The Sun. — London, England, 1863-06-27 00:00:00

IMERIAL PARLIAMENI HOUSE OF LORDS--Last Evening, The Lord Chancellor took his seat at the usual hour. THE SLAVE TRADE. Lord BROUGHAM called the attention of their lord ships to the papers laid before the house in reference to the slave trade, and asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether her Majesty's Government had cornrawai-, cared with the Spanish Government in reference to more rigorous steps being taki'n for the suppressions of the slave trade. Earl RUSSELL said all the papers relating to Com mander Wilmot's visit to the King of Dahomey had been submitted to the Government of Spain, who were of opinion that the slave trade was abominable and inhuman, and pro fessed twake every measure in their power forits suppression. Of late years they certainly had been more energetic, and the Governor of Cuba had sent home several persons for trial charged with trafilcing in slaves. PRIVATE BUSINESS. Worcester, Dean Forest, and Monmouth Railway —Bir mingham and Sutton (Coldfield Extension) Railway— Wexford Free Bridge—Haddington Roads—Midland Rail way (New Lines)—Devon Val!ey Railway—Tendring linadred Railway —and London and North-Western Rail way (new branches) bills were read a second time. The Earl of Fife's Estates Bill were read a third time and passed, REGIMENTAL DEBTS BILL. This bill passed through committee. INNKEE PERS' LIABILITY BILL. This bill also passed through committee. BETHLEHEM HOSPITAL. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY moved a return of the annual amount of revenues during the last 10 years' admini stration by the authorities of Bethlehem Hospital, the total amount of money received from parliamentary grants, the average number of patients in the hospital in each year for ten years apart from criminal patients, the total number of the governors of the hospital, the number of special meetings since January, 1863, in reference to the removal of the hospital and the number of go vernors present on each occasion, and the questions proposed and the divisions taken. The noble earl said the time had now arrived when the removal of Beth lehem Hospital from its present position was absolutely necessary, as it was utterly impossible that the measures now known to effect the best results upon lunatics with a view to their recovery could be carried out in the present building. Fifty years ago the present Bethlehem stood in the midst of fields; but how was it now ? There was little more than 19 acres left in its original state, and he did not think any person would consider that suffi cient space for the purposes of such a vast institu tion as Bethlehem, where it was absolutely necessary the patients should not be subject to over-crowding, but, on the contrary, have the greatest amount of fresh air, without which it was totally impossible there could be the slightest hope of their ultimate recovery. The manner in which the governors conducted the institution was most expensive, and he did not know of any charity where its privileges were administered with less advantage. One of the great reasons that had been urged in favour of keeping Bethlehem was that the patients would be deprived of the amusement of walking down Newington-cause way and looking at the shops, but he could hardly imagine a more ridiculous notion. Another reason for its removal was, that the institution should not be put to the expense of removal. Why, the institution was supported by the public, and if the public wished for its removal, why should it not take place ? Bethlehem Hospital had the magnificent income of £20,000 per annum, and yet only 200 patients, or on the average 240, were weekly maintained in the institution. Such an income ought at least to admit of the maintenance of 400 or 500 inmates. Surely the public had a right to demand the fullest develop ment possible of this great institution. They could do no wrong to any one by insisting upcn the acceptance of the offer now made. They could do a vast amount of great and permanent good by removing Bethlehem to the coun try, and enlarging its sphere and power of action. The noble lord concluded by moving for-1, The annual amount of the revenues during the last 10 years administered by the authorities of Bethlehem Hospital; 2, Total amount of money received by the hospital by Parliamentary grants ; 3, Ave rage number of patients in the hospital in each year for 10 years, apart from the criminal patients; 4, The total number of governors of the hospital ; 5, Number of special meetings since January, 1863, in reference to the removal of Bethlehem Hospital, and number of governors present on each occasion; 6, The questions proposed and the divisions taken. Earl GRANVILLE said there could be no objection whatever to the motion for the production of the pepers. He merely got up, instead of giving a silent assent, to say that the noble lord was by no means singular in the opi nions which he had expressed. A strong proof of that was to be seen in the fact that, although there were a good many governors of Bethlehem Hospital in their lordships' house, not one had thought it necessary to rise and offer any opposition, or to controvert the opinions of the noble earl. The noble lord had taken the best mode of promoting the object which he had in view, by bringing it prominently before the public. In fact, it was only by bringing public opinion to bear strongly upon it that he would succeed. In thus stating his own agreement in the opinion expressed regarding Bethlehem, he (Earl Granville) should at the same time disclaim the pronouncement of any opinion upon the merits of the question as to the other hospital which had been mentioned in connection with the motion. (Hear,) The motion was then agreed to. AMERICAN PRIZE COURTS—THE CASE OF THE DOLPHIN. The 'Marquis of CLANRICARDE, in moving for papers connected with the recent decisions in the American prize courts, took occasion to defend himself from the ani- madversions made in the last debate upon the prize-court queetion by Earl Russell. He asserted that he had merely recited the decisions of American and English lawyers and judges. It was absolutely necessary that we should know as soon as possible the decisions of the American prize courts, in order that our Royal navy, no less than our mer. chant navy, should be guided in the course they should pursue. If the judgment pronounced against the Dolphin had been correctly reported in the newspapers, he asserted that an entirely new and inadmissible doctrine had been laid down, one which was contrary to that pro pounded by her Majesty's Privy Council. It was maintained that suspicion was enough to justify the de tention of a vessel, and that the onuQ of proving innocence should be thrown upon the owner. The owner was to prove a negative. A captain of a British man-of-war was con demned in the last war, and had to pay he ivy costs for seiz ing a vessel under the very circumstances that had just been held sufficient to justify the seizure and condemnation of the Dolphin. He hoped that this horrible and unneces sary war would soon be at an end, and that many irregu larities which had arisen during it would not survive. It was generally reported that the Emperor of the French had made a renewed proposal to this country, that the two Powers should formally recognise those States which we had already long since acknowledged as a belligerent power, although we had not as yet recsgnised their Government as an independent one, even though it had shown itself capable of performing all the functions and maintaining the rights of Government. He begged, therefore, to ask the noble earl whether any reports of the proceedings in the prize courts of the United States of America, especially in reference to the case of the Dolphin, have been received at the Foreign.offiee—and whether it was true, as reported that the Emperor of the French had invited her Majesty's Government to join in any recognition of the Confederate States of America ? Earl RUSSELL, in reply to the first question, said a re port, which appeared to be an authentic report of what bad taken place in the case of the Dolphin, had been received that evening at the Foreign-office. As to the doctrines to which the noble lord objected, he (Earl Russell) should observe that they were laid down by Lord Stowell. But as to whether the decision in the case of the Dolphin was in accordance with these doctrines or not, he offered no opi nion at present. With regard to the second question—whe ther any communication had been made to this country by the Emperor of the French upon the subject of recognising the Southern Confederate States of America—he had to state that no such communication had been received. He (Earl Russell) did not think that the circumstances of the case had been much altered since the question had been brought forward by Lord Stratheden; and he remained still of the opinion which he had th en expressed. His lordship con cluded by layin g the report from America upon the table. ENCLOSURE (No. 2) BILL. This bill was read a second time. LEASES AND SALES OF SE rTLED ESTATES ACT AMENDMENT BILL, The report on the amendme n t s made in, this bill was received. _ vv AFRICAN SLAVE TRADE TREATYx BILL. this bill, It Earl RUSSELL mo v e d the t hird readin g accordingly read a th ird time and Pa SECURITY FROM VIOLENCE 'BILL This bill was read a third t ime and p as sed ; as also the Inland Revenue Bill, and the Militia Pa y Bill. were Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS—Last Evening. The SPEAKER took the chair at twelve o'clock. PUBLIC WORKS MANUFACTURING DISTRICTS (ADVANCES) BILL. Mr. VILLIERS brought up the report on this bill. Mr. BENTICK expressed a hope that the security the right hon. gentleman proposed to offer was of a valid and substantial character, and that there was a reasonable pros pect of the money finding its way back in due time into the public pulse. He did not consider that emigration was the only remedy for the present distress, but he hoped it was not true that the manufacturers were opposed to it on the selfish g round that they might require the labour. He trusted that the right hon. gentleman would explain the views of the Government on the point. Mr. ASPINAL TURNER denied the common rumour that the millowners had made large fortunes out of the pre. sent crisis. Many persons, clergymen as well as others, foreseeing the failure in the supply of cotton, had treasured it up, and thus made considerable sums of money. /tr. FURRA.ND denounced the bill as a miserable one, and one which would never meet the exigencies of the case, It was in very truth a manufacturer's bill, a bill drawn up by the manufacturers of Laneashire, while the interests of the working people had never been consulted. He recom mended arrangements for sending 1C 0,000 of ur unem ployed factory operatives to the colonies, Such a course must be taken, it was to question of time. He be lieved the eperatives would not be quiet another winter. The 4.0 e,OOO unemployed people were tired of being paupers, and looked confidently. and, indeed, as they had an un doubted right, to the House of Commons for relief—a million or so out of the many which they had been instru mental in adding to the many millions of the wealth of the country, and of which the Chancellor of the Exchequer boasted the other night, in order to place them in compara tive comfort in the colonies. The peat advocate of free trade, the honourable member for Wolverhampton (Mr. Villiers) and the hon. member for Rochdale (Mr. Cobden) contended before its advent that its adoption wculd enable the people of this country to meet successfully every contingency that might happen ; but it had fallen to pieces like a pack of cards, for it had proved of no avail in the present emergency. It was said that this was an excep tional case, that being so exceptional alleviating remedies were required. What guarantee had they that if peace were made between the North and South that it wculd last. Was not the war in Italy an exceptional state of things, though he could name many others. The fact was, the manufacturers wanted to keep the unemployed workpeople hanging about the mills in case they should happen to need them, The cpinion of the best informed was to the effect that it was utterly impossible to restore the cotton trade, even in the most favourable circumstances, for two or three years. He implored the house to accede to the prayers of the opera tives, and would give them the means of emigrating. Col. W. PAT TEN gave the hon. member credit for being actuated by what he, doubtless, considered good in tentions towards the unemployed operatives; but, strictly speaking, were he their greatest enemy, he could not have acted otherwise. (Hear.) They had then but two hours to discuss the measure, and if the bill were not quickly pro ceeded with and passed through committee to-day, the ses sion would probably end without its becoming law. (Cheers.) The bill would allow £1,200,000 to be directed to the employment of operatives,which would be a great boon. If the hon. member desired, he could in committee propose that a certain sum be appropriated to emigration; but as there were 19 clauses in that bill, he begged the hon. mem ber not to hinder the house going into committee. Mr. VILLIERS depreeated at this juncture raising ques tions which bad been discussed and settled during the last 20 years. His opinions on free trade, and those with whom he had acted, were unaltered. The bill would be a great boon to the unemployed operatives, and trusted no time would be lost in proceeding with it. The resolution empowering £1,200,000 to be devoted to the purpcses of the bill was then agreed to. The house then went into committee on the bill, and vari ous amendments were introduced into several of the clauses. Mr. ADDERLEY inquired why the Government took no powers in the bill with respect to emigration ? Large numbers of the eperatives desired to emigrate, and it was very right that they should be helped to do so. Colonel W. PATTEN said the central committee had re ceived large sums of money from the colonies, but no stipu lation had been made that emigrants should be sent out in return. Under the existing law parishes were empowered to allow a certain sum per head to eligible people who de sired to emigrate. If the funds raised by this bill were so applied posterity would be improperly taxed. Mr.VILLIERS submitted that the bill was for a specific purpose, and a discussion on emigration was not germane to the matter. The remaining clauses, with the exception of the 11th, which was struck out, were then agreed; to, with some amendments and additions. The third reading will stand as the first order on Monday. The house resumed, and adjourned at 20 minutes to four o'clock. The house met again at six o'clock. THE MHOW COURT-MARTIAL. Mr. CONINGHAM gave notice that on Monday he should ask the Under Secretary for War whether he would lay upon the table a copy of the second letter or memo randum on the Mhow court-martial signed by the adjutant general. THE SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS. Mr. LAWSON gave notice that on going into committee of supply he should move that, in the opinion of that house, the laws regulating the sale of intoxicating liquors were eminently unsatisfactory, and, therefore, that they re• quired immediate alteration. THE DIPLOMATIC SERVICE. Mr. B. COCHRANE gave notice that on Monday, on the motion for going into committee of supply, he should call attention to the report of the diplomatic service commit tee, which was brought before the house last evening quite unexpectedly. GROWING CROPS (IRELAND), In reply to Sir F. HEYQATE, Sir R. PEEL stated that the Government did not intend to proceed with the Civil Bills (Ireland) Bill, but it was un der consideration whether the clause of the bill referring to the seizure of growing crops might not be embodied in a separate bill, to be introduced during the present session. GENERAL MOURAVIEFF AND THE LADIES OF POLAND. Mr. D. GRIFFITH—I beg to ask the tinder Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has reason to think that the instructions given to Gen. Mouravieff by the Rus sian Government, on his appointment to the military com mand of the army in the Government of \Vilna, contain any such passages as the following: "If circumstances ren der it advisable, his excellency can adopt measures against families who possess members in the ranks of the insur gents." " His excellency should oppose certain demon strations of the women, and, for their hindrance, will even adopt severe measures against them." Mr. LAYARD—I am quite sure my hon. friend will perceive that it is quite impossible for me to answer such a question. Of course the Russian Government do not com municate to us the instructions which they may have given to their agents ; and if 1 were to state what I think the in structions given in the present case to be, I might only be deceiving my hon. friend. BOW-STREET POLICE-COURT. Sir G. BOWYER desired to refer to a case at the Bow street Police-court, which was reported in the newspapers of Wednesday, the 24th. It appeared that a boy named Nicholls, 12 years of age, was charged before the magis trate (Mr. Corrie) with stealing a horse and cart from Covent-garden Market. The father said the boy had borne a good character until recently, but that, having fallen into bad company, he had taken to stealing small articles and small sums of money, and therefore he thought that the best thing to be done was to send him to a reformatory. Mr. Corrie asked whether the father was willing to pay ss. a week for the purpose, when the father said that his earnings were only 15s a week, and that he had a wife and three other children to support ; nevertheless, he would try to pay the ss. a week rather than the boy should go on in his present ways. The mother then stated that she was a Catho lic, and that the boy had been brought up in that faith, although the father was a Protestant. Said Mr. Corrie : " His religion does not appear to have done him much good —(Great laughter, and cries of "Hear, hear ")—and per haps the best thing for him to do would be to change it," (Renewed laughter, and cries of " Hear, hear.") However, after some consultation between the parents, they agreed that the boy should continue a Catholic, but subse quently, on being told that it might be easier to get him into a Protestant reformatory, they determined upon leav ing it to the magistrate to settle the question of the child's religion. Now, he (Sir G. Bowyer) wanted to know whether the right hon. gentleman the Home Secretary had instituted any inquiry into the most extraordinary conduct on the part of the magistrate. Sir G. GREY said that on looking into the newspaper report of the case he found there was nothing in it to justify him in calling upon the magistrate for an explanation. But the magistrate had sent him a memorandum to the effect that a member of the bar, a Catholic, had called his attention to the report in the newspaper, which was under stood to imply that he (Mrr Corrie) had induced the boy to change his religion ; but the gentleman in question acknow ledged that the charge was entirely without foundation. The boy was 12 years old, and he had been twice brought up on a charge of felony, and, under the circumstances, Mr, Corrie was quite justified in sending him to a reformatory. Further, having ascertained that the only religious instruc tion he ever received was from Catholic clergymen, Mr. Corrie decided upon sending the boy to the Roman Catholic reformatory at Walthamstow, in case there should be room in that establishment to receive him. (Hear, hear.) MR. HUNT AND THE EXHIBITION BUILDING. Mr. DILLWYN asked the First Commissioner of Works whether Mr. Hint , who had made the estimate for the re pairing, altering, and arranging the International building at South Kensington, was the same Mr. Hunt who took out the quantities for Sir C. Barry for the New Houses of Parliament, which quantities formed the basis of the first estimate of £750,000 for the construction of the Houses of Parliament; and whether Mr. Hunt, who had been em ployed by Government to value the Exhibition building be longing to Messrs. Kelk and Lucas, was or had been em ployed for Mr. Kelk as his surveyor and valuer. titNieisr.f COWPER said that Mr, Hunt did take out the quan thatifpoorr their cConßstarrurcYtiwonhioefht position in h u i t s y formed o d u t a h e e s of basis Parlitheament first ; esti mate but My showed that 26 years ago Mr. Hunt occupied a house ill the p to o r r i t l a y n , t u a p don the He entitling him to undertake so im outhcould, however, prove most satisfac table of that Lyear 1837, the correctness of the of documents laid upon the It was well known that the estimates made by Hunt. ebxceeded, but not through estimates for the building 'l N i r t r t huatd because. Sir C. Barry errors in the original quantititeehsa, had disregarded the drawing s and had not erected the buildin g at abresetn originally made, with regard to the other questi on , h e fau d n e d si gned. Then that Mr. Hunt was employed about three years inquiry Kelk to make a valuation of the land oc,cu p i ed b a y g Vic toria the station, Pimlico, and that upon his valuation Mr. Kelk made a purchase to the extent of something like £.500,000. If, however, the hon, member meant to imply any inf erence derogatory to Mr. Hunt from that fact, he was particularly in the wrong. Any such insinuation against the professional character of Mr. Hunt would be entirely groundless. Mr. Hunt was one of the most truthful and honest of men, and THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JUNE 27, 1863. he possessed a most unblemished reputation. If the hon. gentleman meant to insinuate—(Loud cries of "Order" convened the right hon. gentleman to resume his seat.) to pursue the ccurse which had been adopted in this in stance, and which would always prove unsatisfactory. After a few words from Mr. BLA.CKBURNE and Mr. MUIR the subject was allowed to drop, THE IRISH CHURCH. Mr. B. OSBORNE rose to move that a select committee be appointed to inquire into the present ecclesiro , tical settle ment of Ireland. The hon. member said, in common with many members on both sides of the house, he could not but regret the position which this question of the Irish Church had assumed ; and he was not surprised that his hon. friend the member for S.vansea (4r. Isillwyn) should feel disap pointed at the somewhat Fabian policy displayed by the Government when he bronght it before the house. At the same time, it should be remembered how great was the ignorance which prevailed in this country on the prospects and position of the Irish Church, and how long an in terval had elapsed since the treatment of a question which was both the stalking-horse and the eturablinsblock of the Whig party, but which now, no doubt, found but little favour on the Treasury bench. (Ironical cheers.) True, it was far easier and much more popular to read lectures to the Emperor of Russia on the management of Poland than to legislate for Ireland—(hear, hear) — and he could imagine that the ghost of Bangle() rising in the midst of the festivities was not more unwelcome to Macbeth than was the revival of this question to the feeble lord and those of his colleagues who formerly rocked the cradle of the Irish Church agitation, but who finally stood by, if not as murderers, at least in the character of mutes, at the downfall of their old friend "appropriation." (Much laughter and cheers.) Nevertheless, despite all, in the face of the returns recently moved for, in the face of the census of 1861, it would not he possible for any long period for the House of Commons to avoid dealing with the ecclesiastical settlement of Ireland. Great ignorance prevailed in Eng land upon the subject. Indeed, he could not but think that more knowledge was displayed here onthe concerns of China than on the affairs of Ireland. Ireland was very much in the same situation she was described to be in 20 years ago by Lord Russell. She was occupied, but not governed. (Oh, oh, and cries of "Hear, hear.") There was a tranquillity of exhaustion on the surface, but discontent, if not dissatisfac tion was below. (No, no, and hear, hear.) The hon. mem ber then referred to the opinions formerly pronounced by Lord Carlisle, Lord Palmerston, and Sir G. Grey, on the subject of the Irish Church. The opinion of Lord Palmer ston, declared in 1843, was to the effect that in no country of the world was there a grievance to compare with the Irish Church establishment—it was a grievance of an enormous character ; it was a grievance which it was within the power of the Government to remedy, and for which the Govern ment were bound to provide an instant remedy. (Loud iro nical cheers.) Such was the declaration made by the Lord Palmerston of 1813; and here was the declaration of the Home Secretary of to-day. The hon. member quoted from the speech of Sir G. Grey, delivered in Feb., 1844, in which the right hon. baronet declared that the Irish people could not look upon the Irish Church except with the most egre gious dissatisfactio n ; and t hat nothing could be more hazard ous than for Parliament to refuse to entertain the question. (Cheers.) Well, where were the remedial measures produced by those men for the rectification of this enormous griev ance. Searching the records of Parliament for the present session, he found that a compulsory bill for the vaccination of adults and infants, and a bill now hanging in nubibus for the protection of Irish salmon, had exhausted the Whig budget of reform for Ireland. [Loud cheers and laughter.) He would ask, should such a state of things be allowed to continue by the Liberal party. (Loud cheers.) He owned at the outset that he for one did not contemplate the de struction of the Irish Church. It would neither be politic nor prudent to uproot it. What he contended for was that there should be some adaptation of its monstrous establish ment. He intended to prove that, so far from the Churches of England and Ireland being united, they were dissimilar in all respects. The Church of England had been always identified with the liberties of Englishmen, and her clergy were as tolerant and as educated a race as any clergy on the face of the globe. But could any one affirm that the Irish clergy had been identified with the liberties of the Irish people ? As an institution the Church of Ireland was a plunderer; as a national religion, it was a fraud, although a pious fraud. (Much laughter and cheers.) Anyone who had had the misery to listen to Irish sermons must know that the great bulk of the Irish clergy were Puritanical and Calvinistic in their tendencies ; and certainly that was not the case in England. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman had also complained that the whole revenues of the Irish Church only yielded £2OO per annum on the average to each clergyman; but he did not know that that was not quite enough, considering the small amount of work they did. (Hear.) The fact was that the present immense staff of archbishops, bishops, archdeacons and clergy was most ridiculously large as compared with the number of Pro testants in Ireland. Bishops with only 5,000 Protestants in the whole of their diocess were in receipt of £5,000 and £6,000 a year, with a large staff of archdeacons and clergy. He recommended that the number of bishops should be reduced from twelve to six, and the salaries (as formerly re commended by Sir W. P. Wood) to a uniform £1,550 a year. The hon. gentleman caused some laughter by reading an auctioneer's catalogue of the effects of a deceased bishop, which included 100 dozen of wino, 200 fallow deer, &c., and which he said was a disgrace to the age. The hon. gen tleman quoted Archdeacon Stopford and several other emi nent Irish Churchmen, who were in favour of reform. The hon, gentleman gave an account of the incomes of the bishops and clergy of the different dioceses, the number of Protestants and Catholics in each parish, and the church accommodation in comparison with the number of Pro testants who attended the church services. In one case the number of Protestants, including the parson and clerk, was eight, and the church a ccommodation for 150; in another there was church accommodation for 100 persons, and one policeman only attended. On the other hand, there were parishes containing over 3,000 population, with church ac commodation for 500, but only 31 Protestants, the bishop's income being 1,152. In Powerstown there was a population of 400, with church accommodation for 100, and the attend ants—one policeman ; but, to be sure, there was one other Protestant parishioner in the parish, but he had been bed ridden for years. (Laughter.) He quoted those facts from the " Irish Church Directory," a work which the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of Dublin had said could be perfectly relied on, and they proved that the Protestants were limited in number and that the clergy almost exceeded in number their flocks. The remedy he proposed was to reduce them in the same proportion as he proposed to diminish the bishops. He next called atten tion to the number of clergymen who did not reside in their respective parishes, and he asked to be informed whether those absentees could claim to be paid their tithe rent charge. (Hear, heir.) Th e "Irish Church Direc tory" summed up these facts with the observation that the census showed that, whether as regarded population or distribution, the result could not be regarded otherwise than satisfactory. He urged that the house should take the matter into their consideration, and send her Majesty's Ministers to the other side of the house to agitate the ques tion. The remedy was, to make the system congregational instead of territorial or parochial, as proposed by Earl Rus s:l in 1844. The late Sir G. C. Lewis also urged the reduc tion of the State provision to the level of the actual num bers, and adoption of the congregational system, with one biship only for each province. The right hon. gentleman (Sir R. Peel) perhaps would say he was not a follower of Earl Russell ; but he was of the noble lord at the head of the Government, who also approved of the congregational system in 1844. He next inquired how far the Irish Church was a missionary Church. They boasted at having spent £30,000, and of their having made 30,000 converts. When he objected to the means taken to deceive the public mind on that subject, he wished to direct the attention of the house to what he called the monstrous deceptions which had been, and were, practised upon the old ladies of this country who had more money than wit, with regard to those missionary societies. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) It was said the missionary societies in Connaught were attended with signal success, and that within the last few years 30,000 converts had been received into the Church. That was all in Galway, whose population consisted of 251,256, and of whom 7,500 were Episcopalians. But where were the 30,000 converts ? (Hear, hear, and laughter.) The truth was, that any one who could give credence to such statements, or believe " Good News from Ireland"— (laughter) —must be bereft alike of intellect and judgment. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member quoted the opinions of Lord Plunkett, the late Sir Robert Peel and Lord Palmer ston, in support of the position that the fifth article of the Union did not stand in the way of the revision of the Irish Church, and then referred to the management of its property by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, The wisdom of that management might be judged from the fact that at Clonmel, after spending £4,000 in improving the parish church, it was found that it would contain 200 less than it did before —(laughter)—and that they were now about to expend £2,800 more to enlarge it to its old propor tions. (Laughter.) He had himself seen cobwebs in the font for want of b aptisms —(laughter)—marriages were at a stand-still for want of people, and funerals likewise— (laughter)—and in his own parish the sexton was an old woman and a Roman Catholic. (Great laughter.) A vacancy took place in the deanery of Ardfert, where there was no cure of souls ; and the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in their report, stated that they were about to recommend his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland not to fill up the deanery, but that they found his Excellency had already filled up the vacancy. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) What was the right hon. gentleman about, whose duty it was to keep the Lord Lieutenant in order? (Laughter.) The hon. gentleman concluded by saying —But while they are endeavouring with such assiduity to pull the beamfrom the eye of his Holiness the Pope, they might find sufficient time to remove the Irish mote from their own vision. (Cheers.) This I know, that a noble lord in another place has lately kindly offered a palace and an asylum to his Holiness at Malta. I think it may be suggested to the noble lord that if the people of Ireland were consulted, they would not ob ject to see the Protestant Primate of the Irish Church re moved to a smaller mansion, and a more circumscribed in come. I know th a t w h ere th e P ope is concerned thepeop ( l C e h o e f e E rs ngland are apt to lose their reasoning powers. (Hear.) At the same time there is a strong analogy between the position of the Pope and the situation of the Prime Minister. Both the Minister of England and the Pope of Rome have been made heads of the Liberal party in their respective countries. (Laughter.) Both at one time have been ardent reformers, Both have produced Reform Bills, and both have abandoned them. (Cheers.) The Pope is supported at Rome by French soldiers. The Prime Min' ster is kept upon the Treasury Bench by Conservative votes, (Loud cheers.) Both are inclined at present to do little or nothing. ll'on possu►nus is as much the motto of the Pope of It onie as of the Minister in Dowsing -street. (Cheers.) I regret that the Ministers do not sometimes look at home "and see ourselves as others see us." If they did so they would see four and a half mil lions of Catholics in Ireland who would accept some of the six points which are offered for four millions of Catholics in Warsaw. (Cheers.) I think they would not object to see men who have the confidence of the Irish people sitting is the noble lord's Cabinet. The noble lord can recommend to the Czar in suggestive lectures that there should be no thing but Poles having the confidence of Poles in the ad ministration of Poland, but he sedulously excludes every man who is an Irishman and enjoy the confidence of Irish- men from his own Cabinet. (Cheers) It is because lam not content to masque, ade as a reformer in a foreign coun try, and act as an obstructive at home, that I for one, who prefer contentment in Ireland to want in Italy, am opposed to these projeolts of the noble lord ; and I think that if the Liberal party pretend to hay e any claim to the name they will not be content for ever to rest in their present torpid state, but will unite upon this question, and insist upon the measure which I have so inefficiently and so lengthenedly advocated. (The hon. gentleman resumed his seat amid loud cheers.) Mr. CARD WELL, who rose as soon as the question was put, was received with loud calls for Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Cardwell, however, persevered, and said that, although ho could not aspire to continue tho animated and amusing tone with which the hon. gentleman had so long kept the house in pleasant occupation, he hoped they would permit him to offer them some serious remarks upon a subject which sufficiently deserved their serious conside ration. (Hear.) The hon. gentleman had given notice on the 19th May of a much less extensive ra - ,tion than his pre sent one. But now he wanted to open up the whole ques tion of the ecclesiastical settlement of Ireland. They all knew what that meant. On the part of the Government, he asked the house to resist the motion of his hon. friend, and to go on with the business before them. (Cheers.) They ought not to touch so great an institution as the Irish Church without good cause, or unless there were a hope that the movement could be brought to a satisfactory con clusion. The hon. member had said that circumstances altered cases, and when he charged the Liberal party with being on the other side of the house, he forgot to tell the house that he was amongst them, and did not enliven the house with one of those animated sallies he had treated them to that night. The proposition of 1844 was different from that now proposed, He believed the house would not surrender the principle of an Established Church, or alienate from its ecclesiastical uses the revenues of the Church—(Opposition cheers)—and the plan of 1844 he felt certain would not find favour with either party. He ob jected to the appointment of a committee, on the ground that it would not result in a just or satisfactory solution of the evils complained of. It would be more consistent with what they owed to the interests of the country and their conscientious convictions to reject the motion. The Regius Donum and the Maynooth grant were mixed up in the set tlement of this question, and he advised them not to adopt a motion that would load to such a complication of difficul ties. The O'DONOGHUE said the Protestant Established Chuich in Ireland had not been, and never could be, any thing more than the Church of the minority in that coun try, and it was unjust to compel tbem to contribute to the support of a Church in whose doctrines th,y did not believe, and whose teachings they emphatically re jected. The hon. gentleman condemned the existence of the Protestant Church in Ireland as an insult to the people, and a misappropriation of funds originally created for the support of the Catholic establishment. It would always be a bar to social harmony, and an obstacle to public peace, and he appealed to any body of Englishmen to say whether they would endure such an interference with their own Church. He spoke in no spirit of bigotry, because many of his most esteemed friends were Protestants, but simply as a matter of justice, for which arguments might be ad duced that were totally unswerable. Mr. G. DUFF then moved the adjournmerit of the debate. Mr. NEWDEGATE complained that the hon. mem ber fir Liskeat d should have selected that evening, when it was well known that many members of the Conservative pirty would be engaged elsewhere—Dir. B. Osborne—l know nothing about it]—and when it was known that the Prime Minister was .indi:posed, for dressing up that old doll the " appropriation" clause with such tinsel as his wit could furnish, and thrust it upon the house at so advanced an hour of the night, He, for one, as an English Protes tant, would never be induced to follow the example of some members in that house, and cast aside the Church of Ire land as a poor relation. There was no consistency in main taining the union between England and Ireland unless the Protestant establishment was maintained in Ireland. Sir G. GREY hoped that, as it would be impossible to bring the debate to a conclusion that night (it was one o'clock), the house would now consent to the motion for adjourning the debate. (Hear, hear.) The debate was then agreed to be adjourned until Monday. The Harwich Harbour Bill was read a third time and passed. The Howth Harbour Bill, as amended, was considered, The Partnership Law Amendment Bill was committed pro fot ma. The Misappropriation by Servants Bill passed through committee. The Courts of the Church of Scotland Bill, as amended, was considered. The house adjourned at a quarter past one. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS TimEs.—We recently announced, though not with out some natural hesitation at the importance of the step we were taking, very grave doubts as to the wis dom of the course adopted by our Government, together with the Governments of France and Aus tria, on the Polish question. We showed the ex— treme improbability that the Emperor of Russia would really and sincerely acquiesce in the proposals of the three great Powers, and how unlikely it is that, even if Russia should be willing to entertain these propositions favourably, Poland would rest satisfied with them. We have not had long to wait for a confirmation of these opinions. The letter of our correspondent from Brody, which we published yesterday, supports them in every particular. The Powers must, one would think, have had in the proposal which they made one of three objects in view. They must either have meant to satisfy Poland, to satisfy Russia, or to satisfy both Poland ar.d Russia. It is only too clear that the policy we prop ,se will not attain any one of these objects, Our correspondent is of opinion that the Russians will never willingly introduce a Polish adminis tration into the Ruthenian Provinces, and yet this must sooner or later follow from the concess'on which we demand. Russia cannot afford to esta blish on her western frontier a kingdom like Poland speaking a different language, administered by a different race, endowed with those free Parlia mentary institutions to which Russia does not pre tend, and animated by a spirit which, if it failed to be intensely national, is perfectly certain to be in tensely anti-Russian, Still less is Russia likely to do this when she is aware that the language and in stitutions of this neighbouring State must, by an inevitable consequence, extend themselves to the vast contiguous provinces which orce formed part of the as yet unconquered and undivided kingdom of Poland. Russia, it seems to be thought, may temporise, may acquiesce for the moment in condi tions pressed on her by force, which she feels herself u❑able to resist; but it will be with no sincere and bona fide intention of giving effect to those conditions, but only to tide over a crisis in her affairs, and wait the opportunity of taking back what sho has conceded. According, how ever, to our Correspondent, the difficulty of ob taining the consent of Russia to the proposals of France, England, and Austria is as nothing compared with the difficulties which are to be encountered in obtaining the assent of Poland. Poland is not fight ing for a Constitutional Government under the Em peror of Russia, nor for the use of the Polish lan guage in judicial and official proceedings, nor that she may be governed by Polish officials, nor for an amnesty, nor for a suspension of hostilities. The nation has been stung to the quick,—has been goaded by a sense of intolerable wrong to a point of desperation, recklessness, and fury which leaves it little disposition for caref illy weighing diplomatic proposals. This heroic people are playing a last and desperate stake ; their lives, their fortunes, their hopes, their memories, are all staked on the issue of battle, and of battle fought under every possible disadvantage. But, if the stake be high, the prize for which they play is high also. That prize is nothing less than com plete and absolute independence —emancipation from the detested bondage of Russia or annihilation. They will not accept any compromise ; they do not desire the restoration of the Constitution of 1815 ; they are quite aware that the causes which made that experiment fail then will makeit fail now ; they trust nothing to Russia; they do not believe that a man will be an absolute Monarch on one side of a river and a constitutional Sovereign on the other. They have lost all faith in promises so often broken, constitutions so often cancelled, treaties so often torn up and thrown to the winds. They are ready to die, but to submit again to a proved and ascer tained imposture they are not ready, Whatever be the reply to the Western Powers, our cor respondent assures us the Polish Insurrection will continue, and only when the land is de vastated will the proposals we make be accepted from sheer inability to refuse them. If this be a correct picture of the feelings of Poland and Russia the effort to mediate between them will be fruitless indeed. Neither party will listen to our proposals, and those who agree in nothing else will at least agree in rejecting them. Surely it was scarely worth while to pat this vast diplomatic apparatus in motion for a purpose so little satisfactory as this P IWe are bound to consider, before we make a pro posal, whether it is likely to be accepted ; and we are also bound to consider Ne hether, supposing it to be accepted, there is any probability of its effecting the t exult we have in view. Lee us adroit the strange and almost impossible proposition that Russia and Poland join in accepting terms from which each is so entirely averse. How long dose any one sup pose that the state of things which we would have created could possibly endure? Would Russia, with the sword in her hand, with Poland in the occupation of her army, bleeding from a recent war, and smart ing from the terms imposed upon her by the Western Powers, be very nice in observing the conditions of a constitution after the pressure which had imposed it had bean taken off ; and would Poland, even were Russia so wise and so moderate as to abstain from any encroachment, permanently bow her head be neath the sovereignty of the House of Romaneff ? All that could have been obtained would be a hollow and hostile truce, in whica each party would be watching the other in order to plant a deadly blow et the first unguarded moment. Have v. e any reason to suppoae—do the events even of the present war countenance the notion—that Poland has outlived her old and deplorable tendencies to domestic fac tiou and aristocratic rivalry P Is there in the con ditions offered to Russia anything upon which we can build the hope that, even if those conditions were fully granted, we should be able to found a better and more permanent state of things, and thus end the protracted agony of an expiring nation ? And yet, while the prospect of the acceptance of our proposals is so remote, and the chance that if ac cepted they would work any part of the good we look for from them is so problematical, their rejection would nevertheless place us in a position of the most extreme embarrassment. We have repeatedly ex pressed our conviction that, come what may of our proposals, this country has never seriously enter tertained the idea of going to war for the sake of Poland ; and we have reason to believe, notwith standing some loud talking and violent writing, that the same thing is true with regard to the great mass of public opinion in France. We seem to have made a demand which we do not expect to ob tain, in order to receive a rebuff which we do not intend to resent. To our mind, the position we ap pear to have chosen for ourselves is neither agree able nor dignified. We ought to demand nothing but what is right and reasonable, and, if what is right and reasonable is refused us, we ought not to rest content with the refusal. The present case is very different from a discussion of the affairs of Poland which might have been brought on at an ordinary European Congress—at the Congress of 1856, for instance. We are not revising Europe in accordance with the faith of existing treaties ; we are intervening in a struggle inspired by the bitterest hatred on both sides, and prosecuted on both sides with the most unsparing ferocity. We have allcwed the memory of the violated Treaty of Vienna to sleep for thirty years, and now we wake up from the grave in which it has been so long buried solely, as it would seem, to show that, while we have not forgotten its provisions, we are unable or unwilling to enforce them. We do not blame England or France because they are unwilling to plunge Europe in war for the sake of a forlorn hope like the Polish insurrection, but we have un doubtedly a right to object to such proposals which, besides being unacceptable to the contending par ties and inefficient for the settlement of the pending dispute, expose us to the alternative of a war which we ought not to undertake, or a peace which our own conduct will have made discreditable. DAILY NEWS.—It must be admitted that Lord Palmerston has displayed his usual gallantry in his endeavour to defend the purchase of the Exhibition buildings at Kensington. With the confident air of an experienced auctioneer he has pointed to the hideous cupolas of the Exhibition, and asked his opponents whether they do not recognise the well known types of St. Peter's and St. Paul's. It is true, he candidly admits that the walls are blank and bare; but then, he says, you forget the virtues of stucco. W a lk th roug h London—look at Pall mall, the street of palaces—what would they be without stucco? There is no material more admir ably adapted for ornamentation than stucco; and if you will only allow Captain Fowke to plaster his walls with stucco—or cement, if you like the term better—l think, said the lively Viscount, that the building will turn out a very handsome thing. There is at present in the neighbourhood of Bond-street an ingenious French lady who has an establishment for renovating dried-up ladies of fashion. By balm as miraculous as that of Gilead this enchantress can recall the bloom of youth, smooth the wrinkles of age, and send forth into the whirlpool of London life worn•out matrons of fifty in the likeness of girls of eighteen. Does Lord Pal merston propose to do the same thing for the hideous architectural skeleton at Kensington P Even if ha were to succeed as well as Madame Rachel, the re sult must be loathsome. And in all probability that result will only be obtained with the same disagree able incident which always accompanies the efforts of the French Merlin—an enormous bill. Courts of justice have furnished abundant proof of the in convenience endured by the husbands of those who have paid their court to Madame Rachel. Should the public allow themselves to be persuaded by the plausible audacity of Lord Palmerston, they must make up their minds to endure a similar inconveni ence. The joke of plastering a continent of bare wall into a Palace of Art is too practical. Lord Pal merston can put the best face upon most things. But the transformation of Captain Fowke's shed is beyond his powers. It was hoped that after the debate in the House of Commons last week the pro ject would have been withdrawn. Unfortunately the new estimate, or rather memorandum, drawn up by Mr. Hunt, almost forbids the expectation. But further, it must be admitted that the obstinate boldness which both Lord Granville and Mr. Glad stone have displayed in answering questions con nected with the project tends to the conclusion that the Government are resolved to persevere in the de sign. It is now pretended that the removal of the building will cost the public more than it will cost to pull it down. Lord Derby, indeed, says that this seems scarce') intelligible, because, according to the contract, the contractors arc bound to remove th old materials at their own expense. Well, says Lord Granville, that may be so, but then the ground must be made level and fitted to receive other struc- tures. That, too, replies Lord Derby, is provided for by the contract. But the retort of the ingeni,us Chancellor of the Exchequer was that if the contractors are bound to do all this at their own expense, the clearing awey will occupy a a long time—prohahly two years—during which period the public will be kept out of the property which has been bought. These are strange diffi culties. It is admitted that the contractors are bound to do certain things at their own expense, and the obligation in this respect must be defined by the contract. The terms of that contract must be, or ought to be, known to Lord Granville, because he has filled the position of Commissioner in both the great Exhibitions. Let us, then, look at the contract Let us see what are its terms. If it pro vides, as Lord Derby sec ms to think, for the removal of the building, for the restoration of the ground to its original state, and for thess acts being completed within a reasonable time, then it is obvious that the objections of Lord Granville and of Mr. Gladstone at once fall to the ground. Now, at the same time it is clear that both of these Ministers are less fully informed upon the subject than the public have a rigbt to expect that they should be. If, on the other hand, the removal or the restoration of the ground to its original condition is not provided for, or if the time at which this work is to be completed is not defined, then the persons who drew the contract and the Commissioners who sanctioned it have been guilty of the grossest neglect. In short, one of two things must be. true. Either the Commissioners are misinformed, or they are very bad men of business. Let us clearly understand how the matter stands; and for this purpose let the contract with Messrs. Lucas and Kelk be produced and laid before Par liament. Even if Lord Granville and Mr. Gladstone had been less hazy in their view of the nature of the contract, this ought to be the course pursued. It is utterly impossible to form a correct opinion as to the propriety of the bargain proposed by the Govern ment without the position of the contractors being precisely ascertained. It may be that the contract is so imperfectly drawn, and so ambiguous, that it cannot be enforced against the contractors. On the other hand, it may be that the contract is perfectly clear, and that the contractors are bound to do much more than they a re now called upon to do. The public is entitled to know, accordingly, how the matter stands; and therefore no time should be lost in insisting upon th e pro d uct i on of the instrument in question. POST.—it is one of the misfortunes incidental to the commercial greatness of this country, and the multiplicity of its relations with every portion of the globe, that there is at all times somewhere or another a disturbance of that harmony which, as an eminently commercial State, we would most willingly maintain with those who are in any way connected with us. British trade and British enter prise penetrate everywhere, and there is scarcely a land on the face of the earth, whether civilised or uncivilised, where British interests do not need pro tection. It should then surprise no one that our complicated and extensive foreign relations do not universally exhibit that appearance popularly known by the expression couleur de rose. The Foreign-office cannot govern events—it can only make the best of them when they occur. A chance shipwreck on a desolate coest may, as we have re cently seen, disturb the relations—nay, for a time completely suspend the connection—between two States which not only nominally, but actually en tertain towards each other sentiments of the most sincere friendship. A short time since the storm was in the western hemisphere, now it is in the eastern. The efforts which we have made to open communications with Japan, and, at the same time, to develop the resourefs of that country end create a new field for British enterprise, have not been eei successful as we could have desired. Japan was,, until within a few years past, completely close& against the rest of the world. Its Government be lieving that, within ha own confines, it possessed all the elements of wealth and happiness, obsti nately and persistently refused to open commercial relations with other States. At length, however, he perseverance with which both Eogland and America endeavoured to divert the Japanese Go vernment from its strange resolution met with its reward. The barriers which had so long been opposed to the entrance of strangers were thrown down, and after a short time the representatives of foreign States permitted to take up their residence at the Japanese capital. It was idle, however, to hope that the prejudices which were fostered during centuries would instantaneously disePP"r- We have been received by the Japanese, it is true, but our position has been that of persons living in an enemy's territory. It would be needless now to recapitulate the outrages which not only our merchants, but even our representative, have expe rienced at the hands of the Japanese. On one occasion the embassy was attacked, and the greater number of its occupants either killed or wounded. At the close of last year an English merchant was foully murdered on the public road at mid-day by the retainers of one of the native princes whom it was his misfortune to encounter ; and, if we mis take not, his wife, who accompanied him, narrowly escaped the same fate. In faot, never during the brief interval which has elapsed since our settle ment in Japan have our relations either with its Government or population been otherwise than ex tremely precarious. The news brought by the In dian mail which has just arrived indicates that matters ere far from mending. We are, in fact, drifting into what may become a petty war, which, however slightly felt its consequences may be in these islands, may bring to a close our commercial connection with Japan. Her Majesty's Govern ment found it absolutely necessary to demand from the Japanese authorities reparation for the several outrages committed upon our n enchants, but with these demaLds the latter hesitated to comply. Under these circumstances orders were transmitted to the English admiral on the station to employ coercive measures; and in accordance with these an ultimatum was communicated to the ,• Japanese' Government by the British Charge d'Affaires on the 6th April, with an intimation that if within twenty days reparation was not made Admiral Kuper would have recourse to force. In accordance, however, with the wishes of the Japanese, this time was extended by 15 days, viz., until the 11th of May. It would seem, however, that this delay was demanded, not for the purpose of reconsidering the expediency of complying with the British demands, but simply with the view of maturing preparations for war. When the mail left on the 28th of April the Japanese were said to be busily engaged in collect ing a considerable army. Arms and ammunition have for some time past been imported in large quantities, and it is said that since hostilities were resolved upon by our Government, in the event of reparation being refused, the American merchants resident in Japan have largely srpplied the native Government with munitions of war. Assuming that this report is correct, it must not be supposed that the Americans have violated any moral or 'egal duty. The possibility of an interruption of amicable relations between ourselves and the Japanese could of course give us no right to inter fere with the trade of another nation. It may, however, be questionable whether the Americans acted with prudence in placing the means of resist ance in the hands of our probable adversaries. In the present instance England is virtually taking up the cause, not of her own subjects, but of the entire foreign mercantile population of Japan. The out rages of which we have bad to complain were dic tated not so much by a dislike to ourselves as by et general antipathy to the interference of strangers. Indirectly we were maintaining by our remons trances and demands for reparation the interests of American as much as of English traders. The po sition in which the foreign residents were placed when the mail left was critical in the extreme. The commands to the admiral were said to be peremp tory—to proceed to hostilities in the event of com pliance with our demands being refused. In a com munication addressed to the residents Admiral Kuper stated that it was not in his power to afford them protection, and consequently no other alterna tive was left them than to embark with all their effects before the time granted by the British repre sentative had expired. With regard to the parti cular measures to be taken by the admiral, it is supposed that, with the force at his disposal, he would blockade or possibly bombard some of the principal seaports. From Yedo, the chief seaport town, the Daimios have, however, departed, and, with its exception, it is not believed that the Japa nese Government care very much about the damage which can be effected by a naval force. If war un fortunately does ensue, the employment of a land force will become absolutely necessary, and the troops now stationed in India must supply the con tingent necessary to vindicate our rights in Japan. It is very unfortunate that this collision between ourselves and the Japanese should have arisen, but however much it is to be regretted it was inevit able. None could be more desirous than the British nation of cultivating to the utmost amicable rela tions with Japan, but all our efforts in that direc tion have been frustrated. Our grounds of com plaint were such as the government of no State should have refused to recognise, and the repara tion we demanded such as none should have refused to accord. The refusal of the Japanese Government to entertain or satisfy our demands leaves us no option as to the course to be pursued. If an Eng lish admiral should find himself compelled to bom bard the seaports of Japan, or an English general be forced to lead an expedition into the interior of the country, the fault will be entirely that of the Japanese themselves. We are desirous of living on terms of amity with all the world, and more espe cially with semi-barbarous nations, but we cannot be expected, for the sake of avoiding hostilities, to submit patiently to outrages as barbarous as they are unprovoked, COUNTRY MARKETS. ~..____. LIVERPOOL-FRIDAY. At this day's market there was a small attendance, with a retail demand for wheat, and late prices receded id per cep tal. Oats and oatmeal very dull. Beans neglected, at 9d per qr decline on the week. Indian corn in better de mand. Flour 6d per barrel cheaper. THE QUESTION OF POLAND. Mr. BENTINCK—I beg to ask my hon. friend the member for King's County whether, in consequence of the entirely altered position of the Polish question, and in con. sequence of the very grave disclosures made the other even ing by the noble lord at the head of the Government, it is his intention to bring on the Polish question on Monday next. I Mr. HENNESSY said his hon. friend was one of those who upon a recent occasion, voted against the motion of the noble viscount at the head of the Government, that the dis cussion with respect to Poland should take precedence of the orders of the day, and therefore the request of his hon. friend was entitled to the more consideration. But, as he be lieved the Government were in daily expectation of receiv ing the answer of the Russian Government to the recent despatch, he should fix his motion for Monday, in the hope that the noble viscount would repeat the motion on that evening which he had made upon a former occasion. Subsequently, a discussion took place as to the advisa bility of fixing the motion for Monday —it appearing, ac cording to S r George Grey's statement, unc-q.tain whether Lord Palmerston would be in his place on that evening—. which was terminated by Mr. HENNESSY saying that he should fix the motion for Thursday. (Hear, hear.) TERRY'S RIFLE. In reply to Mr. H. BARKELEY, The Marquis of HARTINGTON said that the corn manding officer of the 13th Hussars had expressed the highest satisfaction with respect to Terry's rifle, which had been in use in the regiment for two years, except in regard to a trifling difficulty experienced when the weapon was used for blank firing. MONDAY'S BUSINESS. In reply to Mr. B. COCHRANE, Sir G. GREY said the first business to be taken on Monday would be the report on the bill relating to public works in Lancashire and Cheshire; and that supply would be the next order on the paper. THE RECOGNITION OF THE SOUTHERN STATES. The O'DONOGHUE—I beg to ask the hon. and learned member for Sheffield Ishether it is his intention to proceed on Tuesday evening with his motion for the recognition of the Southern states of America. Mr. ROEBUCK—My answer is, certainly; and I am only astonished that there should be any' doubt upon the subject. (Much laughter, and cries of " Hear, hear.") THE CASE OF JESSIE M'LACHLAN. Mr. MACAULAY asked the Lord Advocate by what authority an oath was administered to John Ritchie, one of the persons examined by the Procurator-Fiscal touching the truth of the statement made by Jessie M'Lachlan after her conviction for murder, and for what reason that person alone out of 66 witnesses was sworn to the truth of his answers. The LORD ADVOCATE said the explanation of what appeared so extraordinary to the hon. gentleman was that the sheriff in Scotland was entitled to put upon oath any witness examined before him if he thought it desirable. In the case in question he took his own course upon his own responsibility, as he was entitled to do. THE DOVER PACKET SERVICE. Mr. HEYGATE asked when the papers relating to the Dover and Ostend packet service would be laid upon the table. Mr. PEEL could not say with certainty. Mr. HEYGATE said he would repeat his question on Monday. THE EXHIBITION BUILDING VOTE, In reply to Mr, C. BENTINCIE, Sir G. GREY said this vote would be taken, if possible, on Thursday next, after the vote for fortifications. THE CASE OF JESSIE I‘I'LACHLAN. Mr. STIRLING said that, while admitting at the outset that the law of Scotland might require some revision, he felt it his duty to call the attention of the house to the fact that in this case the verdict of a jury had been set aside upon a quantity of very doubtful evidence, collected toge ther at an inquiry conducted in a very objectionable manner. He had also to remark that the right hon. gentleman the Home Secretary had not treated those engaged in the ad ministration of justice in Scotland with the courtesy which he conceived to be due to them. Further, the right hon. gentleman causd a great deal of pain and annoyance to an innocent person—he alluded to Mr. Fleming. The hon. gentleman then proceeded at some length to quote from the correspondence between Mr. Fleming's agents and the Home-office in support of his argument, and contended that by the course pursued in the cross-examination at the trial Fleming had been virtually put on trial himself for wilful murder, without the advantage of having counsel to defend him. It had no doubt been unintentional, but on several occasions during the correspondence the right hon, gentle man had spoken of Jessie M'Lachlan's "share of the trans action," and in other terms which conveyed the imputa tion that another person was concerned in it. Public feel ing, which had before been much excited by the vile accu sations and caricatures of the " ritald press," had taken a very painful change, and Mr. Fleming, through that im plied imputation, had been hooted and hunted through the parish. He contended further, that when Sir G. Grey acquitted the woman, he ought to have accompanied the pardon with a written declaration that he considered the old man flee from imputation, or else to have indicted him for perjury, which he dared not do. The hon. gen tleman concluded by saying that he had no interest in the matter personally, and knew none of the parties but the two right hon. gentlemen then in the house. Mr. DUNLOP also thought there had been a miscar riage of justice, which, by the act of the right hon. gentle man (Sir G. Grey) had led to all the subsequent discussion. He took exceptions to the proceedlngs on the grcund that that man was not tried as an accessory, and he reverted to some of the facts of the case to show there was a failure of justice in consequence. There was abundant evidence to prove that the woman did not commit the deed alone. It was impossible for the Home Secretary to have done other than he had, The LORD ADVOCATE, at considerable length, stated the facts of the case, and condemned the accusations made against the Home Secretary for his use of the Royal prero gative. It was a clear constitutional right, and there were no grounds for the charges that had been made against its exercise in this case. Mercy was administered on grounds different to law by both judge and jury. After sentence it was no more the power of the judge or jury to tie up the hands of the Home Secretary than it was for the latter to interfere and review the sentence. The exercise of the attribute of mercy was not a reviewing of the sentence, in a legal and constitutional sense. This was not a case of that kind, but one where, after the judge and jury had done their duty, facts had been discovered that were not brought before them, and in which, undoubtedly, the func , ions of the Crown ought to be exercised. He defended the opinion ex pressed by him on a former occasion relative to the power of putting on his trial on the same charge a man who bad given evidence in support of it. It had been held, and he consi dered upon good authority, that an accomplice, after he had been put into the witness-box, could not be prosecuted. It was a humane indulgence. It secured the immunity of those who made discoveries of crime, and it enabled them to give true and unrestrained testimony. It could not be known that a man was an accomplice until after he had given his evidence. There was not a single instance in Scotland where justice had been defeated by such an ope ration of the law, and he had no cause to regret the advice he had given in the conduct of these proceedings. The hon. gentleman complained that the inquiry made after the trial was made in an objectionable manner, but it was very easy to criticise after a think was done. The original circum stances were investigated by competent authorities, and there was every reason to believe, from the proofs that were brought forward, that Mrs. M'Lachlan was the sole perpe trator of the crime. The other theory had not then been suggested, and she was either guilty of the murder by her self, or her statement afterwards made was untrue, which had been clearly and palpably proved. It was therefore im possible to put both of them on their trial, for the probabi lity was that, if it had been done, both would have escaped, old Fleming's statement not having been made at that time in contradiction to Mrs. M'Lachlan. A public prosecutor's duties ended with a conviction, and after that the criminal was in the hands of the executive; but if a public prosecutor thought he had prosecuted to death an unhappy prisoner on evidence which he afterwards thought unsatisfactory, was it, he asked, his duty to sit still and allow the law to take its coarse? The Lord Advocate was not the usual person who was applied to for advice in such cases ; but he contended that when a new inquiry was instituted it was the duty of the Home Secretary to ask, and the Lord Advocate to give, such advice as it was constitutionally and legally within his power to do. The right hon. and learned gentleman then referred to the respite on Oct. 4, and the subsequent in quiry. This, he contended, was well and temperately con ducted, and was as perfect as the circumstances would allow. It was said that old Mr. Fleming should have been repre sented there; but on what principle could such a claim be supported ? The inquiry was not of a criminal charater, and many things were allowed at it which would never have been admitted in a court of justice. Its object was simply for the information of the Home Secretary, and, the ques tion which it involved being solely between the prisoner and the prerogative, old Fleming could have no right to be re • presented at it He denied that it imputed any guilt on Fleming, or could be construed into discourtesy to the judge who tried the case. It was instituted in the exercise of the prerogative of mercy ; it expressed no opinion on the guilt or innocence of the prisoner; but left the case, because of doubt with which it was surrounded, to time to unravel. (Hear, hear.) Sir G. GREY admitted that his conviction was that an inquiry was necessary, but he denied that it involved any discourtesy to the judges. On the contrary, he stated, when the subject was first brought before the house, that he did not think it possible any other verdict could have been re turned upon the evidence presented to the jury —(hear) — and that still was his feeling. In all these cases the Home Secretary with ii e lit t olio a:y li nea d Bo i ts d hiti se n t,: v o en, t acsa a etn c u pon o t drt ah thej oe rjudgei , permanent i e 'cis own mf awnheonttriedunaided instancesu nd wteh j ra u e-s d set g eahc m s are Under-Secretary r 7, which but iosoh ultire at s el e y rge prevailed. antp i better to Mr, eistataisu at tmOTT believed that it would be much once an appeal in criminal cases than STAMFORD-FRIDAY. White wheat, 49s to 6iis ; red, 46s to 46s per 36 stone. Barley, malting, 36s to 40s ; grinding, 28s to 30s pe r qr . Oats, 22s to 268 per 24 stone. Beans, old, 40s to —8 per qr. ; new, 38s to —s. I VAKEFTELD—FRIDAY. There was a scarce show of wheat, and prices rather in favour of buyers. Beans, oats, and shelling were un altered. Averages for the week : Wheat 2,021 qrs., at . 469 7id Rye — —s Od Oats Beans — EXETER-FRIDAY. Wheat, white.. 6s 3d to 6s 4d I Barley. ...3s 6d to 4s 3d Ditto red. .6s Od t o 6 s 3d Oats .........2s 9d to as Od Flour, fine, 35s to 36s ; seconds,.34s to —s per sack. CATTLE. 1 Fat beef, p sc., 10s0d to 11 8 6 d E wes , per Its .... sid to bid Pork carcases, 7s Od to 8 s Od Wethers, d 0.... 7d to —4l Lamb, p 1b.......—d to d Fat calves, d0...61d t 0 7 ,1. Rough fat, 34d per lb. BRISTOL SUGAR—FRIDAY. The market this week has been more active, and the sales, principally of Barbadoes and to grocers, amounted to about 800 hhds., at from 33s to about 38s. Refined goods steady, at late values. In rums there is no alteration to notice. Births. CAYLEY.—On the 25th inst., at Stamford, the wife of Geo. Cayley, Esq., of a son, HALL.—On the 26th inst., at 114, Adelaide-road, Dirs. D. Hall, of a son. PEACIL—On the 25th inst., at Leamington, the wife of H. P. K. Peach, Esq., of a daughter. THAVAITES.—On the 25th inst., at Troy, near Blackburn, the wife of John Thwaites, Esq., of a daughter. Marriages. MOORE—FoRIEscrE,---On the 25th inst., at St. George's, Hanover-square,William Westby Moore, Esq., to Louisa Susan Anne, eldest daughter of the Hon. George and Lady Louisa Forteseue. HONYMAN—BOWEN —On the 25th inst., at All S a i n t s ', Paddington, the Rev. Witham Macdonald Honyman, youngest son of the late Sir Ord Honyman, Bart., of Armidale, to Jane Dorothea, youngest daughter of Major Bowen, late of the 10th Hussars. Deaths. BLACRWELL.—On the 25th inst., at Pimlico, Thomas E. Blackwell, Esq., lat e o f Montreal, Canada, aged 44. COCHRANE.—On the 23d inst., at The Heath, Stourbridgef Alex. Brodie Cochrane, aged 50. ENGLEFIELD.—On the 24th inst., at Maidenhead, Berk. shire, James Englefield, sen., Esq., aged 63. HYNE.----On the 24th inst., at Maida-hill, Charles Hyne, Esq., aged 57. PALMER.—On the 21th inst., William Francis Palmer, Esq., of Island House, Loughborough, aged 69. YATES.—On the 24th inst., John Yates, Esq., of The Elms, Allbrighton, Salop, aged 79. London : Printed and Published by WILLIAM ANDREWS, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at THE SUN Office, No. 112. : Strand, in the Pr ec i nc t o f th e Savoy, In the Coun ty Middlesex,— Saturday, June 27, xsa