, E sq., aged 83. RicnAnnsorr.—On the 25th inst., at Henry-street, Saint John's-wood, Mr. Thomas Richardson, aged 91. TURNER.—On the 27th inst., at New-street, Dorset-square, Frederick Turner, Esq., aged 87. WALLACE.—On the 25th inst., at his house in Worthing, Colonel Robert Clerke Wallace, late of King's Dragoon Guards, aged 73. WILKINSON.—On the 25th inst., at New-cross, Thomas Snaith Wilkinson, Esq., aged 47. London : Printed and Published by WILLIAM ANDREWS. of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at THE Sow Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the County Mbleilesex.—Saturday, March 2S, 163. Sul Office 10, D Bank( P c For 1 Bub Item and and i ingale initte( T' NO REC] G' the NV an E Eight Witiii and 9th A Comp. RAH The V Passe on an and V Chels4 tween Static Brigh B 1 Of th by the of this standi Lt ELLI of whi Invite Vincec and 2] Elliot increa tism, pain, for Sp &rob] CATIC The tion I bottle roue ( Sold i 79, St. lexrif - Two inven The is he body, Moc-1 and c during truss, cumfe sent NMI Pc FUN] Poi 'witho Ltir by in: Lilt Am Ful be feu Choice suit C° Obs "JA3 AS A Do An IJ Poe office, Weak porou lit e a eajli. B' 62, race, add( BCC° MOT race STA thre geld the Or n BOVE