The Sun. — London, England, 1863-07-15 00:00:00

IXPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF LORDS—Last Evening. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. THE lONIAN ISLANDS. Lord STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFE gave notice th3t on Tuesday next he should call attention to the cession of the lonian Islands. JAPAN. Earl GREY stated that since it had been stated that Mr. Mess had deliberately shot a policeman in the territories of Japan, he (E Grey) had received a letter from that gentleman, who denied the statement, and said he was at tacked by an armed party in a most unwarrantable manner, and in defending himself he shot a police officer. Earl RUSSELL understood that the reason the state• merit was made was because Sir Rutherford Alcock had been stated to be too favourable to the Japanese. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Ely Valley Extension Railway Bill and the Brecon Junction Railway Bill were read a third time and passed. SAVINGS BANKS BILL (AMENDMENT). This bill was read a second time, PRISON MINISTERS BILL. The Commonb' amendments to the Lords amendments to this bill were then taken into consideration. The result was, their lordships adhered to their original amendments, but some additional words were added to their first amend ments. THE SHEEP AND CATTLE (SCOTLAND) BILL, This bill was read a third time and passed. STIPENDIARY MAGISTRATES BILL. This bill was read a second time. REMOVAL OF IRISH POOR BILL. This bill passed through committee, and was reported with amendments. GROWING CROPS SEIZURE (IRELAND) BILL. Earl ST. GERMANS moved the second reading of this bill, the object of which was to place the growing crops beyond the reach of creditors unless the debt was above £2O, thus putting ordinary creditors on the same footing as the landlords. The Earl of DONOUGHMORE and the Earl of HARDWICXE both gave notice that in committee they would move cer tain amendments. The bill was then read a second time. CLERGYMEN (COLONIES) BILL. This bill was read a second time. DRAINAGE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LANDS (IRELAND) BILL. The amendments to this bill were reported. MARRIAGES REGISTRATION (IRELAND) BILL. This bill passed through committee and was ordered to be reported. Sir Robert Hitcham's Charity Bill, the Ruthin Charities Bill, and the Police and Improvement (Scotland—Provi sional Order) Bill were each read a third time and passed. The Colonial Acts Confirmation Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. FIRING ON A SHIP IN BRITISH WATERS. The Earl of AIRLIE asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he had received any official report of the attack which was alleged to have been made by a ship of war of the United States on the ship Margaret and Jessie in British waters. His lordship drew attention to the ac count of the attack upon the Margaret and Jessie which appeared a short time ago in the public newspapers, and which appeared to have been written by a person who was on board. According to that statement, the vessel was fired at when she was not more than 400 nor less than 100 yards from the land. She was sunk by the shot of an Ame rican man-of-war, the name of which vas given as the Sa vannah, but which was subsequently found to be the Rhode Island. He was aware that it was alleged that the captain of the Rhode Island had asserted that he was not nearer than four miles to the shore at any time during the firing. But he presumed the case would be properly examined and the evidence compared. He should also ask a quetion of which he had not given notice—namely, whethet l it was true that the American officers in charge of the blockading squadron off Charleston Harbour had issued orders to the captains of vessels not to take any prizes, but to sink all blockade-runners. Earl RUSSELL said that the noble earl had stated correctly the story of the Margaret and Jessie as it had been received by public report. The Secretary of State in Washington had assured the master of the vessel, upon his arrival in New York, that if the case should prove to be as he represented it, full reparation should be made ; but he at the same time stated that the captain of the Rhode Island gave a very different statement of the affair. The whole matter would be inquired into. As to the statement which appeared in the newspapers of the directions given to the captains of vessels at Charleston, he should disregard it as inaccurate until he saw it officially confirmed. BRAZIL —THE WRECK OF THE PRINCE OF WALES, Lord CHELMSFORD called the attention of the house to the " Memorandum regarding assessment of compensa tion in the case of the Prince of Wales," which bad been blia upon cue mule , ee.e. et►e secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to inform the house upon what grounds the Qaeen's Advocate founded his estimate of the sum of £2,360 as the amount of compensation which ought to be paid for the cargo, after making allowance for probable and neces sary damage; what was the nature and description of the cargo and its invoiced value, and if the owner had received anything from the underwriters in respect of its loss ; also, in what manner the Queen's Advocate had ascertained that the loss of wages and effects ought to be estimated at £290 and the compensation for " possible murders" at £B4O ? His lordship contended that the arbitration of the King of the Belgians having resulted in a decision against the charges made on behalf of the officers of the Forte, the right to make reprisals was completely disposed of, as these re prisals had been made partly to obtain reparation for the alleged insult which had been offered to the British navy in the persons of the officers of the Forte. He hoped therefore to hear from the noble earl that he had offered some expres sion of regret, or made some amends, to the Brazilian Go vernment for the course which he and Mr. Christie had pur sued. When the Brazilian Governmentresisted the demands which the noble earl had made through Mr. Christie, and when they refused to make any compromise, but simply surrendered at discretion to superior force, they placed this country in the very delicate position of being judges in our own cause. It was our duty, under such circumstances, to behave with great caution and forbearance ; but he thought that the very contrary spirit had been shown. The case was referred to the Queen's Advocate, and he had made the award upon some appraisement which he (Lord Chelmsford) would be glad to see explained. surely a ship broker or an insurance underwriter would be better autho• rities as to the nrobable value of a ship's cargo and sailors' kits than the Queen's Advocate. The noble lord went over the whole case of the loss of the Prince of Wales, and cen sured the demand made for freight upon the Brazilian Go vernment as an utterly unjustifiable demand, freight not being earned until the goods are delivered He condemned the charge for seamen's wages allowed by the Queen's Ad vocate, and as to the assessment of £BlO for " possible murders," the Brazilian Government denied the charge of murder, and he was at a loss t 6 understand how the curious sum was arrived at. (Laughter.) The very term used was a strange one. All could understand what " probable mur ders" meant, but anything so vague as " possible murders" he had never heard of before. In conclusion, he asked Earl Russell whether he had made any amends to the Bra zilian Government for the forcible seizure of their ships, and the enforcement of demands which were awarded to be groundless; what was the nature and description of the cargo which the Queen's Advocate had valued at two-thirds of the invoice value ; whether Mr. Stephens had received anything from the underwriters on account of insur ance ; how the seamen's wages came to be assessed at £200; and how the calculations had keen made which settled the compensation for possible murders at an ? Earl RUSSELL said that the noble lord had made many statements very favourable to the Brazilian Government, but what her Majesty's Government knew was, that when a British vessel was wrecked on the Brazilian coast the au thorities refused to produce the bodies or to hold an in quest. It was easy for the noble lord to make statements favourable to the Brazilian Government, which had taken good care that there should be no proofs forthcoming. It was not because the award of the King of Belgians was in favour of the Brazilian Government in the matter of the officers of the Forte that therefore her Majesty's Govern ment was wreng in compelling the submission of the ques tion to arbitration. If the Brazilian Government had agreed to leave the matter to arbitration in the first instance, no reprisals would have been made. Mr. Christie pressed upon them the offer of arbitration, and they would not accept it. Until the reprisals were made nothing could be done. In fact, the Brazilian Government had for some time treated her Majesty's Government with a degree of contempt which was very unusual between friendly Powers. As to the noble lord's suggestion about a shipbroker, the Government were not in the habit of going to shipbrokers or insurance agents for advice. They usually applied to the law advisers of the Crown, and the Queen's Advocate was the proper officer to whom they had referred. The noble lord, as the advocate of the Brazilian Government, alleged that the cargo had gene to the bottom—but the evidence of Mr. Consul Vinkes showed that the vessel was afloat and at anchor when he saw her, several days after the wreck. Ifer boats were drying on shore; they were unbroken, and the oars were in them. Several packing cases were open on the shore empty—and the paper which lined them was dry, and bore no appearanc3 of having been wetted. It was true that Mr. Christie had made no demand for compensation for the murders—but the Queen's Advocate thought that the charge was fair and just. He (Earl Russell) had no doubt whatever that the people sere murdered. Mr. Stephens, the owner of the ship, had received nothing on account of insurance from the underwriters —and he (Earl Russell) considered the charge as assessed was very moderate. As to our relations with Brazil, he thought they would be very much improved by the Brazilians finding that British sea men could net be murdered or British vessels plundered with impunity. The Earl of MALMESBURY said that the papers showed that the Brazilian Government had produced four bodies, and that they were proved not to have been mur dered. Earl RUSSEL—There were ten bodies seen, and only four were produced. The Earl of MALMESBURY said that the other six were buried in the sand, and could not be found. (Earl Russell made a gesture of dissent.) The affair was a dis grace to this country, and he regretted that the oble earl had not given any reply to his noble friend, or my assur ance that he would make amends to the Brazilian Govern ment, and say that he regretted the reprisals were made. He hoped that no false pride would prevent the noble earl from seeking a reconciliation with Brazil. Our feelings on the unfortunate slave trade had led us to do many things wh'ch. disturbed our relations with other countries ; and the Aberdeen Act, by which British cruisers were empowered to board, search, and seize Brazilian vessels suspected of being slavers in Brazilian waters, was calculated to prevent a good understanding from being established between the two countries. It was mere legalised piracy in search of piracy, and Lord Aberdeen often expressed his regret for for having passed that Act. Earl RUSSELL said he had been informed by the Por tuguese Minister in London that he was instructed to use his good offices in bringing about an amicable understand ing been this country and Brazil. Ho (Earl Russell) thought it best to wait until that proposition became before her Majesty's Government. Earl FORTESCUE warmly defended the character of his friend Mr. Christie. After a few words from Lord MALMESBURY, the subject dropped. GALWAY AND NEW YORK MAIL PACKETS. The Earl of HARD WICKE asked the Postmaster- General : —lst. Whether the contract for the conveyance of mails between Galway and America has yet been con cluded. 2d. Its terms ; and whether any and what modi fications, more especially as regards the landing of mails or telegrams at St. John's,. Newfoundland. 3d. When the t c h o o m A m d e m nc i e ra . Ity 4t s b u . r l v V e h y e o t r h s e a r s , p notwithstanding t htehservicee reports is o t f o to the unfitness of the vessels, the Government are prepared to incur the risk of another failure in this service. sth. Whether any steps have been taken by the Government authorities to insure the public against the consequences of those deficiencies in the vessels of the Galway Company pointed out by the Admiralty surveyors. Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY replied that the pro posal of contract had been accepted. 2. That the terms were precisely the same as in the previous contract, except that no member of either House of Parliament should be a contractor, and the mails should be landed at St. John's, Newfoundland. 3. The service would commence when the company declared themselves ready. 4 and 5, his lordship said, he would answer together. The terms of the contract should be observed, and time should be kept. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS---Last Evening. The SPEAKER took the chair at a quarter after 12 o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Edinburgh Water Bill was read a third time. FORTIFICATIONS (PROVISIONS FOR EXPE N SES). Mr. MASSEY brought up the report of the resolutions, making provision for the expenses and payments to the Bank of England, already agreed to. The house then went into committee, and a clause to this effect was embodied in the bill. The house resumed. UNION RELIEF AID ACTS CONTINUANCE BILL. On tho motion for going into committee, Mr. CHILDERS rose to move, "That, in the opinion of this house, it is desirable that any monies raised under this bill, by way of loan on the security of the rates in the dis tressed manufacturing districts, should be applicable to assist emigration to such colonies as may be will ing to co-operate in carrying it out." He, for one, had not much faith in the employment of the distressed artisans on public works, believing that the greater proportion of the money would go into the pockets of the contractors and in the purchase of materials; but as the general opinion of Lancashire was in favour of the plan, he had felt it his duty to give it his support. Supposing the war in America to shortly cease, it would take at least four or five years before the cotton trade of Lancashire could be restored to its former condition. For many years the influx of people into the cotton districts had been at thereto of 35,000 a year, and he attributed the great increase of crime last year to the inability of these people to obtain a living, and thus they became a component part of the dangerous classes. The emigration from this country and Ireland from 1852 to 1858 was far larger than in the four or five preceding years. In the years 1860-1-2 there had been a great falling off, so that in prosperous years 'the emigration had been much greater than in those of an opposite character. In the present year, however, there had been a great augmentation of emigration. Acts of Par liament were in existence to enable parishes to assist the irremovable poor and orphan children to emigrate by a charge on the rates not to exceed one-half of the average rates of the three previous years ; but the adoption of such a plan in order to relieve the distress in the cot ton districts would be but as a drop in the bucket. By the adoption of his motion, as an addition to the bill, parishes would be materially aided in promoting emi gration, and they would find that the colonies would readily co-operate in so good a work. Many of their southern colonies had ceased to a great extent to be pastoral, and now presented a multitude of these mining and manus.cauring occupations which went so far to make up the wealth of nations. Hence there was an ample field in our colonies for the profitable employment of the distressed artisans in the cotton districts. It was absurd to say that the English mill hands could not stand the climates of our colonies in the southern hemisphere, because they were particularly adapted, on account of the genial warmth that prevailed, the absence of snow, east winds, and fogs, to renovate the impaired health of these artisans. Though numbers of emi grants had gone during the last year or two to Australia the labour market had not been disturbed nor wages re duced. He contended that the " assisted" emigration he proposed would be a great boon to the distressed cotton hands, who, he was satisfied, were most desirous of emi grating, In the course of a year or two a sum of from £200,000 to £300,000 would be available, out of colonial funds, for the promotion of emigration, provided the emi grants themselves contributed a little sum. He appealed to the house to accede to his motion, and thus mitigate the prevalent distress. Mr, MARSH seconded the motion. He spoke from great experience when he said that our colonies would be glad to receive a great accession of emigrants. The colo nies did not want particular specialties in emigrants. If they had good common sense and were willing to work they would be sure to succeed. For instance, in the old days of transportation, it was found that London pick-pockets made the best shep herds. (Laughter.) He quoted statistics to show that wages in Queensland were high, and food exceedingly cheap. It was, too, a capital place for women, because there were no shops (Laughter.) Mr. NEWDEGATE supported 'the bill, because an ex ceptional resource was needed in the present extremity, and ha was satisfied that this was the best one that could at the present juncture be devised for the relief of the distressed cotton-workers, The emigration, under proper guidance and protection, of women was exceedingly desirable, in order to correct the present glaring disproportion of the sexes in this country, Colonel W. PATTEN denied that the Lancashire com mittee were hostile to the emigration of the distressed cot ton hands. They had no right to expend money placed in their hands for the relief of distress to a foreign object not indicated by the donors. (Hear, hear.) The committee were taking e distres sth at might be to guard aga i nst th • ht b e apprehended in the winter, and he hoped the house would believe that the committee would do their best to meet all the rational requirements of the distressed opera tives. (Hear, hear.) Mr. FE RRAND considered that the hon. member (Mr. Childers) would not succeed in carrying his motion, because the manufacturers had leagued themselves with the Go vernment to keep them in the vicinity of the mills, in case their services should be required. It appeared that £460,000 out of the £1,000,000 subscribed had alone been devoted to the operatives, making, with the £200,000 lately raised under this bill, only 30s. per head on the 400,000 to 500,000 needing aid. There were actually 30,000 able-bodied men out of employment in Lancashire, and he advised the local committee to direct their attention to eturying them into the districts where he knew for a fact there was at that mo ment a paucity of haymakers. Mr. BAGWELL adverted to the lamentable distress among agriculturists in various parts of Ireland, especially in the west, and said the way the two classes of her Ma jesty's subjects—those in Ireland and in Lancashire —were treated presented a remarkable crintrast. Nothing was done for the former, but if the Government did not afford these poor people succour, he warned them that the people would fail in their loyalty. . . _ Mr. HIBBERT contended that the present state of the law afforded every facility to parishes to aid in the emigra tion of distressed inhabitants willing to leave their native land. After a few words from Mr. ADDEELEv, Mr. VILLIERS advised the hen, member (Mr. Childers) to withdraw his motion. He proposed that there should be no compulsory emigration, but that it should be quite optional. He had not, however, proved that either the operatives or the parishes supported his motion. Then he clearly de monstrated by figures that the emigration during the pre sent year had . greatly i ncreased, If so, why interfere with w hat was going on? The h on , gentleman had stated pub licly that the colonies had a qu ar t er of a million of money r eady for the promotion of emigration ; but ho had not shown that such really was the case, though the hon. mem ber had stated that he expected to be made the holder of this large sum. The mass of emigr an t s di d not care to go to Australia, but to America, and the right h on . gentleman quoted statistics in support of his statement. He feared the hon. gentleman had unfortunately m i xed up his humanity with his interest in Australia; in fact, accor d. ing to him, England's misery was Melbourne's opp ar t,i ty. His opinion was that if employment could be found h ero for the distressed ope ra tiv es in this country it would be impro per to encourage emigration. Cotton operatives were not required in Victoria, and, indeed, several of the colonies had no need of such hands. It was the duty of Govern.. ment to see that men were not encouraged to leave their native land unless they were well satisfied that they stood a good chance of doing well in the future. It was useless sending the operatives to Queensland or any other place where there was not sufficient capital or channels of em- THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVE NING, JULY 15, 186 ployment open. Parishes had by law ample powers to keep emigration in check, but they had not seen it expe dient to put the law in force. The Government could not curtail emigration. Mr. HENLEY deprecated the use of the expression by the right hon. gentleman, "England's misery was bourne's opportunity," as positively indecent , seeing the succour afforded by Australia to the suffering operatives at home. (Hear, hear,) He lacked information with respect to the .£250,000 spoken about as to be furnished by the colo nies to promote emigration. Fearing that the Lancashire h d distress in ed the it wiseco min t g o winter give every would po be we exceedinglyrtn the authorities severe, that might possibly tend, in the ir discretion, to mitigate the h ou il l l d he an a y ev p e o t r e t d io t n e ) this C emfisthereylth2oaot,oporclevtaeilehde. ra (H ise e d ar u , n h d e e a r r. emigration ? Mr. VILLIERS replied that the guardians could use the money for any purpose to which at the present time they could devote the ordinary poor rates. (Hear.) Mr. COBDEN thanked the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Villiers) for the patience and zeal which he had devoted to the alleviation of the distress in Lancashire. (Hear, hear.) The motion would be inapplicable, because the session was nearly at an end, and it would be requisite to send out to Australia to get the co-operation of the authorities there to assist in the work. He had inquired at the Colonial-office, and found there was not is, in hand, so far as the colonieswere concerned, to assist emigration. (Hear, hear.) Then the Queensland Company, and indeed, the Emigration Office, in prescribing the nature of persons helped to emigrate, omitted factory operatives, because there is no field of ope rations for them. The operatives themselves—especially such as lived together in parishes, receiving Irons £1 10s to £2 per week—objected to emigrate. If so, they would have heard a good deal about it. It would be cruel to ship off people to the antipodes, without being sure they would do well when they got there. Queensland was one of their youngest colonies, and with a small population, and possibly in a few months they might learn that this population was too great for its resources. He advised the working people not to emigrate to any place except they were pretty well certain that they would be able to do well for two or three years abroad, and not to be carried away by such ill-advised schemes for their so called benefit, as that advocated by Dean . Close, who, in a recent case, desired to consign a number of emigrants to the care of Captain Pitt, an aide-de-camp of the governor, without being satisfied that they would do well there. Sir B. LEIGHTON supported the motion. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hoped the debate would bear some fruit, and that the house would quickly divide upon the motion. He defended the right hou. gentleman (Mr. Villiers) from some expressions cast upon him with respect to his address. His right hon. friend simply meant to contend that it was no part of the functions of the Government to direct and control emigration. The right hon. gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) then entered into an explanation of the existing acts bearing upon the matter at issue, and argued that this was no time to lay down a new principle of operation, seeing that these acts were deliberately enacted, and when wages and comforts of the industrial classes were being generally enhanced. The factory operatives were not a class of emigrants who would succeed in the colonies. Moreover, the bill was only sought to be enacted for six months, so that it would be futile to place this clause within it. Our colonies had be haved nobly in regard to the Lancashire distress, and it would be unfair to send them shoals of emigrants for whom they had no need. He should, therefore, vote against the motion. (Cries of " withdraw.") Mr. DODSON supported the motion. _ _ Mr. CHlLDERSwithdrew his motion so that the house might go into committee, when he should preps° a clause that would, he hoped, meet with the approval of the Government. _ _ __ After a few words in explanation, by Mr. HORNBY and Mr. FERRAND? The motion was withdrawn. The house then went into committee, On clause 1, Mr. POTTER proposed to add the following proviso : Provided always, that the secticns 3 and 5 of the said Act shall be construed and read as if the words " one shilling and sixpence" had been there inserted in lieu of the words " three shillings." Mr. VILLIERS said he had fixed the amount at 3s, after minute inquiry, and believed it would work well. After a short discussion the amendment was withdrawn, and the clause passed. Mr. T OLLEMACHE proposed the following clause : That section 3 of the act of last session, as extended by this act, shall be read and construed as if the words " six shil lings and sixpence," were substituted in that section for five shillings." Mr. VILLIERS assented to the amendment, so that the clause will stand at 6s. 6d. In reply to Sir H. WILLOTJGHBY, Mr. VILLIERS intimated that the rate of interest would be similar to that paid on account of public works. The remaining clauses were agreed to. Mr. CHILDERS desired to propose an amended clause with respect to emigration. Mr. VILLIERS asked his hon. friend to propose the 0t...00 on the report. The sitting terminated at 4 o'clock. The house resumed at six o'clock. EMPLOYMENT OF CHILDREN IN POTTERT-Fts Mr. FERRAND gave notice that on Thursday he would ask whether the Government intended in the ensuing next session to introduce a measure placing children employed in potteries and paper-tube factories under the protection of the Factory Acts. And also whether their attention had been directed to the great destruction of human life for many years past by the bursting of steam boilers, and if so, whether they were of opinion that steam boilers ought to be placed under Government inspection. having regard to the condition of Lancashire, that some chidages were necesssary with regard to the administration of the affairs of India. He believed great discrepancies existed between the services in India, and that the medical service had good ground fa' complaining of inadequate rewards. He hoped the Minister of India would take a cofisiderate view of the proposition of his hon. friend,brought forwari in so moderate a manner; and as it was too late to do anything in the present session, that the matter would be kept in view during the recess, se that some measure might be introduced next year which would lay the basis for the welfare of India, and at the same time provide for the comraarcial prosperity of the people at home. Sir C. WOOD said, with regard to what had fallen from the hon. gentleman who had just sat down, he thought he had distinctly stated on a former occasion what had been done by the Government of India, and that nothing* had been omitted which was deemed to be of advantage to the people of India and to the commercial benefit of this country. Whatever had been done had been done with the entire ap proval of a large majority cf the council ; and the only question upon which a difference of opinion took place was with reference to the sale of waste lands. The hon. member opposite had said that he might be asked why he had brought forward the motion, and it seemed to him that the hon. member had good reason for putting the question, as he had not advanced one argument in support of it. The hon. member had not instanced one fault, one case of ne glect; but, on the contrary, had stated that he did not im pute any blame for the non-performance of duty either to himself or the council over which he had the honour to pre side. The only reasons give in support of the motion were the opinions of certain members of that house on a former occasion. But after the experience which he now possessed, he could only say that he had every reason to be satisfied with the number and constitution of the present council; and he was glad to have that opportunity of expressing the obligations he was under to those gentlemen who, though having been members of the old council, and being placed in a difficult position, had yet worked in a cordial manner in the administration of the affairs of India; and the coun cil themselves were also satisfied with the manner in which things were conducted. The noble lord opposite, who was the author of the bill appointing the council, had stated that the Minister of India was to be surrounded by those mem bers of the council who were men of great experience, and who could give him the best advice ; but still that the Mini ster would be bound in every case to act upon his own single and individual responsibility. (Hear.) He had followed the example of the noble lord. and claimed the right of taking or not taking the advice of the council , and acting upon his own responsibility. Did the hon. member mean to say that his Parliamentary liberty Ivo t o be fettered, and th a t h e was to be prevented from bringing forward any measure w hi ch ho thought to be for the good of the country, because he differed from his own council ? The amalgamation of the Indian army was not a purely Indian question, but an Im perial question, and, although the council were opposed to the measure, still it w as supported by a large Parliamentary majority, and proved successful. (No, no, from Col. Syk es .) He did not expect the hon. and gallant gentleman to con cur in that opinion ; but it could not be denied that Par liament had approved of the measure. He could only say that he was satisfi e d w ith the council, and that it would be impossible for the Secretary of State to go on without the council. Col. SYKES said the right hon gentleman had himself fully established the fact, that upon a question affecting the interests of several thousand officers he had set at nought the unanimous opinion of the council, although they were to be his advisers and mentors upon all questions relating to India. He could tell the right hon. gentleman that the amalgamation of the Indian army with the Imperial forces was producing a feeling of rankling discontent in India, and the present system might, at some future day, lead to a mutiny or some other terrible convulsion in India. The hon. and gallant member thdn contrasted the old system under the Court of Directors with the present council, and said that while every member of the old board could give notice of motion and discuss any question he thought proper, like members of that house, the existing council could initiate nothing, but were ruled absolutely by the Secretary of State, who in his way was as great a despot as Alexander or Darius. strengthen the cou nc il , and that they sh ould be allowed to be elected memb ers of Par li ame nt, although he was not Sir E. COLEBROOKE sa id he would be willing to quite sure but that this might have a contrary effect. At tleman had everything his own present it could not be denied but that the right hon. ge h n ; was backed by a strong Government, at the head of w was the noble viscount, who enjoyed so much popularity. lia wa y in the council, for he But there might not be a strong Government rise in importance and pessess greater influence. to be raised Lord STANLEY said the questions proposed feneralpolicy, power, and in this case he could suppose the coune w il a w ys ould were not questions of detail, but questionso deliberate g opinion fiv upon which the house had expressed a years ago ; and inasmuch as the)! a select body of gentle debate by that house, and not by men, he hoped the motion would not be pressed... were all matters for full been expressed, his hon. friend would withdraw his motion. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY also thought that a commission when the Secretary was not desirable, and asked whether,. . Mr. KINNAIRD said that after the opinions that had of State for India differed from his council, he recorded the obligation upon the Se groundsshe. f i o i r , o h o is p dts j e a nt u is t er i e v member of the council to state the cretary of State or any upon any question, though he might reasons for his opinions occasionally have done sO• . Mr. MILLS then withdrew his motion. -a- PRIZE PROPERTY. ARM I Col. NORTH then rose to movs, an address to her Ma royal commission . to inquire into the jesty praying for a prize property, and its mode of distriba realisation of army tion, and into the cause of the extraordinary delays which ruitairsi g no ? had in most eases occurred in its distribution to the captors, for the same. Th e h on. and gal with a view to a rem ed y lant colonel then alluded to the enormous delays that had occurred in the distribution of the prize money from India, army,had which, in some cases, to the disgust o f the kept back so manyn Sears that ot one-fifth of the ri g htf u l claimants survived. (Hear.) The amount of unclaimed i n h an d was no l ess th an £ 1,163,339, and prize money now the interest cn it was ... £253,587, all o f w hi c h ought to have been divided amongst those entitled to it Jong ago. He much regretted to find that £556,752 out of that fund had been applied to Chelsea Hospital, and £40,000 f or army _school masters' buildi p— . 120 .,, he thought that th ose were not proper appropr i a ti on s of th° money.. _ Lord PALM TENS - ON said that her Majesty's Govern ment had no objection to accede to the motion of the hon, and gallant () pacer, because they th oug h t it might prove very advantageous in many respects. It might be as well, however , to omit the wo r d " extraordinary" f rom the terns of the m otion ; because, in th e fi rst place, it seemed to imp l y censure, and, seco n dl y, b ecause it did not in truth represent. the fact. (A laugh,) He had often felt the injury that was done to the service by the delays in sharing the prize -money, but whenever he had at tempted to inquir e into the matter he had always been met by the reply, that there were so many thi ngs requisite to be done before the m oney was distributed, th at the delay was unavoidable. An i n quiry would t h erefore probably be of great advantage i n showing the t rut h of that matter, be cause, if it were the fact, the more eenerally the reasons for it were known the better. One great evil of the delay in the prize-money fora were that th e c l a i mants were distributing se ll their claims a small pres en t di s p os ed to s payment, so that when it cam e to be paid at last, the bulk of it went to a lot of speculators, who made a large profit it. It would be an objec • t with her Majesty's Government to see that the commission was c om p osed of suc h elentents of inf orma ti on andauthority as should render it satisfactory to the house Hear. and to the country. ( ) Sir S. NORTHCOTE—The noble lord would not forget to take into consideration the necessity for some legal and properly constituted tribunal to settl e quest i ons of disputed c l a i ms amongst officers. complained that the h on. b aronet had im- Sir C. WOO D p r operly gone into the merits of the Kirwes and Banda money prize- question upon the motion before the house, after the noble lord at the head of the Government had spoken, which precluded him from replying to the statements the hon. baronet had made, instead of confining himself to the proposition with which he commenced his speech. The motion as amended, by striking out the word "ex traordinary" before " delay," was then agreed to, FIRE INSURANCES. Mr. IL B. SHERIDAN moved the following resolu tion : ~ That, in the opinion of this house, the duty now chargeable upon fire insurances is excessive in amount, that it prevents insurance, and should be reduced at the earliest opportunity," Numerous petitions had been pre sented to the house from corporate bodies, merchants, and others, in support of a change in the amount of duty chargeable upon fire insurances; and that, together with the numerous communications he had received in reference to the subject, was his reason for bringing it under the no tice of the house. After explaining the causes which had led to the delay in his not bringing it forward at an earlier period, he said he was at a loss to understand on what grounds his motion was to be resisted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Last session he obtained leave to introduce a bill upon the subject, but he did not proceed with it be cause he understood it was to be taken up as an instruction to her Majesty's Government that they should take up the subject, and propose a reduction of the duty. He urged that a reduction of duty would have the effect of increasing the revenue by the great additional amount of property which would be insured. He considered the duty a mistake. At present the revenue derived from insurances amounted to 11 million, and represented one thousand millions of insur able property. He proposed that there should be a present reduction of is per cent. on all insurable property, and at the end of five years a further reduction of is, which Would then leave the duty at Is, and there he proposed to stop. The annual increase of insurable property • • in this country was calculated at £50,000 per annum, but it could only - bo said to be a minimum of the annual increase of the wealth of the country. Taking the impulse which would be given to insurance by the reduction of the duty, and add to it the £50,000 annual increase during the first five years, it would more than compensate the loss of the is. duty. co little did he consider the loss (if any arose), that a little less money spent in our Lost • • l y experiments at Woolwich, and also in the construction of iron ships, would more than cover it, In suppext of h • • • his proposition the hen, member referred to the fact that 100 corporations and 70 chambers of com merce had petitioned in favour of the reduction, and con cluded by expressing a hope that the Chancellor of the Ex chequer would eventually see his way to the total abolition of the duty, which was as much a tax on prudence as an encouragement to the opposite quality. Mr. COX seconded the resolution. Mr. HUBBARD supported the resolution, pointing out that the Government took one-twentieth of the value of the property to be insured before an insurance could be effected. The tax being a tax upo ,-, property, it ought to be uniformly and equally levied; whereas, not only was it not levied upon all property, but it was not even levied upon all property of the same character. The owner of Tyburnia, Belgravia, or of a whole county had no occasion to insure—he was his own insurer. The man obliged to insure was the small man, to whom a fire was ruin, It was evident, therefore, that the tax was unequal in its incidents ; the poor were taxed and the rich went flee. The hon. gentleman then pro ceeded to analyse the blue book, which had been crawn up by Mr. Coode, and which had been circulated by the Go vernment amongst the members, and he affirmed that that gentleman had attempted to perpetrate an arithmetical fraud upon the House of Commons. In conclusion, he sug gested that a tax might be imposed on the export of iron, which would enable the Chancellor of the Exchequer to surrender the fire insurance duty. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that although there were two questions brought under conside ration, the real and only one before the house was that, whatever the merits or demerits of fire insuance might be, the resolution of the hon. member was one which should be sanctioned by the house. The hon. member was pleased to quote a declaration of his on a former occasion, to the effect that a reduction of this duty, like the reduction of most other duties, would be followed by an increase of re venue ; and on this ground claimed his support of the mo tion. He was ready to admit that the question was one pro per to be considered in relation to other questions, with a view to diminution; but beyond this he could not travel with the ton member. He had occasion recently to make a computation of the wealth of the country, and, although he took for his basis the surest data he could find, yet he was almost afraid lest some of his cal culations would rise in judgment against him. But his calculations looked contemptible by the side of the hon. member's figures. A thousand millions sterling was the hon. member's estimate of the wealth of the country. Mr. SHERIDAN explained that what he said was, that the estimate of a thousand millions had been made out, bui he was willing to leave it at two hundred millions. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER resumed— A thousand millions was at least five more than the first computation, and he could not help saying that it was a dangerous practice to quintuple estimates in debate. With regard to the blue-book, about which so much had been said by the hon. member for Buckingham (Mr. Hubbard), he could only say that Mr. Coode had been directed by Sir George Lewis to examine iato the question, and without pledging himself to every statement in the book, still he thought the report, upon the whole, had put the question upon a more intelligible footing. But Mr. Coode was entitled to some favour, for how could it be pos sible for the hon. member to find materials unless he had ready to hand the 70 pages of this report ? (A laugh,) The right hon. gentleman, after referring to the fact that the duty on fire insurances kept pace with the increase in the actual wealth of the country since 1816, and showing that the insurance on farming stock, though not equal to that upon other commodities, had greatly increased, entered into the consideration of abstract resolutions, such as that now proposed, and contended that it was a flagrant breach of the duty of the house to give a preference to any particular tax for reduction. The hon. member did not deny the object, which was that the House of Commons should write down this tax No. 1 for reduction on the first opportunity. Against this course he should enter his protest ; for abstract resolutions invariably interfered with the necessary financial arrangements of the Government. The hon. gentleman was known to have more than once made the observation that private members were always, in the eyes of the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, either too soon oritoo late. (Hear, from Mr. Sheridan,) He claimed the right to say of certain measures, that they were too soon or too late. There was always a present between the past and the future, and when the house was asked to pass an abstract resolution, they should never forget the memorable instance of paper duty. All abstract resolutions were bad, and a motion for reduction of a particular tax should take place when other financial questions were before the house. He should lay down that proposition broadly, without beating about the bush to move the previous question, and would oppose the mo tion, becouse he believed it was his duty to the country to do so. After a few words from Mr. HANKEY, and from Mr. SHERIDAN in reply, The house divided, The numbers were— For the motion Against it Majority .. —36 (Cheers.) The resolution was agreed to. FELLOWSHIP PORTERS (LONDON.) Mr. AYRTON moved for a select committee to inquire into the treatment of the fellowship porters by the corpora tion of London. They complained that the £12,000 a year wLiol, had hann pxaeted for years from their earnings to pro vide a relief fund when they became poor and distressed, had been squandered by the Corporation cf London. Sir J. SHELLEY seconded the motion. Mr. CRAWFORD opposed the motion. The Corporation had only exercised certain powers conferred on them by the Legislature. They had no interest in the matter, and the hon, and learned member for the Tower Hamlets had un duly exaggerated the alleged grievance. The Common Council had inquired into the matter, but it appeared the result was not satisfactory to a certain few of the fellow ship porters. Of 600 of them 400 had presented a petition against the inquiry as unnecessary. The dissatisfied per sons wished to wind-up the concern and appropriate the fund amongst themselves. Mr. BRUCE said it was not a fit subject for inquiry by a select committee, and opposed the motion. It was only a dispute between the potters and the corporation, and the most fitting place for investigation was in a court of justice. Sir J. SHELLEY soid they had no other tribunal to apply to than a select committee of that house. He hoped the motion would be renewed next session. The motion was then withdrawn. BANDA AND KIRWEE PRIZE MONEY. Sir S. NORTIICOTE moved that an humble address be presented to her Majesty, praying that she would be graciously pleased to give such directions in the matter of the Banda and Kirwee booty or prize-money as her Majesty might be advised by the law officers of the Crown or by some competent judicial authority. He explained, in the early part of the evening, when be referred to this matter, that he had no desire to act discourteously towards the Go vernment. The booty arose out of the late mutiny, and tne question was whether the column under Sir H. Whitelock who took those towns was a part of Sir H. Rose's force, and the latter entitled to share with the former. Sir M. FARQUHAR seconded the motion. Lord PALMERSTON said the noble lord the member for Ling's Lynn (Lord Stanley) had already moved for papers connected with the case, and he therefore suggested that the house would wait to see those papers before com ing to a decision on the question. His own opinion, founded upon Lord Clive's memorandum, was that the fund should be divided between the two columns, inasmuch as he did not consider General Whitelock's an independent command. Ultimately the motion was withdrawn, on the under standing that the papers would be shortly laid upon the table, and that no action would be taken in the matter will' the house had full opportunity for consideration and dis cussion. PUBLIC EXECUTIONS. Mr. HIBBERT gave notice that early next session he should call attention to the demoralisation caused by public executions, and to the desirability of capital punishments being carried out within the interior of prisons. INDIAN CIVIL SERVICE. In reply to Mr. VANSITTART, Sir C. WOOD said he was quite aware that complaints existed of promotions not being as rapid amongst the civil servants of the North-Western Province of India as it waa in Bengal, but the matter was one with which the Home Government did not interfere, as all appointments were made by the Governor-General and lieutenant-governor of the province. NAVAL OFFICERS ON FOREIGN STATIONS. Lord NAAS asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether orders would be issued to naval officers on foreign stations, forbidding them to attack the ports or ships of friendly powers without a declaration of war or distinct in structions from the Home Government. He asked the ques tion, in consequence of what was stated to have taken place at Tringanu. Lord C. PAGET said instructions were given to our naval officers generally not to engage in hostilities, or have re course to violence, without the sanction of their superior officers. And the officers at Tringanu had received positive instructions not to engage in any hostilities without the sanction of the Governor-General of India or the Governor of Bombay. THE SANITARY CONDITION OF THE INDIAN ARMY. In reply to Mr. CONINGIIAM, Sir C. WOOD said that already certain improvements had been introduced into the arrangements for preserving tl;9 health of our Indian army, and that still more effective me - sures remained to be taken in pursuance of the recommen dations of the sanitary commision. THE CHANNEL FLEET. Sir H. BRUCE asked whether the Channel fleet would be permitted to anchor for a few days in Loch Foyle during their cruise this summer. Lord C. FAUET said that the magnificent Channel squadron, as he might justly designate it, consisting as it did of five iron plates, was now in progress round the north of Scotland ; and he hoped it would touch at the principal ports, weather permitting, as the admiral had discretion to do so. So possibly the port alluded to by the hon, baronet would receive a visit. THE CHURCH BUILDING AND NEW PARISHES ACT AMENDMENT BILL. In reply to Mr. HADFIELD, The SOLICITOR-GENERAL was understood to se that the Government did not intend to proceed with t is bill, but in moving the discharge of the order he would make a statement on the subject. IRISH LAW AND EQUITY COMMISSION.' In reply to Mr. LONGFIELD, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the report of the Irish Law and Equity Commissioners could be laid upon the table before the end of next week. THE INDIAN COUNCIL. Mr. A. MILLS prozeeded to call attention to the consti tution of the Secretary of State for India, and to move an address to the Crown for the appointment of a Royal com mission to inquire and report whether any and what altera tions might be advantageously adopted in the Home Go vernment of India, as constituted by the act 21 and 22 Vic., c. 106. He would assume that the Government had acted right with regard to the amalgamation of the Indian army with the Imperial forces, but still that very act proved the impotency of the Indian Council, all the members of which were opposed to amalgamation. The noble lord at the head of the Government bad moved a clause the object of which was to make it not only optional, but incumbent on Parlia ment to reconsider the constitution of the Council, and this view was supported at the time by Lord Russell, Mr, Wilson then a member of that house), Mr. Bright, and many other members who had given special attention to Indian ques tions. The Secretary of State for India might separate himself from his couiecil whenever he pleased and reject the counsel of the men appointed to advise him ; and, while he acted upon his own responsibility, neither Parliament nor ,the c,,untiy knew anything about what ho was doing. He would not suggest any remedy for what he deemed to be a great evil in the system of administering the affairs of India ; but would simply ask the house and the Government to do what the noble lord at the head of the Government had said at the time the measure for th e appoi n t men t of the Ind ian Council was under discussion, namely, that after the lapse of five years it would be incumbent upon Parliament to re consider the matter, Mr, BAZLEY seconded the motion. it appeared to him, PETTY OFFENCES. Mr. 'WHALLEY moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend the law as regards persons charged with petty offences, and to enable such persons and their wives to give evidence. Leave was granted, and the bill was subsequently read a first time. JESUITS. On the motion of Mr, WHALLEY, seconded by Mr. HENNESSY, a return was ordered to be made connected with the number of Jesuits and persons bound by monastic vows. TURNPIKE TRUSTS ARRANGEMENTS BILL. This bill was read a second time. INDIA STOCK BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. The house adjourned at twenty minutes to ono o'clock. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—Consumption, all nervous, bilious, liver, and stomach complaints, in every st age, are only ag gravated and accelerated by drugs of every description, but perfectly curable by Du Barry's health restoring Revalenta Arabica Food, as proved by thousands of cases which had been considered hopeless. We quote a few.—Cure No. 62,914. Miss Lange, 18 years of age, cured after the medical men bad abandoned all hopes of her recovery from the last stage of pulmonary consumption, with f , arful cough, expectoration, exhaustion, spitting of blood, perspirations, hollow cheeks, emaciated to a skeleton. She is now, thank God, a perfectly healthy, blooming, fleshy girl,—N. Lange, Commissaire de Police. Cure, No. 46,270. Mr. James Roberts, of Frimley, Surrey, of thirty years' diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver derangement, and partial deafness.—Cure, No. 47,121. Miss Elizabeth Jaoobs, of extreme nervousness, indigestion, gatherings, low spirits, and nervous fancies.—Cure, No. 54,816. The Rev. James T. Campbell, Fakenham, Norfolk, of indigestion and torpidity of the liver, which had resisted all medical treatment. In tins, 11b, 28 9d ; 21b, 48 6d ; 51b, lis ; 121 b, 225; 241 b, 40s. Barry du Barry and Co., No. 77, Regent-street, London ; also Fortnum and Mason; and all grocers and chemists in every town of the United Kingdom. [ADVERTISEMENT.] —Holloway's Ointment . and Pills,— Help under Suff e ring.—No diseases which afflict the human body are more irksome to bear or more difficult to cure than skin diseases, whether superficial sores or deep ulcera tions. Holloway's ointment has proved itself a ready remedy for these maladies ; it at once assuages pain, cleans the wound, and works out a sound and lasting cure, more certainly and more rapidly than any other application. In old affections, debilitated habits, and constitutional ailments, Holloway's pills should be taken to increase the salutary effects of his unguent. These admirable remedies scarcely ever fail to perform the cure of what were consi dered incurable cases till Professor Holloway made his in valuable discovery, now most deservedly l rized throughout the world, PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION. DEFEAT OF THE GOVERNMENT. ROUSE OF COMMONS, JULY 14. FIRE INSURANCES. Motion made and question put, "That, in the opinion of this house, the duty now chargeable upon fire insurances is excessive in amount, that it prevents insurance, and should be reduced at the earliest opportunity." The house divided—Ayes, 103 ; Noes, 67. AYES -103. Astell, J. 11. Gore, J. H. 0. Pilkington, James Ayrton, A. S. Goschen, G. J. Ponsonby, A. Bailey, C. Greene, J. Potter, E. Bathurst, A. A. Griffith, C. D. Powell, F. S. Beamish, F. B. Hadfield, Geo. Powell, J. Beecroft, G. S. Hamilton, Lord C. Salomons,Alderman Benyon, H. Hankey, Thomson Scholelletd, W. Berkeley, 11. Hardcastle, Jos. A. Seely, C. Berkeley, C. Hartopp, E. B. Selwyn, C. J. Bramley-Moore, J. Hay, Sir J Seymour, A Briscoe, J. I. Henley, Lord Shelley, Sir J. V. Burghley, Lord Hennessy, J. P. Smollett, P. Cargill, W. Eibbert, J. T. Somes, Joseph Chapman, J. Hodgkinson, G. Staniland, M. Clay, James Hornby, W. 11. Stuart, Lt.-Col. W. Cobbett, J. M. Ilorsiali, T. B. Straccy, Sir H. Cox, W. Kelly, Sir F. Sturt, Lt.-Col. N. Crawford, H. W. Knox, Major W. S. Sullivan, M. Dering, Sir E. Lawson, W. Taylor, P. A. Dickson, Col. Lennox, Lord G. G. Tite, Wm. Doulton, F. Lennox, Lord H. G. Tollemache, Hon.F. Dunne, Col. Lewis, Harvey Trevor, Lord A. Ennis, John Liddell, Hon. H. G. Turner, C. Ewart, William Lindsay, W. S. Vance, John Ewart, J. C. Long, H. P. Vansittart, Win. Farquhar, Sir M. Mackie, J. Walcott, Adm. J. E. Fermoy, Lord Matins, H. Watlington, J. Ferrand, W. Mills, J. R. Westhead, J. Fitzwilliam. C. W. Morris, D. Whalley, G. 11. Forster, Charles D. Morrison, W. Williams, W. Forster, W. E. Murray, William Wyld, James Foster, W. 0. North, Col. Galway, Viscount O'Neill, E. TELLERS. Gard, K. S. Paget, C. Gaskell, J. M. Parker, Major W. Sheridan, 11. B. Goldsmid, Sir F. Peacocke, G. M. Hubbard, J. G. NOES-67. Adam,W. P. Fortescue, C. S, Northcote, Sir S. H. Angerstein, W. Gallwey, Sir W. P. Paget, Lord C. E. Atherton, Sir W. Gibson. T. M. Palmer, Sir R. 4.4 ring, H. B. Gladstone, W. E. Palmerston, Viset. Baring Thos. Geo. Handley, John Peel, F. Bar ttelot, CoL Hartington,3larquis Price, R. G. Bass, M. T. Headlam, Thus. E. Pritchard, John Bentinck, G. W. P. Henley, J. Proby, Lord G. L. Bonham-Carter, J. Hervey, LordA. Puller, C. W. Bouverie, P. P. Hodgson, It. Scourflelo, J. H. Bridges, Sir B. Howard, Hon. C. Smith, M. T. Brown, J. Howes, E. Stansfeld, J. Bruce, H. A. Butt, W. Stuart, Col. Cardwell, Rt. in. E. Ingham, R. Treiusis, Hon. C. H. Cave, S. Jermyn, Earl Villiers, Rt. Hon. C. Clive, George King, J. K. Watkins, Col. L. Colebrooke, Sir T.E. Kinglake, A. W. White, L. Colthurst, Sir G. Kingscote, Col. Wood, Sir C. Cowper, Hon. W.F. Kinnaird, Hon. A. Wyndham, Hon. P. Duncombe, W. E. Knatchbull-Hugess Duudas, Sir David Lefroy, A. TELLERS. Du Pre, C. Martin,J. Fellowes, Edward Mildmay, IL Brand, H. B. Fitzroy, Lord F. Newdegate, C. Dunbar, Sir Wm. The Hon. Mrs. Norton and her Governess. ---10- WESTMINSTER COUNTY COURT—TUESDAY. (Before Francis Bayley, Esq., Judge, and a Jury.) SIBLEY V. THE HON. CAROLINE NORTON. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, Miss Mary Sibley, of 54, Doughty-street, .against the Hon. Mrs. Norton, of 3, Chesterfield-street, May fair, to recover the sum of £lB 6s. 4d. for educa tional instruction to the defendant's two grand children. The case excited intense interest, and the court was crowded throughout the hearing. Mr. Francis, barrister, appeared for the plaintiff, and the Hon. Mrs; Norton (who was accompanied by her nephew, Lord Dufferin) conducted her own defence. - - The learned counsel said that he had hoped that the Hon. Mrs. Norton would have had some profes sional assistance so as to have given him (the learned counsel) an opportunity of conferring with the advocate beforehand, with a view to a settle ment of the case. The Hon. Mrs Norton—l have a sworn accountant here, who is the proper person in the case. He is a professional accountant, and this is an attorney's case, for Miss Sibley is an attorney's daughter— they have chosen to bring me into court, and I am not going to have professional assistance to make a speech against my nursery governess. Mr. Francis then addressed the jury, detailing the facts of the case, from which it appeared that the plaintiff had been for some years previously to the autumn of last year employed as governess; but re quiring a situation in Sept. last year, she adver tised, which brought her in communication with the Hon. Mrs. Norton, and she was engaged to edu cate two of her grandchildren, and terms were settled on the 4th of September. The plaintiff was also to keep the housekeeping book, and to check the tradesmen's bills. She proceeded to the Isle of Wight, and had charge of the two young children; and subsequently in the same year the Hon. Mrs. Norton, the children, and the governess were all staying at an hotel in Edinburgh, and Mrs. Norton required the accounts to be gone into at 12 o'cliack at night, and wished the plaintiff to put down the monies she had received, when some un fortunate differences occurred between the two ladies, with some little exhibition of temper on both sides; and at length Miss Sibley, not satisfying Mrs. Norton as: to a sum of 135, which was said had not been accounted for, the plaintiff was told that if she remained any longer in the place it would be at her own expense. Mrs. Norton then went to Portobello, and the plaintiff had to get to town.- In January she made an application for her salary„ which had been refused. Plaintiff did not claim for wrongful dismissal, but for the bare time she had served. The plaintiff had some tradesmen's books with her which she took away until she had time to look over them. Mrs. Norton said, " You must put down £15," whilst the plaintiff said she would not, because she had not received it, which was the whole cause of the dispute between them. Miss Sibley was then called and examined. She confirmed the whole of the learned counsel's state ment, and said she had been engaged at a salary of £5O a year to educate the defendant's grandchil dren, and to superintend the household matters, and keep the accounts. Entered on her duties on the 9th of September, and proceeded to the Isle of Wight, and continued to educate the two children up to the 22d of November of the same year. Stayed at the Isle of Wight, and went to Scotland. Mrs. Norton asked for the accounts, and witness had them all fair and ready with her account-books and everything, for her to audit. She said on look ing over the accounts that she had given witness a sum of £l5, and witness replied that it was £5, upon which a dispute arose. Wit ness had it noted down in her diary, and used every entreaty and argument to convince Mrs. Norton, and at length said that she would present her with the £lO in dispute out of her (witness's) salary, but Mrs. Norton would yield to nothing, and then plain. tiff refused to let her have the books, and when witness rose on the following morning they had all gone to Portobello, leaving her behind. The Hon. Mrs. Norton cross-examined the plain tiff—Did you on the 22d of November write me this note, complaining that my grandchildren were too much for you, and gave warning, which I ac cepted, and then afterwards say that your note would not bear that interpretation upon it ? Miss Sibley—l don't remember. The learned counsel—Hush ! don't answer. The Hon. Mrs. Norton—You can't say hush to the witness. (To the witness)—Did you say my grandchildren were too much for you P—Witness— I don't remember in the month of November. I think it was in December. Can't say when you accepted it as a notice to leave. I don't say that I kept house for you a whole month without a single farthing. The Hon. Mrs. Norton (warmly)—l am sorry your father brought you here to-day. I'm sorry for you, and I am sorry for myself. The entries you make don't tally in the abstract, with the en tries in the body of the account. I never heard of such a case being brought into court. When I re turned to the Isle of Wight, did I on the 11th of October find that you had spent the whole of the £25 I gave you ?—The witness—Yes, the books show that it was spent. Witness had received a Linsey dress as a present from the defendant from Scotland, which cost £4 ls. The Hon. Mrs. Norton—And was it not changed from one colour to another to humour you, because you said it would better suit your complexion ? Witness (smiling)—lt was changed. After some further interrogatories, The Hon. Mrs. Norton said she did not dispute one fraction of the plaintiff's statement as to what she had spent—namely, £B4 out of £lOO, but the question was as to the £5 given on Oct. 14, which did not tally in the abstract. (To the witness) — How did you pay away these moneys P Witness— The books will prove. The witness then proceeded to read the whole of the items. Two halves of live pound notes, Sept. 28; Nov. 6, three halves; Nov. 10, four halves ; Nov. 15, £10; the 17th received again £lO, &c. ; £B4 in the total. The Hon. Mrs. Norton (with emphasis)—No one disputes she received £B4, but she received £l5 more than is accounted for (Miss Sibley, smileu). It is not a laughing matter. It is a very melan choly matter. Did you not, on the 22d of Septem ber, when I returned from the Duke of Rutland's, refuse to go through the accounts at all ? Witness —I never refused; was willing and anxious and earnest to do it. The Hon. Mrs. Norton—Did you or did you not say, " I won't ; who cares for you and you rotten money P" Witness—l have no recollection of hav ing said so. The Hon. Mrs. Norton—Did you say, "Don't talk to me about money ?" Witness—" Not exactly those words." The Hon. Mrs. Norton—You refused to stay then, and took away the books under your arm ? Wit ness—No; you keep confounding the two things. I left Edinburgh from compulsion, and not from the motives you attribute. The Hon. Mrs. Norton—Who compelled you?' Wi!ness—You aid. The Hon. Mrs. Nortou—l had the sm-.ller room of the two, and you had the other one—eh ? Wlt neye (sharply)—Did you think I was going to sit in a bedroom and let the waiter bring up my break fast were ? Was not at all afraid of you. I left L because you behaved badly to me. Theinh u ;r an . Ai rs , Norton—ls your way of settling Ed accounts to elope 200 .Tiles (laughter) ? Witness--No, I never f a zid . l should go. The Hon. Mrs. Norton—i r on claim salary. I won't ask you any more questions. I'm quite sure any sensible man of business will agree wail me in what I said, that you were " a foolish child ; and that if your father were not an attorney, neither of us would have been here to-day." The learned Judge—Do you wish to state any thing to the jury ? The Hon. Mrs. Norton—Yes, I particularly wista to contradict some of her evidence. On the 12th September I went to the ladies to whom she re ferred me, and one spoke very well cf her, and the other lady seemed extremely unwilling to answer for her temper. There was no dispute as to her power and ability to teach, but it was her temper. On the 13th September went round with her to pay the tradespeople and introduce her as the re sponsible person. I sent the £25 on the 11th October, and found that she had spent the whole of that, and then I gave her three £5 notes from , hand to hand, which she got rid of at the rate of £1 per day, and the story she wishes you to believe is, that from the Bth October to 7th November she had nothing, and that I allowed her to continue keeping house without a farthing at ,E 1 a day. The learned Judge—Were the bills all paid when you left the Isle of Wight ? The Hon. Mrs. Norton—No ; I advanced the £25, and her own account of herself is that I allowed her to spend £B5 without even seeing the books. And when she began the accounts she omitted the Octo ber entries from hand to hand. She still acted as governess up to the 13th December it appears, and what I dispute is that she has already received that omitted entry of £ls. Her quarter's salary would be £l2 10s., and the other ladies who employed her only gave £25 a year, and it I were to pay that run-away journey there would still be something due to me. Further evidence was proposed by the Hon. Mrs- Norton, which was objected to on the ground of irregularity, and at length Mr. Prideaux, the accountant, was sworn, and gave evidence showing discrepancies" in the accounts as kept by Miss Sib ley, there being two separate sums of £l5, but only ono accounted for, being omitted in the abstract, and in fact the whole thing was a confusion. Wit ness added that the accounts, as rendered, were altogether inaccurate. Mr. Francis, in reply, told the jury that it was clear that the plaintiff was fully entitled to her salary, inasmuch as the defendant had failed to esta blish any case against his client for wilfully dis obeying the lawful commands of her employer. The learned Judge observed that there were two points in the case—the one was, whether Mrs. Nor ton had dismissed the plaintiff; and if she had, was she justified in so doing. If she had dismissed the plaintiff, and was justified in so doing, then she would not be liable for the expenses of this young lady in coming from Edinburgh; but if she had not, and the plaintiff had left of her own accord, the case would be different. The other point was, whether the plaintiff received the £l5. Mrr. Nor ton swore positively that at the Isle of Wight she handed the plaintiff three five-pound notes on the 14th or 15th of October. His honour was of opinion. that it had been paid ; but, however, that was a matter for the jury. At all events the plaintiff was entitled to a quarter's salary, unless the jury considered that it was misconduct on the part of the plaintiff in refusing to go through the accounts on the 22d of December, and that she refused to obey the lawful commands of the de fendant, then she would not be entitled to anything ; but, on the contrary, if there was no disobedience, she would then be entitled up to the time that she left. Again, if she had a right to consider herself dismissed, and was dismissed, then she would be entitled to expenses, and it was entirely for the jury to say whether the £l5 had been given credit for or not. The jury retired, and after about 20 minutes' de liberation, said—" We find a verdict for the salary for the plaintiff, but the £l5 seems to be doubtful, and we think Mrs. Norton is entitled to the benefit of that doubt, as being more likely to be correct. That is, we think there have been two payments of £15." Upon this a long discussion ensued between the jury, the learned judge, the learned counsel, and the Hon. Mrs. Norton, when at length the jury finally, upon putting some further questions to the plaintiff touching the accounts, gave a verdict for the plaintiff, by stating that they could not say Whether the money was paid or not, which was held to be equivalent to a verdict for plaintiff. Lord Dufferin, addressing the Court, said that his impression was that the jury believed that Mrs. Norton had paid the money. The learned Judge—They did not say so fairly ; it was a matter of doubt with them. The Hon. Mrs. Norton then said she should give formal notice of appeal on another day, and move far a new trial, for the decision was exactly con trary to what had transpired in evidence. Verdict for the plaintiff. COUNTRY MARKETS. v. LEEDS-TUESDAY. To-day there was a moderate supply of wheat, which met scarcely any demand, at rather lower rates than the previous week. Barley nominally the same. Oats, beans, and other articles dull, at late rates. MARKET HARBOROUGH-TUESDAY. White wheat, 50s to 53s ; red,l46s:to 50s per 36 stone. Malting barley at —s to —8 per qr. ; grinding, 29s to 34s per 30 st. Oats, old, 24s to 275; new, 19s to 22s per 24 st. ; beans, 38s to 42s per qr. LIVERPOOL-TUESDAY. At our market to-day there was a fair attendance both of millers and dealers, and wheat experienced a free sale, at a decline of ld to 2d per cental from the prices of Tues day last. Indian corn was in fair request, and unchanged in value. Oats very unsaleable, and oatmeal dull at late quotations. Barley, beans, and peas still as dear. SHEFFIELD-TUESDAY. The show of wheat and other grain was seasonably fair. Trade ruled very dull, but hut week's prices were gene rally made. Red wheat, per load of 3 imperial bushels...lBB Od to 19s Od White 77 9 ...20s Od to 21s Od New red , , ...168 Od to 17s Od New white 1, If ...188 Od to 19s Od , Beans 7, „ ...168 Od to 108 Od Peas, per qr 45s Od to 56s Od Grinding barley, per qr 3os Od to 32s 04 Malting ditto, „ 34s Od to 38s Od Oats I/ 2os Od to 278 Od Flour, is 7d to 28 Od per stone. .;MELTON MOWBRAY-TUESDAY. The following were the currencies :—New white wheat, 49s Od to 54s Od ; new red, 43s Od to 49s per 36 stone; beans, 39s to 42s for old; new sorts, —s to —a per 38 st. ; barley, —s to —a for malting, and 28s to 30s per qr. for grinding; new oats, 20s to 25a Od per 24 stone. Around here harvest prospects still continue exceedingly good. DUBLIN- There was a dull trade in tions may be repeated. _ -TUESDAY. 'heat to-day, and our quota s. d. s. d. Wheat, white 11 0 to 12 0 Do., red lO 0 to 11 0 Do. new Barley Oats Do., black — 0 to s. d. s. d. Beans.. . — 0 to -- Bere Rapeseed Oatmeal l2 0 to 15 1 Bakers' flour Indian corn Full benefit of reduced duty obtained by pur chasing Horniman's pure Tea; very choice at 3s. 4d. and 4s. "High Standard" at 4s. 4d. (formerly 4.5. Bd.), is the strongest and most delicious imported. Agents in every town supply it in packets. Births. BUCHAN.—On the 12th inst., at Edinburgh, the wife of Lieut.-Col. Fordyce Buchan, of a son. GORDON.—On the 14th inst., at Lee, the wife of Lewis Gordon, Esq., of a son. POLTIMORE.—On the 13th inst., at P, Lowndes-street, the Lady Poltimore, of a daughter. PLUMMER. — On the 11th inst., at South Kensington, Mrs. Scott Plummer, of a daughter. Marriages. DRUCE —CROSS.—On the 14th inst., at Brighton, Albert, son of Charles Druce, Esq., of Denmark•hill, Surrey, to Anna B. Buchanan, daughter of the late William Cross, Esq., of Champion-hill, Surrey. EvANs—EAmEs.---On the llthinat., at St. Mark's, Re gent's-park, John Evans, M.R.C.S.,!of Upper Albany street, to Jane, elder daughter of William Eames, Esq., of St. Mark's-crescent, Regent's-park. Deaths. KEILL—On the 11th inst., at his residence, 12, Gloucester terrace, Campdeu-hill, Kensington, Richard Keily, Esq., Knight of St. John of Jerusalem, F.It.Z.S., aged 68, deeply lamented by his family and large circle of friends. R.I.P. CLENCH.—On the 12th inst., at Rotherhithe, Captain Jno• Clench, aged 75. CLlrr.—On the 13th inst., Charlotte, wife of Mr. Edward Clift, of Lewisham, Kent. DUNN.—On the 9th inst., Wells, Somerset, W. " r • Dunn, Esq., aged 81. DASUWOOD.—On the 12th inst„ at Thornage Rectory, th e Rev. Augustus Dashwood, aged 68. London : Printed and Published by WILLIAM ANDRE I V of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at THE Surf Office, No. al , Strand, in the Precinct of the savoy, in the CountY Q t ItAiddleseX.—Wednesday, July 16, 1863. N °' John Chai Charle puty A. De Edwar James A. H. P. C. C P.1'.1 Ilan • Superi The Ct Xing'dor Mercai duced ra 1,0 se; Jekre of the most allowed The fa during t 1A5R.... 18'0.... 1811_ 1862.... Thus amurin; The 1( I.E 2. T Form on appl HEAD N° TH Estal limits Shares. Deposi Allot vale Sir Ch vard Philip Porc P. 11. lane John t ford lion. Acct Mes MesE the g north krug, direct city hand Tb to th roust La seal( less MI 0118 I trat pass of a mun calm of tl TI Mar Nom "wor duce to ti yiel, VCT,