The Sun. — London, England, 1863-03-04 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF LORDS—Last Evening. The LORD CHA.NCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. METROPOLITAN RAILWAYS. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented two petitions from Chelsea against the London Railway (Victoria Station) Bill. The noble earl said the bill proposed to appropriate Sloane square for the purposes of a large railway station, and that amongst other evils numbers of the working classes would be rendered nearly homeless, and hundreds of small shopkeepers would be ruined. - PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Buckley Railway and Fulham Bridge Bills were read a second time. PRINCE AND PRINCESS OF WALES ANNUITIES BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND NOTES (METRO POLIS) BILL. Earl GRANVILLE moved the second reading of this bill, which makes bills due on the 7th inst. payable on the 6th. The motion was agreed to. The standing orders were then suspended, and the bill was committed and afterwards read a third time and passed. NAVAL COAST VOLUNTEER ACT AMENDMENT BILL. This bill passed through committee. THE lONIAN ISLANDS. Lord CHELMSFORD proposed his motion relative to the removal of two of the judges of the supreme command of the lonian Islands. Their lordshit s then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS—Last Evening. The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. SECOND READINGS. The following bills were read a second time—Drayton Junction Railway, Great Northern Railway (Spalding to March), Inverness and Perth Junction Railway, West Shropshire Mineral Railway, REGENT CIRCUS RAILWAY BILL. On the second reading of this bill, Mr. H. LEWIS moved that it be read a second time that day six months. He wished it to be dis tinctly understood that he was not opposed to any useful and requisite project which would relieve, by carrying off some portion of the traffic, the over crowded streets of the metropolis; but this project would create a far worse nuisance than the acclivity of Hol born-hill. Some of the most populous streets, such as Old street-road and Euston• road, would be interfered with in a wanton and extraordinary manner. For instance it was proposed to raise Euston-road 11 feet and to entirely close one of the streets out of the Old St. Pancras-road abutting upon Chesterfield-street. In several places, too, there would be open crossings, and the sewers would be materially interfered with. The rate-payers were almost entirely opposed to the project. There was a question on the order paper by his noble friend the member for Middlesex (Lord Enfield) as to whether the Government would not deem it expedient to appoint a Royal Commission on the subject, so that the wise would act unwisely by giving powers for the construction of a railway that might, on inquiry, prove inimical to the metropolis. Lord FERMOY seconded the motion. Mr. H. ROBERTSON supported the second reading. It was quite a " bugbear" to say that there were twenty-eight metropolitan lines now actually before the house. Out of the number originally proposed nineteen were for the northern part of the metropolis, Six of these pro jects had perished, whilst four were not of a character to do more than make requisite extensions of existing lines; 10 had gone up to the House of Lords, and six were simple junctions. Thus it appeared that only five metro politan projects were left, four of which had been read a second time ; in fact, this was the only one left in the House of Commons for discussion. The line would be a great benefit to the metropolis, would not interfere with any great thoroughfare in an objectionable manner, and would only carry out to the required extent the plan of railway accom modation fostered by the house. Lord J. MANNERS opposed the bill. If the House of Commons had passed some of the railway projects, as stated by the hon. member, he trusted the House of Lords would do its duty and reject these bills, in order that some public body, such as the Metropolitan Board of Works, or a com mission, might report upon the nature and expediency of the various projects. Sir S. M. PETO had been urged to a large extent by his constituents to vote against this bill, but he should not do so at the present moment until the merits of the various projects had been investigated by a oemmittee of that house or a special commission. Mr. JACKSON supported the second reading. The bill would, as a matter of course, be fully investigated up stairs in committee, when all the opposing parties would have an ample opportunity of being heard against it. Mr. DALTON opposed the second reading. As a mem ber of the Board of Works he trusted the house would spare that body the trouble and expense of opposing it. It would create, in one part of its route, a nuisance quite as great as Ludgate-hill. Mr. LOCKE opposed the second reading, on the broad principle that no railways ought to be permitted to enter the heart of the metropolis. He trusted the north part of the metropolis would be saved from the nuisances created by railways on the south side of the Thames. Mr. HODGSON knew nothing of the bill or its pro moters, but the house would act in opposition to all precedent, if it rejected it on a second reading, without giving the parties an opportunity of going into committee. Mr. TITE characterised this as one of the wildest of all the many railway projects proposed for the metropolis. It never could be constructed as proposed. The bill ought to be rejected at once. Lord FERMOY advocated the immediate rejection of the bill. The line could not be worked in any sort of uni formity with existing lines. Mr. MASSEY said if the bill was really so objectionable in principle and faulty in detail, probably it would be ad visable for the house now to reject the bill, so as to compel the promoters to bring in a proper and amended bill. But this was an enterprise of a peculiar character ; it was the first attempt yet made to enter the very heart of the metropolis. (Hear, hear.) It was certainly a very bold project. Of course it was to be regretted that in the infancy of railways a distinct and comprehensive system of action was not adopted. (Hear, hear.) It was the duty of the house to see that the public, had no improper schemes thrust upon them. As far as he could see, the scheme was a crude one, promoted by parties with whom in his oflisial capacity he had never before come in contact. (Hear, hear.) It professed to be connected with the Great Northern Railway, but he did not find that the directors of that line had anything to do with it ; and as it would interfere with a large amount of valuable pro perty, really an exceptional case, he thought the house would do well not to send the bill upstairs to: committee. He understood it was intended to construct several mounds and to make a subterranean passage through them. Sir J. Shelley, Sir De Lacy Evans, and Mr. Malins op posed the bill. The last speaker sail it was intended to cross Oxford-street on a level, which was a monstrously absurd proposition. The 'notion for the second reading was then negatived without a division. The result elicited much applause. LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. MAGUIRE gave notice that after Easter he should introduce abill to amend the relations between landlord and tenant. (Hear, hear.) IRISH BOARD OF FISRERIES. Mr. BLAND asked the Secretary to the Treas ury, whether his attention had been called to th e fact of one of the defendants in a fishery pre.. secution instituted by the Irish Board of Fisheries having sworn at a trial which took place during the present month at Arthurstown, county Wexford, that Mr. James Redmond Barry, one of the Commissioners, had written to him to the effect " that he was not a party to the prosecution against him for alleged illegal practices, and that the said prosecution was an unfair proceeding." And whether the Secretary of the Treasury had taken any, and what, measures in consequence of the above proceeding on the part of Mr. Redmond Barry? Mr. F. PEEL replied that no report of the matter had been furnished to the Treasury, but he believed the cir cumstance, as related by the hon. member, was substan tially correct. It was right, however, to state that the opinion was conveyed in a private letter, and proba bly the sentiments it conveyed at the official position of Mr. Barry ought not to have been penned. Probably Mr. Barry would be remonstrated with on the impropriety of his conduct. RAILWAY METROPOLITAN PROJECTS. ENFIELDVis asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, hh considering the numerous schemes that were proposed for intersecting the metropolis and its s uburbs with variou s of lvirineesotrailway, be would take into con sideration the or recommending the appoint ment of a special committee, commissionhear,) to investigate a nd report upon the same? mear, Mr. M. GIBSON replied that the '3 Government did not deem it expe dient to i nstitute aninquiry the aid of a Roy al Commission. some years by ago a commission was appo inted to inquire into the subject of me t ro politan railways, and an e laborate s p ecia l report was the result. For some years it was the custom of the Board of Trade to direct the attention of the com mittee of that board on railway bills to that report. They however ceased to do so after several of the proposi• tions laid down in that report had been overruled. The sacred area which they recommended should not be interfered with by the metropolitan railways had been invaded— (hear, and laughter) for railway bridges had been projected to cross the Thames, and power obtained to construct them. If the house desired it a special committee of the house could be ap pointed. But knowing the interest taken in the sub ject, and the importance of having the various railway metropolitan projects properly and quickly considered by Parliament, he had intrusted an officer of the Board of Trade to devote his attention to t b t se schemes, and to frame a report thereon. When the report was ready he should be prepared it) lay it ma the table of the house. (Hear, hear.) THE DEVONPORT ELECTION. Mr. FEItRAND asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the First Naval Lord did not receive a deputation from the dockyards men during his canvass at Devonport, for the purpose of hearing their com plaints against the regulation issued in October, 1861, which prohibits promotion in the dockyard after the age of 45; whether he did not promise them a full inquiry into the operation of this regulation immediately after the election, with the view of its being rescinded if its effects was injurious to the dockyards men; whe ther this promise was not in part fulfilled by orders be ing sent from the Admiralty to the principal officers of the yards for a report of the working of the said regulation; whether they had not replied, condemning the restriction as to age for promotion ; and, whether the Secretary to the Admiralty would place upon the table of the house the in structions sent and the report of the officers thereon? Lord C. PAGET replied that Sir F: Grey when can vassing the electors of Devonport, very properly refused to receive any deputation, or to make any promise to redress any grievances. (Hear, hear.) After the election was over, Sir F. Grey received a deputation of cer tain dockyard men complaining of the restriction with regard to promotion. The result was that the Board of Admiralty desired the dockyard officers to report on the matter, which they accordingly did, and to the effect (as understood) that the present system ought to be maintained. it was not usual to publish confidential re ports between officers in departments of the public service, therefore he must decline to lay this correspondence on the table of the house. PRINCE AND PRINCESS OF WALES:ANNUITY BILL. Mr. Justice WILLIAMS and Mr. Justice BLACKBURN, at- tired in their full robes, brought up this bill from the House of Lords, and intimated that there were no amendments. The learned judges were somewhat awkward in their progress up and from the table, bowing somewhat out of order, and retiring backwards not quite in accordance with the practised rigidity of those used to the process. The result was a gool deal of unseemly laughter, in which the learned judges could not perforce but join. • FOREST RIGHTS AND ENCLOSURES. Mr. TORRENS called attention to the reports of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, reporting the sale of rights of the Crown in Waltham, Epping, and other forests in Essex, and to the fact that in consequence of those sales numerous inclosures have been made in the forests by the purchasers of Crown rights : and to move for a select committee to inquire into the legality of those and other recent inclosures; also to ascertain what steps ought to be taken to preserve the rights of the public, or the poorer foresters, and the inhabitants of the metropolis, within the forests, as well as to inquire into their general management. _ _ _ Mr. COX seconded the motion. He only wished to pre serve the rights of the public, and not to interfere with the rights of others. He claimed upon behalf of the inhabitants of the metropolis the right of going on these lands when ever they pleased. If the committee of inquiry were granted he would undertake to show that the public had enjoyed that right for nearly 300 years without any objection. The only right which those who wished to enclose the lands had was, that of turning cattle upon them to graze. The people had an undoubted right to go there for the purpose of dis porting themselves and enjoying the fresh air. The public claimed that right, and what harm could possibly result from granting a committee, so that the whole question might be at once and for ever set at rest. Mr. P. WATLINOTON protested against the assump- tion on which the motion was founded, namely, that the public had any legal right over these waste lands. The question being one of legal right, it seemed to him more fittting to be tried by a court of law than a committee of the house. Indeed, the question was the subject of judicial investigation last year before Mr. Justice Wightman. when a jury found that the public had no right to wander over these waste lands. The Infant Orphan Asylum and the Merchant Seamen's Institution were built on those grounds, and surely it could not be the intention of the hon. mover to deprive those institutions of possession. Surely it was not right that thousands of acres of ground should be allowed to lie waste because the public wanted recreation, which a comparatively small number of acres would ade quately supply. Chigwell parish had been put to great ex pense under a pretence of this kind, and deprived of 150 acres. Much had been said of the enjoyments which thou sands had derived from Sunday excursions to Epping, but no notice had been taken of the thousands of religious people who had been scandalised by the Sabbath desecra tion resulting from such excursions. (Hear, hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the motion, accord ing to the terms of it, would erect a committee of that house into a court of judicature to try the rights of indivi duals as opposed to the rights of the Crown, which would be a dangerous precedent. The proper forum was a court of law, which could enforce its judgment. He would suggest that, in lieu of the hon. member's motion, the house should agree to appoint a committee to inquire into the condition and management of the royal forests in Waltham, Epping, and Essex, and their enclosures, and consider whether it was necessary to take any steps for the preser vation of the open space. (Hear, hear.) He hoped the hon. gentleman would accede to this proposition. (Agreed, agreed.) Mr. TORRENS expressed his assent, and having ob tained leave to withdraw his motion, that of the Attorney- General was adopted. METROPOLITAN TURNPIKE ROADS. Mr. G. HARDY, in the absence of the right hon. baronet the member for Petersfield (Sir W. Jolliffe), the cause of whose absence they all deplored, rose to move for leave to introduce a bill to amend the acts relating to the turnpike roads in the neighbourhood of the metropolis north of the river Thames. The hon. member said metropolitan roads had been under the charge of commissioners, of whom the right hon. Bart. the member for Petersfield was one, and upon former occasions turnpikes had been removed, and the charge of the roads transferred to the parishes. A commis sion which sat in 1859 recommended a large extension of that arrangement, and this bill proposed to relieve 51 miles of road within the district governed by the Metropolis Local Management Act, by removing 26 turnpike gates—(hear, hear),—and 46 side gates, which were now serious impedi ments to traffic. In order that any parishes which might be affected by the bill should have an opportunity of stating their objections ho proposed to take the second reading before Easter, and afterwards to refer the bill to a Select Committee, where all parties could be heard. Being a hybrid bill, it would afterwards come before a committee of the whole house, so that there would be ampleopportunities for the parisehs to state their views. The hon. member concluded by moving for leave to introduce the bill. Sir G. GREY said he had been in eommunication with the right hon. member for Petersfield, whom he had assured of his cordial support in carrying out the object in view. The reference to a select committee would, he thought, meet all the objections that could be raised. Lord ENFIELD thought the subject was in very good hands, and was glad to find it was intended to send the bill to a select committee, but he wished to know whether it would be a committee of 13 or 15 members, or one of five members. Mr. HARDY—Of five members. Lord ENFIELD said that would meet all objection, as it would enable parishes, some of which were grievously bur. dened, to appear and state their cases. Leave was given, and the bill was subsequently brought in and read a first time. BRAZIL. Mr. BRAMLEY•MOORE said he had been requested, in consequence of tho incompleteness of the papers, to post pone the motion of which he had given notice until Friday next. MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS BILL. Mr. COX moved the second reading of this bill. Sir G. GREY thought some explanation of the bill should be given. He believed it was intended to allow votes to be taken by ballot in municipal elections, but it appeared that the hon. member who had introduced the bill was not present. Mr. G, HARDY moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months. Mr. WILLIAMS thought the bill was a proper comple ment to existing Acts of Parliament. Lord J. MANNERS observed that if this bill were al lowed to pass, the hon. member for Bristol would declare the subject of his annual motion to be the necessary com plement of this measure. Mr. H. BERKELEY said he certainly did regard the bill as a step in the right direction. Mr. KINNAIRD thought the absence of the hon. mem ber for Truro was accidental, arising from the sudden post ponement of a motion that had been expected to occupy some considerable time. • Mr. PAGET thought that Parliament might very pro. perly put the system of vote by ballot to the test in this in- stance. If it failed, the general application of the system would not of course be persisted in ; but if it succeeded, a s he believed would be the case —though any man must be presumptuous who spoke confidently about the success of new systems—then an unanswerable argument would be supplied for its further extension. Mr. LOCKE said the only object of the bill was to extend to municipalities the same mode of voting as now existed by means of voting papers in the metropolitan parishes, and existed there most beneficially. He hoped that the house would hesitate to throw this bill out on the second reading. Mr. AUGUSTUS SMITH said his bill was intended to be auxiliary and supplementary to the use of the ballot at Parliamentary elections. He had been for many years a convert to the ballot, though he was not inclined to attri bute to it all the advantages or all the injurious consequenees which some persons expected from its adoption. The pre sent bill would, he hoped, satisfactorily test the principle. they At many of those el ec ti ons a va riety of i m p ro p er induce ments were h e ld out to influence the electors; and a large proportion ofrahtihgerters were influenced by the advantages which derive at the moment. It was clear that o some change w as necessary • ' and, as the objections to this bill were rather m a t ter for c wo uld agree to the second re:tee, din g committee, he hoped the house Lord PALMERSTON—I have supportersalways o e fn this an very of the ballot ; and the mover and fairly avow that this is the first step towards proposing the ballot for Parliamentary elections. (Rear.) One hon. mem ber has told us that it is ancillary and supplementary to a ;~-~lr. THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 4, 1863. proposal for vote by ballot; and, as I should on any occa sion when such a proposal came before the house vote against it, I can have no hesitation in supporting the amend ment of the hon. and learned gentleman opposite to delay the second reading till this day six months. (Cheers.) Every argument I have heard adduced in favour of this bill could be adduced in favour of vote by ballot at Parliamentary elections; and the objections to such a mode of voting at Parliamentary elections apply in principle to the present proposal, because the election of a municipal body is a poli tical election. (Hear, hear.) It has not the same political importance as an election of members of this house, but there is no question that it is a political act. (Hear.) The principle which I think a sound one in this free country is that no man should perform a political act without its being known to his fellow-citizens how he performs it—that he should bear the responsibility for good or evil of the act which he has thought fit to do. (Hear, bear.) 1 think responsibility ought to go hand in hand with political action. (Cheers,) The object of the bill is to with draw thelconduct of voters at municipal elections from pub lic observation—to make their voting secret, and therefore to divest them of that responsibility which I think under a free constitution ought to follow every political act. I shall therefore vote against the bill, and support the amendment. (Cheers.) , the house divided, and the numbers were— For the second reading Against it Majority against second reading —3s UNION RELIEF AID ACT (1862) CONTINUANCE BILL. This bill as amended was considered. BIRTHS AND DEATHS REGISTRATION (IRE LAND) BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. The house then adjourned. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 3. MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS BILL. Order for second reading read. Motion made and question proposed, " That the bill be now read a second time." Amendment propoied, to leave out the word now,' and at the end of the question to add the words "upon this day six months." Question put, " That the word 'now' stand part of the question." The house divided—Ayes, 58; Noes, 93. AYES-58. Acton, Sir J. Greene, Capt. J. Potter, E. Adair, H. E. Hennessy, J. P. Robartes, T. J. A. Atherton, Sir W. Ingham, R. Russell, Sir Wm. Ayrton, A. S. Kinglake, A. W. Scholefleid, W. Baines, E. Kinglake, Serj. J. Sheridan, H. B. Barbour, J. D. Kinnaird, Hon. A. Sidney, Thomas Bazley, Thomas Knatchbull-Hugess Smith, J. A. Berkeley, Hon. H. Layard, A. H. Stangeld, J. Blake, J. A. Lawson, W. Stuart, Col. Butler, C. S. Lewis, Harvey Taylor, P. A. Buxton, C. Locke, John Tollemache, Hon.F, Childers, H. C. E. Merry, James Vivian, H. H. Cobbett, J. M. Mildmay, H. Warner, Edward Collier, R. P. Mills, J. R. Wemyss, J. Cox, W. Morris, D. Whalley, G. H. Doulton, F. Onslow, Guildford Williams, W. Duff, M. E. Padmore, R. Fermoy, Lord Paget, C. Forster, W. E. Paget, Lord C. E. Gilpin, C. Pease, H. Smith, Augustus Goldsmid, Sir F. Pilkington, James Dillwyn, Lewis L. TELLERS. NOES —93. Adderley, C. B. Grogan, Sir E. Palmerston, Viect. Addington, Hon.W. Handley, John Parker, Major W. Baring, Sir F. Hardy, J. Patten, J. W. Bathurst, A. A. Henley, J. Paull, H. Black, Adam Hodgson, R. Pritchard, John Bovill, Wm., Horsiall, T. B. Puller, C. W. Briscoe, J. I. Hotham, Gen. Lord Ridley, Sir M. W. Bruce, C. L. C. Howard, Lord E. G. Scott, Lord H. Buller, J. W. Humberstone, P. S. Scourfield, J. IL ButlerJohnstone,ll. Jolliffe, H. Selwyn, C. J. Cairns, Sir H., King, - J. K. Smith, Abel Calthorpe, F. H. Knatchbull, W Somes, Joseph Cavendish, Hon. W. Laird, J. Spooner, R. Cavendish, Lord G. Langton, H.G. Stanley, Lord Chapman, J. Leader, N. Stuart, Col. W. Codrington, Sir W. Lep, W. Taylor, Colonel Collins, T. Leighton, Sir B. Tempest, Lord A.V. Cubitt, George Leslie, W. Thynne, Lord H. Cubitt, Ald. Liddellalon. H. G. Tomline, G. Disraeli, Benjamin Lygon, Hon. F. Torrens, R. Edwards, Major H. M.'Cormick, W. Vansittart, Wm. Fane, Col. Mackinnon,W. A. Verner, Sir Wm. Farquhar, Sir M. Malins, R., Verney, Sir Harry Fellowes, Edward Manners, Lord J. Walker, James R. Ferrand, W. Miles, Sir W. Watlington, J. Fitzgerald, W. S. Mitford, W. T. White, L. Forester, Gen. Montagu, Lord R. Whitmore, H. Gard, R. S. Mowbray, Rt. Hn. J. Wood, Rt Hn. Sir C. George, John Newdegate, C. Wynne, W. W. B. Gore, J. R. 0. Noel, G. J. TELLERS. Gower, G. W. L. Northcote, Sir S. H. Hardy, Gathorne Grey, Rt. Hn. Sir G. Palmer, R. W. Bridges, Sir 8., Bt. THE DISPUTE WITH BRAZIL. The following further correspondence respecting the plunder of the wreck of the British bark Prince of Wales, on the coast of Brazil, in June, 1861, was published yesterday : "M. MOREIRA TO EARL RIISSELL.-(RECEIVED FEB. 27.) " (Translation.) "Brazilian Legation, London, Feb. 26, 1863. " The undersigned, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of his Majesty the Em peror of Brazil, has the honour to acknowledge the receipt of the note addressed to him this day by his Excellency Earl Russell, &c., and hasten to transmit to his Excellency a cheque for the sum of £3,200 on the Bank of England, which her Britan nic Majesty's Government has fixed for the ship wreck of the Prince of Wales. "'Phis payment being made, it is now the impe rious duty of the undersigned to do what he already had the honour to announce in his note of the 9th inst. to the Right Hon. Earl Russell—that is to say, to declare that his Majesty the Emperor, in making this payment to her Britannic Majesty's Government, does not recognise in any manner the right or justice, on the part of the British Govern ment, to pretend to make the Imperial Government responsible for the wreck of the ship Prince of Wales on the coast of Brazil, inasmuch as the Im perial Government used all the means in its power to punish the supposed malefactors, and sincerely and loyally made all possible efforts to demonstrate the invalidity of the claim which the British Lega- ion at Rio de Janeiro put forward in this affair. 'And the Imperial Government, being thus fully convinced of the right which appertains to it, de- clares— "1. That it cannot and ought not to assent to the unusual principles which it is pretended to establish against it on the occasion of this shipwreck, nor can it accept the responsibility thrown upon it, against all which it loudly and categorically protests. _ _ "2. That, therefore, it refuses, as it has already refused, to consent to and take part is the liquida tion of the losses suffered by the owners of the shipwrecked vessel, or of any compensation for the damages which resulted from that shipwreck; and thus, likewise, the Imperial Government absolutely declines to take cognisance of the fact that the Bri- tish Government abstains from making any pecu niary claim for the ship or freight, as declared in a note to which the undersigned is now replying. " 3. Lastly, that in transmitting to her Britannic Majesty's Government the aforesaid sum of £3,200 for the shipwreck of the Prince of Wales, the un dersigned declares, in the name of his Government, that this payment thus made to the British Govern ment is made solely in consequence of the illegal and violent proceedings committed upon Brazilian ships in the territorial waters of the empire, and is the simple result of force, without in any way im plying the admission of right or justice on the part of the British Government. Wherefore it will never be possible, by this payment, to establish a prece dent against Brazil or any other maritime nation, inasmuch as the imperial Government does not re cognise the right of such an act, but, on the con trary, most formally and solemnly protests against it and its consequences. " The undersigned, in making this protest to her Britannic Majesty's Government, for the due effect thereof, reserves in the meantime the right of claim- ing, in the name of his Government, satisfaction for the violation of its territorial sovereignty, in conse quence of five vessels belonging to Brazilians having been captured and held as prizes in the territorial waters of the empire, by way of reprisals, by ships of war of the British navy ; as also an indemnifica tion for the damages resulting from the said cap ture, against all of which the undersigned now pro• tests; and he takes, &c., "C. MOREIRA." " EARL RUSSELL TO M. MOREIRA. " Foreign-office, Feb. 28, 1863. "The undersigned, her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, a2know ledges the receipt of a check on the Bank of Eng land for the sum of £3,200. " The undersigned would have gladly confined himself to this simple acknowledgment, had not Senhor M oreira, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of his Majesty the Emperor of Brazil, in transmitting the cheque, made various statements which it is the duty of the undersigned not to leave uncontradicted. " The first of these statements is, that the said sum of £3,200 is a sum ' which her Britannic Ma jesty's Government has fixed for the shipwreck of the P r ince of Wales.' The undersigned has already informed M. Moreira that no sum is claimed for the loss of the ship Prince of Wales, nor for the freight of the cargo. The sum is claimed for the shameful plunder of the cargo, and for the negligence shown by the Brazilian authorities in their inquiries to ascertain the delinquency of the supposed malefac tors. When Mr. Consul Vereker arrived on the coast on the 16th of June, eight or nine days after the shipwreck, finding that eight or ten dead bodies were said to be on shore, he requested the Municipal Judge to proceed to an inquest on the bodies, but he declined to do so. The Consul attributes this refusal to the presence of Senhor Faustino, the In spector of the District, with an armed force which outnumbered that accompanying the Municipal Judge. Here was at once a failure of justice. Had the - eight or ten bodies been at once produced, and had those bodies been examined, it would have been ascertained whether there were any marks of violence upon them ; and as they were withheld for a considerable period, until the bodies were in a state of decomposition, the cause of death could not be ascertained. "Had a Brazilian ship been wrecked on the coast of Cornwall, and dead bodies been found on the shore, the coroner of the district would at once have had the dead bodies produced, and would have held his inquest upon them. " Had any magistrate appeared with an armed force to prevent or control such inquest, 24 hours would not have elapsed before that magistrate would have been dismissed, and a military force would have been sent to protect the judicial pro ceedings of the coroner. " The undersigned will not enter further into'the case. The circumstances are well summed up in a letter of Rear-Admiral Warren to Mr. Christie, dated Sept. 23, 1862, contained in the papers re specting this case presented to Parliament by her Majesty's command (page 96). " The shipwreck took place in June, 1861. Her Majesty's Government having been mocked for 18 months by the evasions, subterfuges, and unfounded assertions of the Brazilian authorities, her Majesty's naval squadron proceeded to enforce the moderate demands of her Majesty's Government. These pro ceedings have been conducted according to the rules of international law, after a long period of patience and forbearance.—The undersigned, &c. " RUSSELL ." Importing Tea without colour on the leaf pre vents the Chinese passing off inferior leaves as in the usual kinds. Horniman's Tea is uncoloured, therefore, always good mike. Sold in packets by 2,280 agents FATAL RAILWAY ACClDENT.—Yesterday Mr. Bedford held an inquest at King's College Hospital on the body of Benjamin Brown, aged 41, an engineer in the employ of the London and Brighton Railway Company. From the evidence of several witnesses, it appeared that on Tuesday last the deceased was superintending some works at the Clapham Junction station, when a signal was given that a train was approaching. Deceased got on a fence, which was only two feet from the main line, and instead of getting over the fence he sat astride on it, thinking the train would pass him. In this, however, he was mistaken, for, according to the evidence of two witnesses, the carriages in the train struck the deceased, and knocked him off the fence, fracturing his left legs and one of his arms. He was seen by a surgeon, and afterwards taken to the hospital. The fence in question had been constructed under the direc tions of the deceased, but he had given instructions the same morning to have it removed further back from the main line, as he considered it too near the trains. Mr. Wm. Smith, house su rgeon , sa id th e d ecease d was a d m itt e d on Tuesday last. H e was su ff er i ng f rom a compoun d f rac t ure of the right thigh, an d a f rac t ure o f th e e lb ow j o i n t. Th er e was also a seve re sca lp woun d, an d a l arge woun d on the left thigh. Amputation was resorted to and he went on well till Wednesd a y even i ng, w h en h e b egan t o s ink rapidly. He , died at 10 th e same night. The coroner hav i ng g one through the evidence, th e jury returned a verdict of " Accidental death." RUSSIAN BARBARITY. The attack on the house of Count Polytelo by the Russians has been mentioned in our columns. We are now in a position to give, from an authentic source the details of this barbarous outrage, which was entirely unprovoked on the part of the suf ferers :—Count Leopold Polytelo, member of the Polish Council of State, after having taken his wife to Nice for her health, went to live on his estate of Woyslawice, Lublin, with his two young sons, in tending to await events, The insurrection broke out, and he continued to hold the opinion he had often expressed, that this movement could only have the effect of bringing down measures of re pression upon the country. None of his servants took part in the insurrection, and no conflict took place in his territory. On the 12th of February he assembled, to do honour to the fifth birthday of his eldest son, his brother -in-law, M. Titus Woycie chowski, a former colonel of Grenadiers in the Polish guard, and a former major of the Polish army. These gentlemen, over their coffee and cigars, discussed the events of the day, when at half-past three in the afternoon, the steward of the estate, Salkowski, came to tell them that a detach ment of Russian troops, consisting of three compa nies of infantry, a squadron of lancers, with two guns, and some Cossacks, had made a domiciliary visit to the chateaugof Rakolupy, belonging to the Count Aurele Polytelo, that they were marching on WoyGlawice, and that they would arrive in half an , hour. The gentlemen considered what they had better do. They could easily have avoided a meeting with the troops, as the time more than sufficed, but the two old soldiers recommended that they should remain quiet, seeing that it was not a Tartar horde that was coming down upon them, but a detach ment of regular troops, commanded 1y civilised chiefs and men of honour, who would make the domiciliary visit, and, finding nothing, quit the place. Soon after there were heard in the distance two reports of cannon, fired in the little village of Woyslawice, situated about a quarter of a league from the chateau. These shots killed four inoffen sive men, and wounded others. Then there were seen from the windows several Cossacks, who approached at a gallop along the road, and shortly afterwards tirailleurs were seen to extend and to march upon the chateau, where their balls already began to break the windows. Behind them were the masses of infantry. The guns were put in position at 150 paces, and at this distance the officers remained, while the infantry approached the chateau and began to break the windows. Count Polytelo wished to go out and parley with the com mander of the expedition, in order to save the in- , habitants of the chateau and his guests from the danger which menaced them, but he was prevented by his brother-in-law, who pointed out that there was no one with whom he could treat, as no officer, not even a subaltern, appeared among the soldiers. Then began a horrible slaughter. The soldiers, having broken the windows, began to fire, without up to that time having wounded any one; but as soon as they came into the vestibule they began to massacre the servants with the bayonet. Count Polytelo seeing this, and convinced that his future life was to be counted by minutes, bade farewell to his brother-in-law and his guests, and saying that it was his duty to die with his children, he went to his sons, whom he found with their aunt, Mille. Dunin, and three female servants on their knees. He fol lowed their example, and for an hour and a half, dur ing which the carnage lasted, he passed the time praying and awaiting death. The count, his chil dren, and the women who were with them, were saved as by a miracle, since the door of the room in which they were was riddled with balls, and all around them the soldiers had been firing about at random, and breaking open the doors. Towards six o'clock in the evening the firing ceased, and the count, leaving his retreat, learned what follows. M. Woyciechowski and his son Joseph had withdrawn into the cabinet of the count, and when the mitraille commenced, the missiles which came through the windows killed the young man and wounded his father. Major Kunn and Col. Dunin awaited the assa6sits in separate rooms. Major Kunn was attacked with the bayonet, and defended himself with his hands. Afterwards he lost two fingers from a bullet, and then received several bayonet wounds, and numerous blows on the body. The victorious soldiers took him prisoner and led him before an cfficer. From him he asked for medical aid, as he was weak from loss of blood, but the officer replied that he had surgeons with him, but that their services were fcr t he Russian soldiers, and not for the enemies of Russia. He ended by giving him a blow on the face with his sabre. Colonel Dunin (70 years of age) sat calmly upon a sofa in the drawing-room, awaiting the attack, when the door was opened, and four soldiers fired upon him simultaneously. He was wounded in several places. Then the soldiers set upon him, and he was wounded in the hand, pushing back the bayonets. He wished to check the fury of the assas sins, and compelled them to take note that they ought to deal with him as an old man and veteran soldier. For reply he received wounds and blows; then the soldiers supporting him because he grew weak with the great loss of blood, conducted him to the major commanding the detachment, who re mained impassable beside the guns in the midst of this scene of carnage. Colonel Dunin addressed the major as follows :—" You are a soldier, and yet you are not ashamed of thus killing an unarmed crowd, unable to defend themselves." The major replied that 100 shots had been fired from the cha teau, and he had then caused it to be attacked. Colonel Dunin replied, "It is an infamous lie. I am an ancient colonel of the Grenadier Guards, aide-de-camp of the General of Division Zymirski. I am decorated—nay, I swear to you by my grey hairs; I give you the word of honour of a soldier, that since the disturbances arose there has not been a single insurgent in the chateau, and that there has not been a single weapon in the building— neither musket, nor revolver, nor sabre ; in a word, not a thing. Besides, I am in your hands ; let a domiciliary visit be made, and if you find any other articles but some pen-knives and table-knives let me be shot." The major replied, "But what do you tell me, when T have seen some one in the court aim at myself at 20 paces." Colonel Dunin re plied, " How dare you tell such a lie ? But, good heavens what kind of leader are you ? and how have you not seized that man in a court filled with soldiers ?" The Russian major perceived he had told a fib, was silent, and at a given signal the fire ceased. At a second signer the soldiers resumed their ranks. Thus it is not by the fury of insubordinate soldiers, but, in fact, by the order of the leaders that the crime has been committed. At last the major ordered the mayor of the village to be called, and placed the wounded under his care, after which he told the soldiers that they had be haved courageously—like heroes. Ho went about a quarter of a league from the place, and next morn• ing returned from this glorious expedition to Kra suystaw. There are six killed—four at the town of Woy slay wice, and two at the chateau, M. Joseph Woy ciechowski and a servant ; there are besides at the chateau nine wounded, who have been 11 hours without being attended to, since there were no doc tors or other assistance to fetch to them in these places. The sack of the mansion has been complete. The ground-floor has been covered with w rec k ; furniture, glasses, china—everything has been broken ; the linen was given to the flames. They carried off the jewels of the countess, and abstracted 12,000 florins from the chest of Col. Dunin. They have also taken from a maid servant 3,000 florins of savings, and from Controll er G orc h ons ki 1 2 , 000 florins, which constitute his all, the fruit of savings during a long series of years. We have not yet succeeded in learning the name of the Russian major who commanded this com pany, but we are able to give the name of the colonel (Baumgartner), military con mandant of the district of Krasneystein, who, having to engage a band of 2,000 insurgents four leagues distant from that place, at Dubrenka, contented himself with sending a moveable column to Woyslawice to mur der a councillor of state and his guests, all inoffen sive and unarmed men. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. TIMES.—It is impossible to read the account o the preparations now being made in every town and hamlet of Great Britain, or to walk the streets of London, or to mingle in society, or to watch the thousand nameless symptoms by which the temper of the public betrays itself, without becoming con scious of a prevailing enthusiasm more spontaneous and intense than has been kindled by any event within living memory. There were rejoicings at Queen Victoria's Coronation, and there were rejoic ings equally sincere and universal at her Wedding, nor can we forget the proofs of regard and attach , went which were showered on the Princess Royal when she left her parents' roof. But ft is no dis paragement to the happy reminiscences of those occasions, or rather it is a testimony to the Queen's long-tried popularity, to say that they failed to excite the same interest as the Prince of Wales's marriage. And yet, if crowds are chiefly attracted by the grandeur of a show, there is nothing in the programme of Sat ur d a y hich can account for so general a desire to be present at it. A Coronation is a gorgeous ceremony ; at the Duke of Wellington's funeral the procession was swelled by some of the most famous of living soldiers and statesmen ; but here there will be little to gratify curiosity and a love of display. Half-a-dozen Royal carriages, the well known equipages of the Lord Mayor and civic dignitaries, and a squadron of Life Guards— such sights as these would hardly tempt the whole population of this metropolis away from their homes and callings. The grand avenue of windows and balconies, alive with human faces, through which the Prince and Princess will pass, cannot but be a noble spectacle, but it is one which only those who form the procession can witness. We have taken thought for weeks and laid out many thousands of pounds, ostensibly for the sake of an experience which will last less than a minute, and yet none of us is ashamed of it. This is a pheno menon which needs to be explained, and of which the explanation may help to dispel some popular illusions, already discredited, about the spirit of our age. There never was any real danger that this great and wise nation would so cut itself off from its past history, and so recklessly imperil the destiny which Providence has intrusted to our keeping, as to follow the desperate career of revolutionary France. The danger was not that the people would wilfully desert the Throne, but that the Throne should prove unworthy of the people ; not that Monarchy should be condemned as worn out and effete, but that our Monarchs should not know how to adapt themselves to the altered conditions of poli tics and manners. The Royal power had triumph antly weathered the French Revolution, but would it survive the Court of George IV. ? It had shown that it was compatible with Parliamentary Govern ment, but could it be reconciled with modern notions of economy and the requirements of modern public opinion? It is chiefly because it hassatisfled this test, and withal identified the Royal family with the domestic virtues of the nation, that the reign of Queen Victoria has strengthened the posi , tion of her dynasty. She has not realized, for no human Sovereign could, all the wild expectations that were entertained at her accession, but she has shown that a good Queen, and therefore a good King, may avoid all semblance of a collision with her subjects and win their entire devotion, without becoming a puppet or a cipher. A roe faineant, in the better sense, may still be by far the most powerful man in the country without making a single enemy. The most independent and high spirited race on the face of the earth will submit to be lead by a thread, not blindly, but with a distinct consciousness of the reasons for its submission, upon one condition and one only. Their loyalty must not be coldly accepted as a right, but merited by its ob jects and cordially acknowledged as a willing tribute of love and esteem. It is not the King, as descendant of mythical ancestors, or as consecrated by the inves titure of the Church, or as the highest of feudal suzerains, or even as chief magistrate, the fountain of honour, the dispenser of reward and pardon, the visible leader of society, that we love to idealise and to salute with every demonstration of national re spect. It was not in this country or in this age that the titl e o f " W e ll-b e l ove d" was con f err ed by acclamationheredihereditary i n n e o e n a. e o We f the give worst our and homage weakes t no the office alone or t o t h e S overe i gn a l one, b ut to t th to e Sovereign be cause, of office worthily. If it i dwseorefahrealds,ihnecflomllsmtihsseiokni, ourngly loyalty would fl ag , b ut were held by a degeneratet w or ou n l n d e gr q a u th a o l u l Till this shall happ en — and we may rest assured days—loyalty that it will never happen in our own equall y Monarch. flag if it ys—loyalty will still find a legitimate object , and the potency of its spell will not be broken. Loyalty may possibly outlive Monarchy, but Monarchy will never outlive l o y a lty. There is nothing in the human mind more durable than this sentiment. Patriotism, w hi c h was first developed in perfection among the city Re publics of antiquity, has been transplanted into Christian States of a thousandfold greater extent, where it flourishes to this day. The same be said of loyalty. It grows naturally out of the personal relation between a King and his subjects. So far from dying out in our present advanced state of civilisation, it shows more vitality? in Great Britain than it has done since George 111. ascended the 1 throne a century ago. That it cannot be quenched or exhausted by any fair demands on it we are firmly persuaded, and it will be the fault of evil counsellers if it shall ever be damped by the want of a truly Royal response to it, Mr. Sergeant Glover v. Count de Persigny and M. Billault. JUDGES' CHAMBERS, MARCH 3. (Before Mr. Justice Blackburn.) This afternoon the adjourned hearing of the sum mons taken out by Mr. Sergeant Glover, for rescind ing the order of Mr. Justice Crompton extending the commission for examining witnesses in the above case in Paris until the 30th of April, was taken at Chambers, before Mr. Justice Blackburn. Mr. Sergeant Glover conducted his own case. The defendants were represented by Mr. Hodgson, the barrister, instructed by Mr. Cotterill, of Throg morton -street, defendants' solicitor. Mr. Serg. Glover strongly objected to any further delay, which, he contended, was only sought from motives of oppression and vindictiveness towards himself. The French Ministers against whom he was proceeding first deluded him, he said, into spend ing many thousand pounds on their behalf, and he had not received even a farthing from them, while they had paid as much as £26,000 to some of his successors in the It.; orning Chronicle. At the trial he should be able to prove, by incontestable evidence, that in June, 1856, two gentlemen came to him at the Morning Chronicle office, and then and there offered to purchase and to pay him immediately in cash the sum of £lO,OOO sterling for the copyright and plant of that journal. He refused the offer, considering the property to be of much higher value —whereas, after he had been associated with the French Government in having leading articles written, and inserting them on behalf arid to the profit of that Government, the Morning Chronicle became so much injured and depreciated in value as to have been sold in October, 1858, for the sum of £3,000, thus showing a pecuniary loss in the com mercial value of the Morning Chronicle property of £7,000 sterling. After negotiations had been com menced in November, 1856, by M. Bonard, the avocat to the French Embassy in London, at the instigation, as he (Mr. Sergeant Glover) understood of Count de Persigny, then French Ambassador in London, and M. Billault, then Minister of the In terior of France, several leaders and articles were inserted at the suggestion of M. Bonard. A leading article against the Times newspaper, written in French, was given in Paris to him by M. Ballard, who said it had been transmitted to him by the Chief of the French Embassy in London. The article was amended by the foreign editor of the Morning Chronicle in London, whence it was transmitted to Paris, and the amendments made were shown to M. Bonard, who, having submitted the article in another quarter, returned it with the approval of M. Bil lault. This article, he repeated, inserted in the Morning Chronicle in December, 1856, was a vindication of M. Billault against the limes news paper. After the negotiation between the French Government and himself, a leading article writer was employed and paid by him (Sergt. Glover) to call frequently at the French Embassy in London, and to communicate, personally or otherwise, with the Count de Persigny, then French ambassador in England. That gentleman frequently called upon Count de Persigny, and received from him advice (or what Frenchmen call " inspirations") for the purpose of writing suitable leaders, which were afterwards inserted in the Morning Chronicle, not only for the purpose of influencing public opinion in England for the advantage of the French Go vernment, but likewise that such leading articles might be translated into French, and reinserted in the Moniteur, Constitutionnel, Pays, and other French journals. After the arrangement had been concluded between M. Billault and himself, he (Mr. Sergeant Glover) was requested by M. BOnard, jun , on the part of M. Billault, to whom he was private secretary, to name and introduce at the Ministry of the interior the Paris correspondent of the Morning Chronicle. That gentleman was accordingly intro duced, and M. Billault frequently gave instructions on which articles were founded. He might par ticularly mention a letter which was written at the inspiration of M. Bonard, jun., the private , secretary of M. Billault, and inserted in April, 1857, in reference to the Minister of the Interior opening la Laval and Rennes Railway, and he alluded also to a letter he had received from M. Bonard, jun., attacking the Morning Advertiser. Upon that letter a leading article was written and published. Another person connected with those transactions, and who acted on behalf of th© French Government was M. Chevalier St. Andre, who was appointed by M. Bil lault as Chef de Division de la Presse, in the bureau 66, Rue Belle-Chasse, Paris, when and where M. Collet Meygret was Directeur-General de la Surete Publique et de la Presse, the latter office being after wards filled by M. Laguerorniere. M. St. Andre had lately been pensioned off by the French Government, but previously to that he mentioned to him (Mr. Sergt. Glover) that M. Billault, then Minister of the Interior, and he (M. St. Andre) had had what Frenchmen call a very serious conversation and con sultation in Paris about the London daily journals, one of which, he said, M. Billault was desirous to obtain in support of the French Government ; that he (M. St. Andre) observed that the Morning Chronicle was the only daily London newspaper likely to answer the French Government's purposes, as the others were generally held by several pro prietors, who, as bodies, it would be difficult to ar range with, except the Morning Post, which was Lord Palmerston's journal and organ ; whereas the Morning Chronicle was held by a single proprietor (Mr. Sergeant Glover). M. St. Andre added that tie was then authorised by M. Billault to call upon him (Mr. Sergeant Glover) in London, in order to secure the support and co-operation of the Morning Chronicle on behalf of the French Government, he himself having been some years previously connected with the French department of the Morning Chro nicle before the proprietorship of Mr. Sergeant Glover. M. St. Andre, in pursuance of M. Bil lault's instructions, accordingly called on him at the Morning Chronicle office in January, 1857, stating that he had been a college associate, besides having been very many years intimately and then officially connected with M. Billault—that he was authorised by M. Billault and M. Collet Meygret, he also fill ing the next highest official position (Directeur General de la Surete Pubiique de la Presse) to make relations with him that the Morning Chronicle might become the partisan and English official journal of the French Government, and immediately to commence such operations on behalf of and in conjunction with a daily Parisian newspaper, La Verite, of which M. Collet Meygret had then be come proprietor on behalf of the French Govern ment. Accordingly he (Mr. Sergeant Glover) went to Paris at the commencement of February, 1857, and made arrangements with regard to the Morn. ing Chronicle's support of the French Government. Afterwards the subjects of editorial leaders were suggested by different members and associates of the French Government, besides the arrangements which he had previously alluded to. Mr. Justice Blackburn (interposing) said that, as far as he at present understood the matter, the ob ject of the motion before him was simply a legal matter—namely, to rescind an order of Mr. Justice Crompton for an extension of the commission. Mr. Hodgson, for the defendants, said that was really the point at issue. Mr. Justice Blackburn asked for the original affi davit filed by Mr. Sergeant Glover, which was pub lished in extenso in this journal on Friday last. Mr. Sergeant Glover said he was totally unaware of any affidavit being filed, or any grounds being laid before Mr. Justice Crompton for making that order. Mr. Justice Blackburn said it was a common practice for things of that sort to be done without affidavits, or even the merits gone into. Mr. Hodgson said that Mr. Cotterill, the solicitor for the defendants, had filed an affidavit with regard to the order of Mr. Justice Crompton, extending the time for the commission. This affidavit, which was read by direction of the learned judge, stated that issue to this action was joined on Dec. 23, and that on the 23d of that month an order, in the usual extended form, for a commis sion, at the instance of defendants, was settled by Mr. Justice Wightman. By that order Thos. Pick ford, Esq., her Majesty's Consul at Paris, was nomi nated the defendant's commissioner, and M. Delau nay, of Paris, as the plaintiff's commissioner, and the commission was made returnable on January , 31 ,1863. On th e sth Jan. the draft of the commis sion Was sent by his firm to the then attorney for the plaintiff (Mr. Rose) for perusal. On the 9th of January he (Mr. Cotterill) caused a summons to be taken out to add Mr. John Diston Powles as joint commissioner with Mr. Pickford ; and on the 12th Jan. an order was made by Mr. Justice Blackburn to substitute Mr. Powles for Mr. Pickford. On the 27th January, the draft of the commission not having been returned by Mr. Rose, the plaintiff's attorney, a summons was taken out for the purpose of extending the time of the commission. After several adjournments, made in order to enable Mr. Rose to communicate with Mr. Sergeant Glover, Mr. Justice Crompton made the order. The draft was not returned until the 20th Feb. last. Shortly afterwards a letter was received from Mr. Sergeant Glover,stating he had been in Paris awaiting the opening of the commission, and Mr. Rose considered, that the learned sergeant's proceedings were irregular, and without his sanction, so that he should retire from the case. The statement by the plaintiff that the commission was retained by the delendantslattornies for the purpose of delay, was altogether and en tirely untrue; on the contrary the delay in the com pletion of the commission had been caused solely by the default of the plaintiff, and the irregular course to which he had resorted. Some reflections on the plaintiff's conduct in Paris were added. Mr. Sergeant Glover said that having obtained a copy of that affidavit yesterday, he was now pre- pared with an affidavit in reply, which be wib.l to submit. Mr. Justice Blackburn—Read it by all means', Mr. Sergeant Glover then read an affidavit, etT which the following is a copy, only those passages: having reference to his transactions with Mr. Rose, his late solicitor, being omitted :—" I, William Glover, of 58, Burton-crescent, in the county of Middlesex, sergeant-at-law, make oath and say: That I have read with great surprise an affidavit dated March 2, 1863, and purporting to have beeU made by William Henry Cotterill, attorney for the defendants, and which affidavit contains several statements utterly unfounded in fact and truth. That on or about the 6th of Jan. I saw and read , at the office of my then attorney, Mr. Rose, the order for the commission, made and signed by Mr- Justice Wightman, on the 23d Dec., 1862 ; also a; draft of the commission drawn in pursuance of the said order, and I then, or immediately afterwards, informed my attorney that I was satisfied with such drP ft, and desired the commission to be drawn up as soon as possible, in accordance therewith. That on or about the 7th of January, Mr. Rose having written to me about the defendant's attorney wishing to add a Mr. Powles as joint commis sioner with Mr. Pickford, I objected on the ground that I merely had one Commissioner. That Mr. Pickford, an official gentleman of high position in Paris, bad been selected by the attorney for the defendants several months previously, upon some personal grounds from what I had heard, and was induced to believe, respecting Mr. Powles. That I was totally unaware of any of the matters relating to the postponement of the commission, mentioned in the defendants' affidavits, until I re ceived letters while at Paris from Mr. Rose. (Let ters inserted.) That in reference to the paragraph about plaintiff having been in Paris, I told my late attorney, previous to my departure from London, that I was About proceeding to Paris in order to at tend the commission which, from the judicial order already mentioned, I verily believed was to have commenced its sittings about the 12th of January' or immediately after; and being so convinced, I wrote from London to Mr. Pickford, one of the com missioners mentioned, hoping that he would not begin the commission until about the 15th of Jane , as I was then collecting more documentary evidence, among which I forwarded files from the Morning Chronicle for the years 1857 and 1858, which ar rived in Paris on the 13th of January, and which I intended to use upon the examination of the defen dants in this action. I say with respect to some averments in the affidavit of W. H. Cotterell, treat such with the utmost scorn and contempt, especially where he expresses an opinion about events which happened several hundred miles frota where I am informed he was then absent; and say that the high authority in Paris to whom I 14- luded in my former affidavit, was her Britannic Majesty's Ambassador, the Earl Cowley, to whom I wrote a letter dated Feb. 3d, detailing the outrage perpetrated upon me, and afterwards men tioned other facts relative thereto, at an interview with his Excellency. I say that it is most necessary for English justice being administered in this cause, by a trial at the earliest possible opportunity, since the, plaintiff has been informed that attempts are now being made with the knowledge and concurrence of the defendants to tamper with some witnesses ; an d while I was at Paris I was informed that, by the connivance of the defendants and their friends, one gentleman, who had mentioned most important facto to the plaintiff, and who would have given valuable evidence on the part of the plaintiff, was spirited away and sent to America since the commencemen t of this action, in order to prevent him giving such testimony." Mr. Justice Blackburn said he did not see what legal ground had been shown for rescinding th e order. The full Court at Westminster might do It on application, but it was not the practice of °judge at chambers to interfere with an order made by judge having equal authority with himself. Mr. Sergeant Glover said there was an exactly similar order made by Mr. Justice Crompton re: specting M. Billault, which the Court of Queen.° Bench afterwards rescinded, which order he cool; dered must have been obtained from the learne d judge by a mis-statement of facts. Mr. Justice Blackburn said he must decline to interfere with Mr. Justice Crompton's order. Mr. Hodgson applied for costs. Mr. Justice Blackburn said there was no order fit for counsel. The costs must be coats in the cause' COUNTRY MARKETS. , MARKET HARBOROUGH—TUESDAY. White wheat, 4bs to 50s ; red, 43s to 47s per 36 stone. Malting barley at 36s to 40s per qr. ; grinding, 29s to 31$ per 30 st. Oats, old, 26s to 295; now, 21s to 24s per 2 4 at. ; beans, 37s to 40s per qr. LEEDS—TUESDAY. Last week's prices are asked for the best samples of wheat, but some concession is necessary to effect sales—il l fact the trade continues in a deplorable state. Barley slat of sale. Beans rather lower. Last Friday's rates wet ° about maintained for other articles, SHEFFIELD—TUESDAY. There was little demand for wheat, and late rates de ° dined is per load, Seed oath in demand at late price o * No quotable change in barleys. Red wheat, per load of 3 imperial bushels...2os Od to 21 5 ° cl White » ) ... 22 s Od to 24s 9,, 1 New red , , ... 16 s Od to 189 t'; New white „ » ...20s Od to 21s 6 . Beans 9) If ...16s 6d to 19s 6c; Peas, per qr Grinding barley, per qr 2Bs Od to 300 0 S Malting ditto, „ 34s Od to 400 Oa d Oats .) 2ss Od to 3 080 Flour, is 9d to 2a 2d per atone. LIVERPOOL—TUESDAY. At our market to-day there was a fair attendance of the town and country trade ; however, there was a dull busineet/ doing in wheat, and prices were 2d per 100 lb lower on al week Flour difficult to move. Oats and oatmeal Wes neglected. In Indian corn few transactions were recorder, Barley, beans, and peas offered at is decline, without lead ing to much business. MELTON MOWBRAY—TUESDAY. whi t ' The following were the currencies :—New white wile f ' 49s Od to 53s Od; new red, 44s Od to 48s per 36 stor, , , beans, 42s to 46s for old ; new sorts, 37s to 408 per 3S $ll jo barley, 35s to 39s for malting, and 32s to 33s per (1 1. • grinding; oats, 245, to 31s Od per 24 stone. Foreign Mail Packet List. MAILS DUE. A.unralia and Mauritius, via Southampton. Man 21' via Marseilles Araail and Cape Verds, by Briti s h p ac k e t. Cape of Good Hope, Ascensi on , an d St. H e l ena ....M DMl a aa r rr. .. 1 1: 6: China, Penang, and Singap ore , v i a Southaropton.Man 0, via Marseilles ...Mal Falkland Islands . Mar. 6. .... • A Gibraltar, via Southampton 4. India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Southampton.. Man 6. via Marseilles Mar. It, „' India (Bombay), via Southampton .. Mar. Iv via Marseilles l Mar. Portugal.... Ma r. 6. Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton Mar. 4 ' via Marseilles Mar. 7. Newfoundland ..Mar' 4 ' Oporto and Vigo .. • U. S. and British_ N. America, by by u Br.ist..ppancekkeett Mar. 'lei by Canadian packet Mar. o, W.C. of Africa, Madeira, and Teneriffe Mar. 1 Bahamas, via New York Mexico. Feb. 1:8 : All parts of West Indies, including Chili, Peru, Feb.l 28* California, and British Columbia . .... 1 [ADVERTISEMENT.] —Holloway's Ointment and Pill9o. Outward Infirmities.--Before the discovery of these 1.0110 dies many cases of sores, ulcers, &c., were pronounce° ea be hopelessly incurable, because the treatment Por su re .. tended to destroy the strength it was incompetent to P ate serve, and to exasperate the symptoms it was inad e q_o to remove. Holloway's Pills exert the most wholes the powers over unhealthy flesh or skin, without debarring patient from fresh air and exercise; and thus the o °_,T oo t tutional vigour is husbanded while the most malil67, ulcers, abscesses, and skin diseases are in process of c „ r e -r r Both ointment and pills make the blood richer and P t — pr y instead of permitting it to fall into that poor and Wl L 'io. state so fatal to many labouring under chronic ulcerates Births. DUNSDON.—On the 2d inst., at Lower-road, Islingt°lit Mrs. Richard Dunsdon, of a son. Jorrs.—On the 2d inst : , at yliot-place, Blackheath , t° wife of the Rev. G. Meyrick Jones, of a son. etli RYDER.—On the Ist inst., at 39, Grosvenor-square , Hon. Mrs. Ryder, of a daughter. ssro. SUTTON.—On the 2d inst., at Lowestoft , the Hon . J. Henry T. Manners Sutton, of a son, stillborn. Marriages. , wo Cot CH—FoRD.—On the 2d inst., a t Abbotskerswell,x,hp 1 o f Quiller Couch, Esq., of Bo dmin, to Mar y , only 034" z , e t n h b e y lecond daughter of Elias Ford, Esq., of Abbotsford, Newton Abbott. r Esq., of Dulwichtir'',3l, LAZENEY—FRANCIS.—On the 2d inst., at Exeter, Wal t ,, e r , re eldery, t 0 00cn Charlotte Francis, Esq., of St. Thomas, Exeter. rWlotlelTl.relleLtat Deaths. ALBERS.—On. the 3d inst., at South-road, Clapham-P- James Albers, Esq., formerly of Lloyds, aged 76. o f ASHFORD. —On the 2d inst., Benjamin, youngest 00 Mr. J. Ashford, Deptford. BARNES. —On the 34 inst., suddenly, at Canonbury-P- N., Mr. Charles Barnes, aged 34. HoßsoN.—On the Ist i ns t . , at 41, Harley-street, ililo Hobson, Esq., aged 42. JULIAN.—On the let inst., at Bury, Hunt i ng d on shire, S t. Julian, aged 71. KING.—On the l e t i nst., at Greenwich, William I‘l/36i Esq. be lt ' MARCHANT.—On the 28th ult., a t B ogn o t , Mrs. Marc Dr. WALKER. —On the Ist inst., at Trinity, Edinburgb, John Walker. -.001 ESO' London : Printed and Published by WILLIAM AN.v. -- 01, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at THE SIIN OffiCe. N t 9 Ot Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the C 0110" Mlddlesex.—Wednesday, March 4, 1863. t 1