The Sun. — London, England, 1863-04-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF LORDS.—Last Evening. The LORD CRaNczumu took his seat on the woolsack at the usual hour. PETITIONS. The Marquis of NORMAN BY said he had a notice on the paper to present a petition from the Rev. Alfred Bishop, on Monday, the '27th April, in reference to the petitioner's son, now undergoing imprisonment in the fortress of Alex andria, but he wished to postpone its presentation until Monday, the 4th of May. Lord HARROWBY presented a petition against the sale of intoxicating liquors on Sunday. _ . Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY :presented a petition to the same effect. LOCAL GOVERNMENT. Lord STANLEY of ALDE &LEY moved the second reading of the Local Government Act Amendment Bill. I,lrd CHELMSFORD would Not oppcse the second reading of the bill, but comment upon one or two points in it. A short dizcussion then took place, in which Lord Redes dale, Lord Egerton of Tatton, and Lord Stanley of Alderley joined, the bill was read. METROPOLITAN RAILWAY SCHEMES. _ _ Lord KIN NAIRD, in the place of Lord Ebury, moved for a copy of the report upon metropolitan railway schemes wade to the Metropolitan Board of Works by their engineer; and that the same be referred to the select committee now sitting upon those undertakings. The house rose at twenty-five minutes past five. HOUSE OF COMMONS —Last Evening, The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. THIRD READINGS. The following bills were read a third time and passed : Busby Railway, Ely Valley Extension Railway, Furness Railway Company and Barrow Harboar Commissioners, London and South-Western Railway, and Whitehaven, Cleator, and Egremont Railway, SECOND READINGS. The following bills were read a second time :—Edin burgh Water, and Greenock and Wemyss Bay Railway. The Rusthall Manor Bill was considered and ordered to be read a third time. LONDON AND SOUTH WESTERN BILL. On the motion of Mr. R. MILLS the third reading of this bill was postponed until to-morrow. PETITIONS. By Sir J. DUKE and Mr. Nounts, from wards in the City of London, against the amalgamation of the City with the Metropolitan police ; Col. SYKES, from the Working Men's Temperance Society of Aberdeen, against the sale of in toxicating liquors on the Sabbath ; Mr. BLACK, from Edinburgh, in favour of the independence of Poland ; Mr. J. N. POW ELL, from Gloucester, against the Writs Prohibition Bill ; Mr. WRITE, from Brighton, in favour of the Innkeepers' Liability Bill; Lord J. MANNEKS, from Lutterworth, Derbyshire, to the like effect. LORD CHANCELLOR'S BENEFICES. On the motioa of Mr. HADFIELD, a return of the names of the several benefices in the gift of the Lord Chancellor of the value of £3OO a year or under, the number of the population of each parish or place according to the census of 1861, and the yearly income of each such benefice during each of the last five years, was ordered. MAYNOOTH. Mr. WHALLEY gave notice of his intention this day month to move, in a committee of the whole house, that the annual grant to Maynooth be repealed. (Cheers and laughter.) THE TAX ON INCOMES. Mr. ROEBUCK gave notice of his intention, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer's proposition with respect to the income tax was next before the house, to move a reso lution to the effect that the tax on precarious should be lower than that on permanent incomes. (Hear, hear.) DONATIONS AND BEQUESTS (IRELAND). Mr. HASSARD gave notice that on a future day he should call attention to the state of the law with respect to donations and bequests in Ireland, and propose that the laws relating to them be assimilated to that in force in Eng land. PRISONS MINISTERS BILL Sir L. PALK gave notice of his intention to propose an amendment to clause 3. INDIA—SIAM. In reply to Sir J. HAY, Sir C. WOOD said there was no objection on the part of the Secretary to the Admiralty, the Secretary of State for India, and the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, to lay all the available correspondence on the table of the house. BURIAL OF SIR J. OUTRAM. Mr. P. WYNDHAM asked the Secretary of State for India if it was true that the Indian Government intended to defray the expenses of Sir James Outram's funeral ; and if the sergeants of the 78th Highlanders, who volunteered to attend at their own cost from Folkestone, and did so, would not have their expenses allowed to them by the Go vernment ? Sir C. WOOD replied that it was only a fitting tribute to the memory of Sir James Outram, one of the bravest and most gallant officers connected with any of the public ser -vices, that the cost of his funeral should be defrayed out of the public purse. (Hear, hear.) The attendance of the sergeants of the 78th Highlanders was perfectly voluntary and spontaneous ; they desired to testify - their respect to their late commander by being permitted to carry him to the grave, and did so at their own expense ; but the Government consi dered that they should be reimbursed for their outlay, and it had been refunded to them. (Hear.) CONTAGIOUS DISEASES IN CATTLE AND SHEEP. Mr. GRIFFITH asked the Vice-President of the Privy Canncil whether he had any objection to lay upon the table of the house the report of the Commissioner sent by Go vernment in the course of last autumn to the Continent, to inquire into the existence of sheep and cattle contagious or infectious diseases in foreign countries, and into the liability of their introduction into this country ? Mr. BRUCE replied that the report, which was a very ion one, had been delivered to his department, and was now under its consideration. It would be shortly printed to the house in the form of an appendix to the report of 'the medical officers. THE AMNESTY IN POLAND. Mr. DENMAN asked the First Lord of the Treasury, whether her Majesty's Government had received any in form ation as to whether the amnesty offered by the Em peror of Russia to those engaged in the Polish insurrection W 843 inieuded to suspend the execution of political prisoners taken since the commencement of those proceedings of the the Ru.ssian authorities which led to the insurrection ? Lord PALMERSTON replied that it was now well known tilta the Russian Government had issued a procla mation granting an amnesty. There were some variations in the proclamation issued at St. Petersburg, and that issued at War.itiw. As yet the Government had received no very accurate information as to the correct interpreta tion. There were different interpretations as to the exact purport of the proclamation—one asserting to be in the comprehensive sense mentioned by his honourable and learned friend ; the other that its intentions were rather restricted. All he could say was that he hoped the larger interpretation was the just one. (Hear, hear.) It was impossible not to feel that the Russian Government entertained the sense that its troops in Poland had unfortunately committed acts of ferocious vio ler ce, and that there was great reason for the enaction of acts of forbearance and mercy in order to set them right wi h the public. (Hear, hear.) - - CHIEF MINISTERS OF STATE IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS. Mr. D. GRIFFITH desired to ask the noble lord (Lord Palmerston), whether he thought it desirable, with a view to 'he efficiency of the public service, and respectful to the - Reuse of Commons, that the chiefs of three departments e namely, th e Secretary at War, the Chief Secreta ry f the Admiralty, and th e S ecre t ary o f St a t e for Foreign Affairs, slaculd be c oncentrated in the House of Lor d s , and this house left t o the Tinder-Secretaries of the three Dep ar t a . tut ntsf (Hear, h ear.) Lord PALMERSTON replied that it had been his en (fleavour to make the beet arrangement he could for th e public service, combining as many benefits w :th as few objections as Possible. (Hear, hear.) It would be desirable, 'no doubt, to have the whole of the Secretaries of State in the House of Commons; but all he could say was, that the house would not suffer any incon ven!ence in consequence of the arrangements recently made i n re gsrd to full explanations being offered to the house in a ll w afters relating to the public service. (Hear, hear.) ADMIRAL WILKES. Mr. ROEBUCK desired to ask the noble lord, the First Lord of the• Treasury, a question—but if inconvenient he would repeat it on Thursday—whether the Government had determined upon what line of conduct it would be proper to pursue with regard to Admiral Wilkes—(hear, hear) — and whether the noble lord had any objection to state the nature of the determination of the Government ? Lord PALMERSTON—I would rather take the ques tion as a notice for a future day. (Laughter.) WOODS, FORESTS, AND LAND RE VENUE OFFICE, &c. Mr. A. SMITH then rose to move for a select committee t o inquire into the Office o f W oods , Forests, and and Re venues, and the Office of Works and Public Buildings, and the operation of the Act 14 and 15 Tic. c. 42, by which the were constituted as two separate departments. Dur ing the past year there had been a saving of one million on efich of the departments for war and ,the navy ; but he re gretted to find there had been no saving effected in the es timates for the civil service, with regard to which there was more complaint than in any other department of the &Foe. The hon. ;entleman then referred to the Hon. Mr. Gore's report of the income and expenditure, which he (`lr. Smith) urged was a too favourab l e estimate of the r : e m i r and expenditure of this dep artment. The hon. man concluded by moving the appointment of a se lect e ,,,, Thittee ' M" on o PRIM • iconditi f % s a he was quite ready to admit th at the in 'ought from ti me to Crowntime lands was a fair subject to be AhOUse , both because thinle under the consideration of the Y constituted a considerable source of revenue, and because there was a large number of per sons whose connection with those lands made them directly interested in the prudent management of the e. Those lands formed the subject of a compact with the Drown, who, in return for the civil list, had made over to the public the net revenue of the property, after paying the cost of their management, The system under which the lands were administered was one strictly defined by law. This pro petty had been always admininistered by commissioners appointed for that purpose. The union of Woods and Works had proved upon experiment to be a failure, and was abandoned in the year 1851, when the two offices were separated. The act for effecting this separation became law in 1851, and the Prime Minister of the day, when introducing the measnre, stated that it was intended to remedy certain evils which had arisen under the joint system. The evils were chiefly these ; that large and expensive public works were under taken, which cost more than was convenient to propose for the sanction of Parliament, and the requisite funds had to be provided by casting the cost upon the Crown lands, thereby having the effect of lessening the revenue de rived from them, and of keeping the particulars from the public view. The best proof that could be given of the management of those lands under the new system was the sustained and progressive value of them ; for it appeared that they had increased from £301,000 in 1851 to £370,000 in 1862. The consolidation of the Crown property had been carried out to the advantage of the Crown by the difference between £ll,OOO and £27,000 annually. The expenditure had not increased, for the gross receipts had increased pari passu with the expenditure. He examined the different large items of expenditure, which he said were outlays bene ficial to the property. If this were private property, instead of spending the annual income, as was now the case, the owner would rather borrow money and charge the estate with an annuity for the advance; but inasmuch as the civil list and Crown lands would always be arranged on the bases on which they now stand, it was a matter of indifference whether the advances were from the revenue of the country or whether they used the Crown property, as in either case they would receive a fair interest on the outlay. He referred to the acreage of the Crown lands, part of which had been enclosed and planted with oaks, in consequence of the fears that were entertained some time since that there would be a scarcity of timber for the Royal Navy, and was now a source of profit over expenditure. He defended the expenditure of the office, and in conclusion urged that a committee of in quiry was unnecessary, and that it was undesirable to re unite the Office of Woods and Forests with the Office of Works. Full and satisfactory accounts of the departments were annually presented to Parliament. _ _ Mr. CAIRD said that, having perused Mr. Gore's report, he was of opinion that a great improvement had taken place in the improvement of the Crown estates, highly satisfac tory to the public. It was impossible to expect that the Crown lands could be as beneficially managed as private property. The motion was then negatived without a division, THE AMALGAMATION OF THE CITY AND THE METROPOLITAN POLICE. Sir G. GREY rose to ask leave to introduce a bill for the amalgamation of the City of London and the Metro politan police. The motion was by no means a new one, nor was it one which ought to be made without a great deal of consideration ; but the fact was that both commissions and committees had frequently reported on the subject, and with a remarkable unanimity of opinion; and no doubt that unanimity of opinion originated in the very limited area over which the corporation of the City of London exercised jurisdiction, when the area of that jurisdiction was put in comparison with the boundaries of the metropolis at large. And he was anxious to say, at the outset, that his present proposal was not founded mainly upon the proceedings of the 7th of March last. It was not a penal measure, directed against the City of London on account of any misconduct imputed to them upon that occasion; although the events of that day showed, undoubtedly, a great want of order, and great mismanagement, as well as a very inadequate appreciation on the part of the City authorities of the emer gency that was likely to arise. They showed, moreover, an over confidence on the part of the corporation in their own means of maintaining order, and that the conclusions of the commissions and the committees to which he had just adverted were not founded upon a merely imaginary theory. And having before him the conclusions of those commis sions and committees, he must say that if the motion of the hon. and gallant member for Westminster (Sir De L. Evans) had been brought forward, it would have been impossible for him to have dissented from it. Under those circum stances, the best course for the Government to take was to deal at once with the subject by bill, rather than await the decision of the house upon an abstract resolution. The dif ference between the corporation of the City of London and other corporations were very clearly pointed out by the com missioners of 1853, and none of the commissioners, he might remark, were men likely to disregard popular rights. At the same time it was due to the City of London that he should call attention to the opinion of the commissioners— namely, that, while they drew a comparison between the corporation of the City of London and other corporations before the passing of the Municipal Corporation Act, they thought that the great defect inherent in those other cor porations—namely of power and authority being vested ex• - elusively in a few—did not exist in the corporation of the City of London, which had been distinguished at all times by the predominance of the popular element. (Hear, hear.) For that no doubt the corporation of London was entitled to credit. Before the passing of the Municipal Corporation Act, the corporations of Liverpool, Bristol, and several other ancient corporations, were to a certain extent similarly cir cumstanced as the corporation of London, in regard of the comparatively limited area of their respective towns, over which they exercised jurisdiction. However, by the Muni cipal Corporation Act, a change was effected in their boun daries, although none was brought about in those of the City of London. Now, it appeared from returns before the Corporation Commission of 1853 that at that date the popu lation of the City of London was 125,158 ; while, by the last census, it appeared that the population had diminished to 112,063. On the other hand, the population of the sur rounding districts within the control of the metropolitan police was not less than 3,110,654; and while the area of the City was between 11 and 11 square miles, that of the surrounding districts under the metropolitan police was 700 square miles. And here he might observe that it was quite impossible that the proposals applicable to the City of Lon don could be applied with any show of reason to other cor porations. The corporation of London was once the corpo ration of the whole metropolis ; but now-a-days the area of the metropolis had far outgrown the limits of the City, so that the corporation of London was simply an anomaly. The City was not included in the Police Bill introduced by Sir Robert Peel in 1829, because it was admitted that the watchmen of the City were more efficient than the watch men outside its walls ; while, at the same time, it was de clared that the bill of 1829 was only an experiment. But the commission of 1837 having raised the question how far an amalgamation of the City and Metropolitan police was desirable, in the following year a committee of that house, which included Sir R. Peel and Mr. Hume, was appointed to investigate the subject, and the result of their delibera tions was a decided and a unanimous report in favour of amalgamation. That was in 1838, up to which time no step had been taken for the improvement of the City police ; but, after the report of the commissioners of 1838, a bill was in troduced for the establishment of the City police on the same footing as the Metropolitan. The bill for the improve-. ment of the police force had been brought in by Lord John Russell, and contained 19 special clauses for the separation of the City police; but ultimately the bill was passed with those 10 clauses struck out. On the day, however, on which the bill received the Royal assent, another bill embodying those 10 clauses had been carried. Then came the City commission of 1854. The police question was expressly re ferred to that commission, and they examined a large num ber of official and other important witnesses, amongst whom was the late able Commissioner of the City Police, Mr. Daniel Whittle Harvey. The commissioners in their report came to the conclusion that the preponderance of evidence was greatly in favour of the two forces not being kept sepa rate. These inquiries resulted in the same opinion being expressed, and the weight of authority in favour of a mea sure proposed to that house had seldom, if ever, been ex ceeded. Mr. Harvey's evidence, though given under a na tural restraint,we n t throughout to ' show the inconvenience, if not the absurdity, of th e ex i sting system. It appeared that the distinctions were so curiously made,that sometimes one side of a street would b e i n the City jurisdiction and the other side in the Metropolitan, and in one case a certain spot was in one jurisdiction at high water, and in the other at low water. Those, however, were ( but minor inconveniences. He was bound to say, that since the establishment of the City police the two bodies had worked together on a perfectly goo d un derstanding. That harmony,.howetvheer, head commissioners. been largely owing to judicious choice of h That harmony might not always prevail,selec tionseaallycoglohosdionoe might not always be made, and should I cur it would be a very serious matter. (Rear.) th e be City, the number of the men was so small, that they could not concentrated on a particular spot without leaving other points unprotected. That remark did not apply tothe Metropolitan f orce. On the 7th of March t h e City police were almost lo s t i n th e crowds of people, an d many pers ons in the City never saw a policeman the whole day. In the Metropolitan Police Act there was power to send the police into the City of London, if the Lord Mayor so requested ; but if—as on the 7th of March—no such request were made, then the Metropolitan police could not enter the City. He meant no reflection on the Lord Mayor on that account, It only went to show that a man who held office merely for a year was not so likely to understand what ought to be done on such an occasion as one of longer experience. He might be asked, "Why was that bill brought in now ?" His answer was that the natural result of the evidence was that an ami cable union of the two forces was desirable. With regard to personal communication with the City officials, he had always been entertained in the best and most courteous man ner, and he trusted the City gentlemen, when they visited him, had left with a similar impression. Still, whenever the Government had brought forward any measure calcu lated in the least degree to touch their privileges, their com bined power of resistance was something remarkable. (Hear and laughter.) It was a very singular fact that a body so wealthy and hospitable as the corporation of London should so steadily oppose a measure of improvement. There were now in the house four members of Parliament for the City, besides which there were the Lord Mayor and several aldermen and other civic functionaries who sat for other places. It was satisfactory, therefore, to know that there would be a compact body to pro tect the privileges of the citizens, (Hear, hear.) To show what sort of opposition the City had been accustomed to bring to bear, he need only refer the house to the evidence of Mr. Rogers, given before the commission he had alluded to. That gentleman stated that when Lord Melbourne in- troduced the bill of 1838, the City petitioned the house, but the Minister of the day was silent. They then addressed the Throne, but though they received a gracious answer, they knew well it meant nothing. They then planted their town clerk in Palace-yard, and instructed him to communicate and, if possible, to co-operate with every corporation in the kingdom, with a view to defeat the measure. That sort of tactics, however, might be repeated too often and persevered in too long. All he should ask of the house was whether they thought it for the safety and welfare of the metropolis that the present state of things should continue ? With one exception, the corporation had successfully resisted every attempt at reform or improvement. That exception was the rc moval of Smithfield Market, to which, nevertheless, there had been great opposition. Much as the munificence and hospitality of the City of London were to be admired. he thought the events of last March clearly showed that some change was necessary, and under those circumstances he had felt it his duty to bring in the bill. It had first occurred to him that the required object might be attained by the Secretary of State having power given him to send the police into the City; but on reflection it seemed that colli sions of authority might occur, which would be very incon venient. He therefore submitted the bill in its present form, and would not name a very early day for the second read ing, so that it might be well and carefully considered. Mr. CRAWFORD said it was a very unusual thing to oppose the introduction of a bill, especially when brought in by a member of the Government. He would be pre- pared to discuss the general principle of the bill on the motion for the second reading, when he would feel it his duty to move that it be read a second time on that day six months. Ho weuld do no more on the present occasion than express a hope that they would,have a full discussion, and he had no fear of the result. Mr. Alderman SIDNEY referred to the statement of the Home Secretary, and asked how it came to pass, if the re ports quoted by the right hon. gentleman had been hostile to the introduction of a police force for the City, that after the production of such reports the police force should be established in the City as it now existed ? That force had been established in 1839, and he thought it was the best answer which could be given to the reports brought forward by the right hon. gentleman as the groundwork of his bill. He could not help expressing great surprise that, after 24 years, the authorities of the City of London should be put on the defensive with respect to the internal gov2rnment of their city. He was desirous of knowing the grounds upon which municipal rights were to be taken from the City, and he was also desirous of putting persons upon their guard, lest they should suppose that this bill would affect the City of London only. 1 here was another great objection to the bill, and it was this, that it would entail additional expense upon the ratepayers ; for while one-fourth of the cost of the police of the metropolitan districts was paid out of the Con solidated Fund, the City paid the entire cost of its police. But under this bill the whole cost of the police would be thrown upon the ratepayers. (Hear, hear.) Muck stress was laid upon the statement that the population of the City was only 112,000; but it was altogether a mistake to estimate the population of the City by the number of persons who slept in it. There was every reason to believe that half a million of people did business in the City daily; but in whatever way they estimated the population, the fact remained that the property of the City of London was threefold greater than the property of any district of the metropolis of the same extent. The hon. gentleman next adverted to several Royal and civic processions which had taken place in ancient times in the City of London, and charged the Home Secretary with the whole blame of the unfortunate occurrence of the 7th of May for not permitting the Lord Mayor and his brethren to form in the Borough, and pre cede the Roy al procession the entire way. The right hon. gentleman the Home Secretary had referred to the demon stration in the City; but he (Mr. Alderman Sidney) could not help thinking the present bill was an unworthy return for that demonstration. (Hear.) The streets of London were peculiarly inappropriate for illuminations, yet millions of people paraded them that night. It was to be regretted that several deaths occurred through some panic; and Govern ment were much to blame in allowing the illuminations. The Metropolitan Police were unable to carry out their in structions ; and why, he asked, had no inquiry taken place into their conduct. (Hear.) A more lamentable failure of the carrying out of the regulations adopted by the Metropolitan Commissioner of Police had never occurred than on that night. That no lives were lost was a perfect miracle ; and that miracle arose from the fact that the carriages could not move in the streets. (Loud laughter.) If the right hon. gentleman were successful in carrying this measure, its pro visions must be extended to all large municipal towns, which would be inconsistent with the principle of local self government. The bill was mischievous and uncalled for, and contrary to the constitution of the country. (Hear.) The LORD MAYOR said a more unconstitutional pro.- position had never been brought forward. A police was essentially a local force, and he fearlessly asserted that the City police were in every respect very superior to the Me tropolitan force. Robberies accompanied with violence in the daytime were of frequent occurrence in the me tropolitan districts, but it was not the case in the City. Indeed, if they were to occur with any frequency within the City, the head of the police force would speedily be dis missed, and replaced by a more efficient and competent person. Ihe City police were in a most efficient state. A record was kept by them of every person who passed through the City daily—(hear, hear, and laughter)—and there was scarcely a thief that was not known to them and his haunts well ascertained. He instanced the captures of notorious commercial criminals, that had of late years been apprehended in the city and brought to justice, and had received their due amount of punishment. He urged that if the question of precedence in the Royal procession had been ceded to the corporation nothing would have occurred to mar the successful termination of the day's pro. ceedings. He considered it was ungrateful on the part of the Government that, after the corporation of London had expended a large sum of money, and given that which no other city in the world could give, their local self-govern ment should be attacked. (Hear,) The proposal, if carried, would he the adoption of the foreign police system, and would be the means of placing a force of 10,000 armed men at the disposal of the Home Secretary, He would resist the proposed measure throughout its stages. (Hear.) Mr. NORRIS opposed the motion for the introduction of the bill. The hon. member laid before the house certain statistical information which he alleged had an important bearing upon the subject. The average cost of the city po lice was £79 ls. 7d. per man, while that of the Metropolitan police was £7B 3s. 2d., the cost of the county constabulary being £7B 10s. ; so that the difference of cost between the City and the Metropolitan police, as to which so much had been heard, was under 19s. per man. And then, although the resident population of the City might only amount to 112,000, it was a fact that nearly 1,000,000 of people retired from the City each evening to sleep in the country, who left property behind them to an enormous amount in charge of the City police. Sir G. BOWYER, as an independent member, was de termined to offer the bill every opposition ; indeed, he could have wished that it was consistent with etiquette to reject so obnoxious a proposal even at that early stage. With re gard to the inconveniences at the late procession, he be lieved they were chiefly owing to her Majesty's Govern ment, in having confined the chief portion of the proces si9n to the City itself. This caused everybody to crowd to that part of the town. Had it been properly distributed be tween the Bricklayer's Arms and the Great Western Rail way Station, there would have been comparatively no pres sure at any point. Instead of that, however, owing to the restrictions imposed by the Government, the procession be yond Temple Bar consisted of nothing but six carriages and a few soldiers. (Hear.) He would ask the house, and even the Government themselves, whether a large portion of the blame did not belong to the Government for all that had recently occurred, and afterwards he would ask whether that was a good reason for their bringing forward a bill of pains and penalties like the present, which he should most certainly oppose. The bill, too, was extremely ill timed, after the City of London had recently done all they could to show their loyalty and love for the Pr incess and the Prince of Wales, both by munificent presents and by the grand reception prepared for them. Lord A. PAGET thought that up to that time the City of London had certainly had the best of it, and ho should be sorry to interrupt the harmony; but he must say, he did not think the bill had been brought forward in consequence of what had occurred on the memorable 7th of March. He should much regret that anything which had occurred b uo e o c vyea gratifyingu , n e o that d ay s h ould lead to the House of Commons b e i ng l made th e b attle -field of a contest with the corporation, magnificent. He was quite certain that it had been very r i ow n c a e cocs a oe n i n d lpo an P ug r i e i n adn e e dt s h s ue mn o s f ,ual W lni ed a d l e t ro s e , onu t o r hb t a he l d u personagesentdeo hutehbretewplf,h the whose then given had been most doubtless more than all called forth that splendid reception. (Hear.) It was not for him to be the exponent of her Ma jesty's feelings, but he was proud to say he hal served her for 20 of the best years of his life, arri he knew that no one could appreciate bettor than her Majesty the univer sal sympathy that had been shown to her, and the loyalty p r v H i l e e a g r e , s h o e f a r t . h ) e C H i t e y s . h o T u h l d e i b r e h s o o s r p rr t a t l o i i y n h t eard foefrheewr i p t e h o t p h l e e . become famous throughout the world. He had himself very often experienced it, and he hoped that nothing he o u ( L f n a d the u e g r l se d uhrei not ty, be done any might say would prevent him from en j o y in g it again. that to tbhee placed police h omn t e ee r t . 8r ) uo pp oe S lr o iisn c ot e o u tiv dh i e n tn, c ef e eo d ,r: , t h h t haoetw,peiufvbei public , cc w osu a e other way, he would prefer to see it all handed over to the City than under two different heads. He found from the blue book furnished by the City that out of 608 police, the entire force, there were only 372 men left to keep the whole distance from London Bridge to Temple-bar. And, as he said on a former occasion, the non-occurrence of a serious accident was due more to the good humour of the people than the good management of the City. The hon member for Stafford (Mr. Alderman Sidney) had threatened them all with the terrors of the next election if they voted for this bill. It was said by some members of the corporation at re- THE SUN, LON9ON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, APRIL 22, 1863, cent meetings that the Home Secretary would be made to pay a heavy T ensity for having introduced the bill, and that it would be better for tho fame of an hon. and gallant mem ber if he had died thirty years ago. (Laughter.) He could only say for himself that he was not intimidated by the threats of the hon. member for Stafford at the next election, even though he should bring his men in armo it with him. Mr. BOVILL said the sentiments expressed by the noble lord presented a strong contrast to the course pursued by her Majesty's Government; for if ever there was a time when generosity should be shown to the City of London, it was the present. The bill would be met with the strongest resistance, and he only hoped the right hon. baronet would act upon the suggi stion he had thrown out that he would not propose the second reading for a long time, and that he would save save the hon. member for the City the necessity of moving that the bill be read a second time that day six months by postponing the second reading for six months. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) There were many persons who did not approve of having the Metro politan police under the authority of a Minister of the Crown; and the right hon. gentleman who introduced this measure was unable to state one ordinary instance in which the City police had failed in their duty. The 7th of March was an exceptional occasion, and it was not just in the Government, who were largely responsible for the ar rangements which took place, to fix the whole blame upon the corporation. The best prpof that the bill was not de sired by the people of the metropolis was that not a single petition in its favour was presented. (Hear, hear.) If this bat passed into a law, there were nothing to prevent the Home Secretary from coming down next session with a bill for appointing paid magistrates, and superseding the Lord Mayor and aldermen. The hon. and learned gentlemen en tered at some length into a variety of arguments to prove the efficiency of the City police; the confidence that is re posed in them by the owners of immense property ; the great tact and ingenuity exhibited by them in pursuing fraudulent bankrupts and in apprehending runaway debtors, and con cluded by saying he would reserve further opposition until a future stage. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HIBBERT oppposed the bill as being another at tempt at centralisation. He thought it would be better if some arrangement were made, giving the Secretary of State power, without the requisition of the Lord Mayor, to send metropolitan police into the City in cases of emergency. Mr. AYRTON said he felt sure the house had not failed to observe the wide difference there was between the corpo ration of London and the City. They were two things, I,er fectly distinct from one another. The hon. member for the City of London had expressed an opinion on the question diferent from that expressed by members of the corporation who did not represent the City, and that, he said, was a re markable index of the true character of the question, which he should be able more fully to explain when the question had to be further debated. He felt certain that when it came on for more serious discussion practical considera tions would prevail over that array of the reminiscences of the past in which the corporation had indulged. (Hear.) He was a strenuous supporter of local self-government and greatly opposed to centralisation ; and if he thought that this bill contemplated the semblance of an invasion of that principle, he would have opposed it at that stage. (Hear, hear.) After due consideration and deliberation he had come to the conclusion that his views with reference to a general administration of the affairs of the metropolis by one bocy were wrong and impracticable; but he believed it was desirable and expedient that there should be but one police administration. He criticised and condemned the conduct of the corporationon questions of great importance, and said that the proposed alteration was essentially of a local character, and had nothing in common with other cor porations, districts, and police jurisdictions—(hear) —and the only way in which he could account for the course pur sued by the City in reference to this bill was that they could practise on small corporate towns delusions which had no foundation in fact. (Hear, hear.) The more the question b was a p d p i s r c e u e isasteedd, by h y e t m h e o r i e n h h e a b t a a n s t s s u r o e t i t t s h r e e m a l et m r o e p r o i t l s i s () a n a l d d that they would fully understand that whatever police force was good enough for them was good enough for those who live in the City of London, (Hear, hear.) The corporation of London would be acting more in accordance with their charter, and in support of the liberty of the subject, if they ceased their objections to these useful and necessary alters.. tions, and assisted hon. members to carry them into effect. Sir H. STRACEY considered that the Home Secretary was the person who was really responsible for the state of the City on the 7th March. The proposed change, he con sidered, would place too much power in the hands of the Commissioner of Police, and make a kind of Fouche of him. (Hear, hear.) He objected to the proposed interference with the rights and privileges of the corporation, and he should oppose the bill. Mr. Sergeant PIGOTT differed from the opinion that this bill would at all interfere with the local self-government of corporations. It was a bill to place under one manage ment the police of one town. (Hear, hear.) Sir H. BRUCE said it was a most inopportune moment for bringing in this bill. He could not see how the house could pass such a measure without a most unpleasant feel ing springing up between the City and the Royal family. Sir J. SHELLEY would have much more confidence in the devotion of the corporation of the City of London to the principle of local self-government if, upon past occasions when opportunity offered for the principle being extended to other divisions of the metropolis, the corporation had come forward to advocate such extension—but they had never done anything of the kind. As soon as their own privileges were secured, they were silent with respect to those of others. (Hear.) Putting aside the question of patronage—and every one knew that it lay at the bottom of the whole controversy—no one would be found contend ing that, as far as the inefficiency of the police was con cerned, that efficiency could not be much promoted by a union of the two forces under one head, What they ought to have was one great municipality for the whole of Lon don ; and then, of course, there would follow, as the natural consequences, one police for the metropolis at large. (Hear, .hear.) Sir G. GREY, in reply, declared that no one could be more sensible than he was of the exceeding loyalty of the demonstration made by the City of London, on the occa sion of the entry of the Prince and Princess of Wales. It had been his gratifying duty to express to the Lord Mayor, on the part of her Majesty, the deep sense which her Ma jesty e n t er t a i ne d o f th e loyalty displayed on th e occas i on . But one could not help seeing that, out of respect for such conduct on the part of the corporation, the Govern• meat ought not to be debarred from the introduction of a measure which was demanded by public convenience. He had not stated that this bill was proposed without any me nbauyot must tet the oae b wyd n d e et sn: decorations rt aetrt proposed oelnilikely oeolry mainly or exc l us i ve ly in consequenc e o f those events. -f reference to the events of March 7th. What he had said was that it had eer]: p A t oonrbdaet attractedo i n r h ou r g e g h a t r it d no tthooattvhheeo known s c e te City, , en at t s eh , aw h t lO a l id lld t London -b r b e f r o l d r e g e p r a e n e d a u e t l i s o e n w a r h y e r a measures e s b y the ought civic t o have procession,been taken beforehand to guard against such occurrences as actually took place. Indeed, he might remind the Lord Mayor that, from the beginning to the end of the commu nications between them, it was clearly understood that her Mejesty's sanction was also given to the proposed arrange ments on the condition that the most effectual means should be taken by the City authorities for the preservation of order. Assurances were given that such means would be taken, but he was sorry to say that they were not fulfilled. What he found fault with was that there was no directing head, no controlling authority, to supervise the arrange ments in the City on that great occasion, and to produce unity and harmony of action. There were no doubt great crowds in the City; but, as every one knew, there were great crowds along the whole line of the procession, to the westward of Temple-bar, and yet there the most complete order was kept, owing to the admirable arrangements of Sir Richard Mayne. He felt confident if the City police had likewise been under the control of Sir Richard Mayne, that equal order would have been kept to the eastward of Temple-bar. (Hear, hear.) Leave was then given to introduce the bill. LAND DRAINAGE. Mr. BRUCE obtained leave to introduce a bill to con firm certain provisional orders under the Land Drainage Act (1861). LOCAL GOVERNMENT. Mr. BRUCE also obtained leave to introduce a bill to confirm certain provisional orders under the Local Govern ment Act (1858), POOR REMOVAL (IRELAND). Sir 11. BRUCE obtained leave to introduce a bill on the subject of the removal of destitute persons from England and Scotland to Ireland. The three last. mentioned bills were introduced and read a first time. The house then adjourned at a quarter to 11 o'clock. THE PRISON MINISTERS BILL.--The division list shows a curious mixture of parties. Amongst those who voted for the measure were the following Conser vatives :—Mr. Crawahay Bailey, Mr. Beecroft, Mr. Bram ston, Mr. Baillie:Cochrane, Mr. Disraeli, Colonel Dunne, the Hon. A. Egerton, Sir James Fergusson, Sir J. Hay, Mr. Heygate, Mr. Hubbard, Mr. F. Knight, Lord H. Lennox, Mr. H. Liddell, Mr. Longfield, Mr. Lygon, Mr. Main waring, Lord John Manners, Mr. Morritt, Sir S. Nor hcote, Sir J. Pakington, Colonel Patten, Mr. Potts, Mr. Stirling, and Sir H. Willoughby. On the other hand, several well known Liberal members voted against the bill, including Mr. Angerstein, Mr. Butler, Mr. Caird, Mr. E. Crawfurd, Viscount Enfield, Mr. IV, Ewart, Mr. Ewing, Mr. Hanbury, the Hon. A. Kinnaird, Mr. Langton, Mr. 1... ? 3, Mr. W. Martin, Mr. W. Mi ler, Mr. Onslow, Sergeant Pigo't, Sir J. Shelley, Colonel Sykes, Mr. Tite, Mr. James White, Mr, W. Williams, M r . Wyld, &c. While sturdy Nonconformists like Mr. Edward Baines and Mr. Hadfield voted for the measure, equally active members of the dis senting body, like Mr. J. R. Mills and Sir Morton Peto, voted against it. As a rule, Scotch members were in the Opposition. Mr. Ellice, sen., who represents Coventry, voted for the bill; but Mr. Ellice, jun., who represents St. Andrew's, voted against it. Mr. J. C. Ewart, who repre sents Liverpool, was amongst the "Ayes," while Mr. William Ewart, who sits for Dumfries, was on the other side. Mr. Whiteside's name does not appear in the divi sion list, and only a very few members of the Irish Conser vative party followed Mr. Disraeli. HEALTH OF LONDON. (Front the Registrar-General's Weekly Return) The deaths in London in the week that ended on Saturday were 1,437. This number shows a decrease on that of the previous week, which was 1,610, but is still unusually high for the middle of April. The average number of deaths obtained from the re turns of a week in each of the last ten years cor responding with last week, and corrected for an increasing population, is 1,283. The excess in the present return therefore amounts to 154. The deaths of old people were clearly less nu merous last week than those contained in many previous returns. In the last week of February the total deaths were 1,440, an amount which is almost the same as that which is now returned, while the proportions at different, ages vary in a considerable degree. The deaths under 20 years of age have risen from 712 in that week to 766 in last week, and those at 60 years and upwards have decreased from 313 to 222. The complaints which chiefly attack children appear to prevail more. Small-pox was fatal in 42 cases in the last week of Feb., but in the present return the number is 62; measles has increased from 36 to 56; scarlatina from 68 to 86; whooping-cough from 54 to 71. The deaths from typhus were 67 last week. Eighteen of the 62 cases of small-pox occurred at 20 years of age, and upwards. This disease caused 5 deaths in the sub-district of St. John, Westminster, and 5 in Poplar. Measles was re turned in 5 cases in the sub-district or St. James, Bermoadsey, 4 in St. Peter, Walworth, and 8 in Chelsea. Scarlatina numbered ten deaths in Isling ton, 4 in Limehouse, 6 in St. Peter, Walworth. A domestic servant (female), aged 29 years, died at 64, Star-street, Paddington, from " chloroform administered for an operation." (Inquest.) The widow of a bricklayer, aged 78 yea*s, was found dead on the 10th inst. at 47, Little George-street, Somers-, town, from " exhaustion from want of the common necessaries of life." (Inquest.) An apprentice sea man, aged 16 years, died without medical attend ance from " sea sickness and nervous fever." Of six nonagenaripn widows whose deaths are neon - led, two had attained the ages respectively of 95 and 96 years. Last week the births of 1,052 boys and 1,028 girls, in all 2,080 children, were registered in Lon don. In the ten corresponding weeks of the years 1853-62 the average number (corrected) is 1,977. At the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, the mean height of the barometer in the week was 29.877 in. The reading was 29.74 in. on Sunday, and rose to 30.13 in. on Saturday. The mean temperature of the air in the week was 50.6 deg., which is 4.9 deg. above the average of the same week in 43 years (as determined by Mr Glaisher). The mean daily temperature was above the average through out the week. Tile lowest night temperature was 36.8 deg., which occurred on Tuesday and Wednes day. The highest day temperature was 67.7 deg., on Thursday. The difference between the mean dewpoint temperature and air temperature was 5.8 deg. The mean degree of humidity of the air was 81, complete saturation being represented by 100. The wind blew generally from the north-east. The amount of rain was only 0.02 in. The mean of the highest temperatures of the Thames was 54.3 deg.; the mean of the lowest 52.3 deg. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. DAILY NEWS.—The bill for amalgamating the City Police with the Metropolitan Police, intro duced by the Home Secretary last night, was not formally opposed in its first stage. This would have been a most unusual course, and one whieh, in the case of a Government measure, could rarely be justified. When the Government undertakes to bring in a bill for a special object, it must be sup posed to act, not only deliberately, but on public grounds and for strong reasons, and it is perfectly right that these should be fully stated and dis cussed. It was hardly to be expected, however, that a measure which has produced such intense local excitement would be allowed to pass even its introductory stage without provoking some hostile demonstration of a more or less formidable kind. In anticipitation of this Sir George Grey felt it ne cessary to offer a rather elaborate explanation and defence of the motives which had induced the Go vernment to bring in the measure. Without assuming, which would probably be unfair, that the Home Secretary's speech exhausts the Government case on behalf of the bill, we must say that even as a preliminary justification of so important and sweeping a measure, it was singularly weak and inconclusive. In defence of the proposed amalga mation the right hon. gentleman appealed almost exclusively to authority, quoting the reports of various commissions and committees of inquiry that have at different intervals investigated the subject during the last thirty years. Apart, however, from the special reasons on which those reports rested, such quotations are of little value, and from altered circumstances many of the reasons which had some force thirty years ago have none at all now. But if mere authority is to decide the question, or even to be appealed to as one of the elements of a decision, the weight of authority in favour of local government as opposed to centralisation is overwhelmingly deci sive. While the centralised system of the Metropoli tan force is at most barely 30 years old, the system of municipal government which prevails in the City is as old as the Constitution, as widely diffused as the Empire, and has always been regarded with justice as one of the strongest safeguards of our national rights and liberties. It rests on the intelligible principle that the citizens whose lives and property are to be protected having the most direct interest in securing the efficiency and economy of the means employed for this purpose, are the national guardians and governors of local defence, and ought to have the exclusive control of the municipal police. This principle has worked well for a thousand years, and is working at this hour with undiminished efficiency in every town and city of the kingdom. It is, in fact, the rule of our national police, the Metropoli tan or centralised system being the anomaly and exception, only to be justified, or even tolerated, for special reasons and under peculiar circumstances. Apart from the appeal to authority the only argu ment urged by Sir G. Grey in support of the bill is the limited area of the City, and therefore of the municipal jurisdiction compared with that of other cities and corporations. The right hon. gentleman pointed out, what is no doubt perfectly true, that the Municipal Reform Act, while enlarging the municipal authority in other cities and boroughs of the kingdom, which had outgrown their ancient limits, and thus including the new districts with the old under one local government, had left the ancient boundaries and the local government of the City of London untouched. This exceptional posi tion of the City in relation to the adjacent and out lying districts of the metropolis is, no doubt, true as a fact, though, as Alderman Sidney reminded the house last night, the case of the City was in this respect haidiy quite so unique as the advocates of amalgamation represent it to be. The City of Manchester, for example, partially surr oun d s the borough of Salford, the dividing line run ning through a densely populated district, yet each has its own police force, under the control of a separate local government, and the plan of a divided authority over a force locally continuous works without confusion or complaint of any kind, The city of Manchester has never at tempted, in virtue of its larger area, to usurp autho rity over the adjacent borough, and any such attempt would, it may safely assumed, be promptly and effectually resisted. But even allow ing the exceptional character of the city in this respect to the fullest extent, it is difficult to see how the fact of a limited central area can be used as an argument in favour of the proposed amalgamation. At first sight, indeed, it would probably appear in the eyes of most unbiassed judges to tell the other way. If throughout the enormous extent of the metropolis the system of local self-government in the matter of police is represented in the limited area of the City alone, this would seem to be a powerful argument in favour of maintaining it in full vigour and efficiency. But how the comparative smallness of area to which a system admirable both in itself and in its results happens to be restricted, should be urged as a reason for its destruction, we do not understand. Had Sir George Grey attempted to show that the system was necessarily inefficient, that it fated to provide the security for life and property for which it was established, or was inborn patible with the fu 1 enjoyment of this security in the adjacent districts, his reasoning would have been intelligible. But he brought no charge of general inefficiency against the City Police. On the con trary, the Home Secretary's historical review of the legislation and inquiries of the last thirty years told rather in favour of the efficiency of the City Police. When gir R. Peel brought in his measure in 1829, the City of London was excepted from its provisions expressly because its system of local defence was so grealty superior in efficiency to that prevailing in the adjacent City of Westminster. The system in both at the time was that of the- old watch. Under the new system, however, the Metropolitan force soon became superior to the old City watch, and on this ground, ten years later, Lord John Russell pro posed to extend the new system to the City. The City, however, successfully resisted the , proposal, and at the same time wisely reformed its system of defence by substituting a highly efficient police force for the old watch. That system has worked so well that for upwards of t wenty•yeare, until I,,st night in deed, no attempt at amalgamation has been subse quently made. Now ii a system of government ad mitted on all hands to be admirable in itself, and prow d by a quarter of a century's experience to be efficient in practice, is to be suddenly assailed, and if possible destroyed, there ought at least to be some strong reasons for suet) , a summary proceeding. We fail to discover any such reasons in Sir George Grey's statement. The plea of economy recently urged in some quarters he vel‘y justly dismissed in a sentence as not only trivial but irrelevant. The cost of the City police is the affair of the citizens, and if they do not complain, if, on the contrary, they are perfectly satisfied, it is idle for others to urge that there is any grievance on this score. After all, the only ground for the introduction of the bill to be gathered from Sir George Grey's speech, is the partial failure of the City police arrangements on the night of the illuminations. It is quite true that Sir George verbally disclaimed being influenced by this motive, but it is, nevertheless, the only practi cal reason urged in support of the bill the Govern ment have introduced. We must say it appears to us as unjust as it is ungenerous that any attempt should be made to take advantage of the feeling which the accidents in the City naturally produced. The failure of the arrangements made by the Metro politan police on that night was even more conspi cuous, though fortunately not attended with any fatal result. It ought to be remembered moreover that, only a few months ago, during the garroting panic, the authorities who now rashly condemn the City police, as rashly denounced the Metropolitan force as utterly inefficient, and for all practical pur poses worthless. Temporary failure of this sort, even if it can be proved, is no valid argument whatever in favour of organic change. POST.—In the strict sense of the word it would be incorrect to speak of the intelligence which so frequently reaches us from the other side of the Atlantic as being American news. The American nation appear to consider that a state of war is the normal condition of a prosperous and independent • people, and that the industrial powers of the population and resources of the country are best developed by a state of things which affords the most extensive field to speculative contractors. Armies are levied, equipped, clothed, fed, and trans ported to distant regions with apparently no other object than that of filling the pockets of the various classes whose energies are called into operation in order to effect those several operations ; for, when once those armies have reached their destination, they appear to be entirely forgotten. It must seem scarcely credible to any in this country who has taken the trouble during the past four months of glancing at the American news, that, in the course of that period, the Federal Government have had simultaneously sent into four or five different regions of the Southern States armies each of which was as great as that with which we invaded the Crimea. For information respecting the condition, the opera tions, or the fate of those armies the curious in quirer would search the files of American journals in vain. Not more than 60 miles from the Federal capital is an immense army which at various times has been known by the name of the river or the place in the vicinity of which for time being it hap pened to be. At its creation, and when, like a thunder-cloud, it was expected to sweep over the South, spreading universal devastation,it was known by the high-sounding title of the " Grand Army of the North." Subsequently, when the sphere of its operations became more accurately defined, it was called the " Army of Virginia," and at one period, when the fortune of war compelled it to re trace its steps, it became the "Army of Maryland." Since the disastrous defeat of Fredericksburg it has been known as the "Army of the Rappahannock," and with that title it appears determined to remain satisfied. At recurrent intervals, when questions are asked in New York respecting the operations of the army, a sop is thrown to the public impatience in the shape of an announcement that a forward movement is in contemplation, or perhaps a few divisions tra verse the intervening distance between their canton ments,Acquia Creek and the banks of the Rappahan nock, and then march back again ; or reconnaissances are pushed up and down the river, and the Govern ment at Washington is gladdened with the intelli gence that several nests of rebel smugglers have been discovered and their occupants dispersed. In the meanwhile, however, the army continues to be the " Army of the Rappahannock," and the contractors of New York grow rich upon its wants. The rebels are daily growing weaker, and must shortly be starved out, whilst the population of the North are by the very same process becoming more and more wealthy and prosperous, Why then should not the war continue ? Why should not armies continue to be fed and equipped at the public expense until every citizen of the North has accumulated an im mense fortune in Mr. Chase's greenbacks. What may be said of the army of the Rappahannock may equally be said of those in the West and South-west. We have the expeditions of the Yazoo, of Vicksburg, of the Gulf of Charleston, independently of a few minor ones which have not yet earned distinctive names; but what any of them are doing remains the profoundest of secrets. The bombardment of Charleston, so long threatened, is week after week regularly announced as having commenced. By the last mail we learn that considerhble excitement had been occasioned by reports that the Federal troops had landed in the vicinity of Charleston and driven in the Confederate pickets. These reports, how ever, as usual, turned out to be unfounded. Every contrivance which strategy could suggest for re ducing Vicksburg seems in turn to have been tried and abandoned. A canal was cut which was to have diverted the course of the Mississippi, but the river only entered it to make it impassable with mud and rubbish. We now hear that " all the Federal expeditions intended to reach the rear of Vicksburg by way of Sunflower River and the Yazoo Pass have been abandoned." In Tennessee the military situation is said to be what it has long been, " unchanged." Whilst, however, the position of affairs in the field continues every where unaltered, the report of the committee appointed to inquire into M'Clellan's conduct whilst commanding the army of Virginia has been published, and his inactivity when in that post severely censured. We never entertained a very high opinion of M'Clellan's qualities as a general, but he certainly did infinitely more than his succes sors. The ch ec k w hi ch he gave the Confederates at Antietam, with an army hastily collected out of the debris of Pope's " Grand Army," had the effect of arresting the invasion of the Northern States, and very probably saved Washington. Admitting the incapacity of M'Clellan to direct the movements of immense masses of troops, still a report censuring him appears particularly ill-timed at a period when inexplicable inactivity reigns everywhere. Why new committees are not appointed to inquire into the conduct of the present chiefs of the Federal armies can only be accounted for on the supposition that the Northern Government and the Northern public have become reconciled to a state of passive warfare. It must speedily suggest itself to neutral States to consider hew long they can acquiesce silently in a course which entails upon them the heaviest losses without any corresponding advan tage. The Polish insurrection has for a time diverted the attention of England and France, and more espe cially of the latter country, from America ; but in the event of the disturbances in Central Europe be coming more serious than they at present are, the " American question" could not continue to be re garded with the same placid indifference as hereto fore. The Government at Washington have heard of the defeat and flight of Langiewicz, and have shared the mistake into which some in this country fell, in supposing the insurrection was at an end. This they regretted, on account of the supposed freedom it would give to the European Powers to intermeddle in American affairs. A very little re flection, however, might have satisfied them that European complications which might necessEute the active intervention of England and France would equally strain to the utmost the resources of tho se countries. Suppose, for instance, that the Poli s h difficulty gave rise to a European war, neither France nor England would willingly engage in hostilities with an important branch of their com merce crippled. A simultaneous war both with America and with Russia would not of course be contemplated by France and England ; but the inte rest of the latter countries in bringing the Ameri can war to a close would be redoubled, and the earliest opportunity made available for effecting that object. The distress of the cotton manufac turing oistricts both of England and France is steadily increasing, and the Government of the latter country have afforded unmistakable evidences of late that their patience is well nigh exhausted. If the belligerents were making any progress either one way or the other, or if the faintest prospect were held out of the termination of the war at any definite period, we might become reconciled to our sufferings, and make provisions for those which we might still be called upon to undergo. It is, how ever, the want of any basis for calculation, and the conviction that the population of the Northern States are drifting into a state of "chronic whr," which may continue for an indefinite period, that excites our apprehensions. We take no pleasure in reading accounts of engagements in which the slain are counted by thousands ; but still it is only by a series of such engagements that war can be effectu ally carried out. For months past the North has done nothing besides keeping the South, both by land and sea, in a state of blockade. Such a course, if persisted in, can never reduce the Confederates to submission, whilA it must entail ruin upon the Northern States and heavy losses upon the neutral Powers of Europe. INVENTION OF THE SEWING NibHINE. BY ELIAS lO\VE, OF MASSACIIUSZTTS. In the year 1841, Elias Howe, fl native of Cam bridge Port, Massachusel ts, first conceived the idea of constructing a really practical sewing machine. A young mechanic, only 22 years of age, hardly capable of supporting himself and those most dear to him on his scant earnings, be laboured manfully, in a little garret in his native town, at his self imposed task, during the few hours that were spared to Lim after the ordinary labours of the day were ended. He became enthusiastic, and although, as he says, he could not devote his attention to the subject during his working hours, he thought upon it when he could, both day and night. It grew upon him till he felt im pelled to yield his whole time to it, and being pro mised assistance by a friend, he devoted himself exclusively to the construction and practical com pletion of his machine. The result was that in 1845 lie perfected his first sewing machine, and, in order to test its practical success, he sewed with it all the principal seams in two suits of clothes. On the 10th of September, 1846, he obtained his patent. In Howe's original machine a curved needle, attached to tie end of a vibrating lever, was combined with a reciprocating shuttle, for producing the lock stitch. The needle had an eye near its point, and a groove formed along the upper and under sides, to allow of the thread lying therein and so passing more easily through the cloth. The cloth was attached to pins on the edge of a thin steel rib, called a" baster plate," from the fact of its serving the purpose of a basting thread in holding the two thicknesses of material together whilst being sti.ched. This plate formed a portion of the feed mechanism for propelling the cloth; it was carried along step by step by the teeth of a small pinion which geared into holes made in the baster plate, an intermittent rotatory motion being imparted to the pinion by self-acting mechanism working in concert with the needle and shuttle. This feed motion was found to he defective in many respects, and has since been entirely abolished in all sewing machines. The cloth was held in a vertical position against the side of the shuttle race by a spring presser-plate at the part where the needle entered. The shuttle was driven to and fro in its race or groove by two strikers, carried on the ends of vibrating arms, worked alternately by cams. The most important fea tures embodied in this machine were the adaptation of suitable contrivances for imparting the requisite amount of tension to the needle and shuttle-threads, for taking up the slack formed on the needle thread when the needle enters the cloth, for tightening and drawing up the stitch, and for supporting the cloth against the thrust and with drawal of the needle. Shortly after obtaining his patent in America, Howe sent over a machine to this country, and disposed of his invention to Mr. William Thomas for a trifling amount. On the Ist of December, 1846, Mr. Thomas ob tained a patent for the machine in England, soon after which Howe himself arrived here to assist him in adapting the machine to the peculiar kind of work required, namely, stay making. Howe does not appear to have prospered here, for in the spring of 1849, indebted to a friend for a steerage passage home, he returned to America, poorer if possible than when he left. He found his wife on a bed of sickness and in a state of utter destitution. Ten days after his arrival she died. During his absence in England his patent had been extensively in fringed, and in 1850 he commenced legal proceed ings, and succeeded in every case in establishing the validity of his patent. In the course of these proceedings a prior claim to the in ention of the sewing machine was set uP by Walter Hunt, who was said to have constructed, exhibited, and sold, in 1834 and 1835, shuttle or lock-stich sewing machines, similar in all essential particulars to Howe's. That Hunt had tried his hand at a lock.stitch sewing machine, and was the inventor of the shuttle or lock-stitch, there is no doubt, but it was never satisfactorily proved that such machines were so far perfected as to render them more than abortive experiments. The turning point in Howe's career had now arrived, and for tune soon began to smile upon him. In 1853 be granted his first licence, and in 1855 was enabled to regain possession of the whole of his patent, which at one period he had entirely disposed of, in order to meet the pressing demands that were made upon him. His patent rights being finally acknowledged , and his patent prolonged for a term of seven years, he now receives a royalty upon every sewing machine manufactured in the United States, pro ducing an income of upwards of £50,000 per annum.—Social Science Review. COUNTRY MARKETS. ,►• LE E D S-TUESDAY. ----- The supply of English wheat only moderate, but s fair show of foreign sorts. The fine weather and a slow flour trade caused dulness. The sales were few, and prices were scarcely equal to last week. Other articles were unchallge u in value. MARKET HARBORZUGH—TUESDAY. White wheat, 47s to 52s ; red, 438 to 46s per 36 stone• Malting barley at 35s to 37s per qr. ; grinding, 28s to 3 0 ! per 30 sty Oats, old, 26s to 28s; new, 20s to 24s per 2' st. ; beans, 39s to 438 per qr. SHEFFIELD —TUESDA Y. Red wheat, per load of 3 imperial bushels...l7s Od to 18s Ocl, White / 7 7 ...20s Od to 21$ o‘,l. New red , , .15s Od to 16s O d New white ~ » ...18s Od to 19s 0 5 Beans 77 77 ... 16s 6d to 19$ Peas, per qr 45s Od to 50s Oa 0 1 Grinding b ar l ey , per qr 28s Od to 30s 0, Malting ditto, „ 36s Od to 40s Oa Oats ~ 282 Od to 27s Flour, is 7d to 2s 2d per stone. LIVERPOOL —TUESDAY. At our market to-day there was a fair business, with tolerable attendance of the town and country trade, a 1 wheat was in fair req ues t a t Friday's price s . Al so a fal.'., business doing in flour, and full prices for America For oats and oatmeal the demand was better, at late priceS• Indian corn firm, at 3d per qr advance on last week. Ba t t ; • ley and peas in favour of buyers. Egyptian beans ye n ' firm. MELTON MOWBRAY —TUESDAY. The following were the currencies :—New white wheat! 50s Od to 54s Od ; new red, 458 Od to 48s per 36 son!! beans, 44s to 45s for old ; new sorts, 38s to 41s per 38 It; barley, 35s to 39 s for malting, and 27s to 30s per qr. for grinding; oats, 20s to 28s Od per 24 stone. [ADVERTISEMENT.] Holloway's Ointment. Youth: l4 Friends. —This excellent Ointment is so innocent in 11° nature, so cooling in its properties, and so healing in std action, that it is i nva l ua bl e i n s ki n di seases , scald beau_.' tetter, tooth rash ch a fi ngs , an d th e many varieties of roily' and eruptions well known and deeply dreaded in the nu rsert Trivial maladies may by it be met and conquered at thei r outset, and all future mischief overcome before it ha d gained hold upon the constitution and endangered futur e health. Full dire c ti ons are wrapped round each pot , Ointment. Holloway's 'Unguent may be applied with the best results in many diseases in which the sufferer silently submits because the task of investigating them would 1)o both difficult and delicate. Births. BONHAM-CARTER.—On the 20th inst.. at 29, Upper Sel: mour-street, Portman-square, the wife of Henry Bonham Carter, Esq., of a son. COLEORNE.—On the 20th inst., atValetta House,Torque' the Hon. Mrs. Colborne, of a son, PAULL.—On the 19th inst., at 33, Devonshire-place, t he wife of Henry Paull, Esq., M.P., of a son. T UITE —On tee 17th inst., at Woolwich, the wife of Mit.P r ' Gen. Tuite, R.A., of a son. Marriages. CAPPER—SMITPIETT.—O n the 21st inst at St. Jale c tit Piccadilly, Thom as Capper, Esq., to He nr i e tta Burr second daughter of Sir Luke Smithett, of Dover. Ao . e , SCHAW—WEYMOUTH.—O n th e 16 t h i nst., at Kingsbrini) Devon, H enr y S c h aw, Captain Royal Engineet;;tbt Louisa Mary, thi r d d aug h ter of the late IsaaollreVm" n Esq., solicitor, Kingsbridge. Deaths. jowl ANSELL.—On the 19th i ns t ., at Hadleigh, Suffolk, Ansell, Esq., aged 84. BURDETT.—On the 20th i nst., at Walthamstow, 1010 Burdett, of 76, Bishopsgate-street within, aged 65 ' i p. BOYER.—On the 20th i ns t ., M r. James Boyer, of Coo Per hall, Basinghall-street, aged 81. , „ KEPPEL.—On the 20th inst., at Brighton. the 1 -" 3—. alto' Rev. Thomas R. Keppel, M.A., Norfolk, aged 53. „. PAYNTER.—On the 20th inst., at 53, Thurloe-square' Paynter, Esq., late one of the magistrates of AV° ster Police Court, aged 69. SerSEPPINGS.— On the 17th inst., at Torquay, John l‘itt.te pings, Esq., late of eldest son of the rector of North Creak Robert Seppinga, aged 65. _Ol London : Printed and Published by WILLIAM AI I I T t o , 11 2 ' of No. 112, St ran d , P r i nter, at THE SM./ COW' Oh Strand, in the P rec i nc t o f th e S avo y, in the CO L ' Mi ddlesex—Wednesday, APril 22, 1863,