The Sun. — London, England, 1863-04-25 00:00:00

EIPERIAL P. ROUSE OF LORDS—Last Evening. Thc Lord Chancellor took his scat at the usual hour. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Cleveland Railway, Harrowgate Gas, Rugby Water, Scarborough Water, and Accrington. Gas and Rater Bdls were read a s!:cond time. THIRD READINGS. The Marle(,t Ha.horaugh and Loughborough Road, London and North-Western, and Lancaiehire and York shire Railway Companies, South Staffordshire Railway and DalbA2.h Water Bills were read a third time and passed. THE WAR IN AMERICA. Lord REDESDALE said he wished to know whether he understood the noble earl the Secretary for Foreign Affairs to say that the United States Government had re quested the B Kish Government to authorise the British Consul to open the sealed mail bags from this country to see if amongst the letters there was anything baring upon the question'at issue between the North and South, in order that it Might be conveyed to the American Government. Earl RUSSELL, who spoke in a very low tone of voice, wi:s understood to say that such a demand had been made. The Ead of DERBY was surprised that a demand had been made that the sealed correspondence of a mail packet should be opened by the British Consul in the presence of an officer . of the United States, in order that thel,tter might ascertain whether there was evdence enough to justify I im in taking the vessel into a prize court for condemnation. He should like to know witctltr that demand had been denied or ecquiseced in. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE thought the question of such a severe nature that the noble earl would well con sider it and answer it on Monday next. He should like to know upon what ground any British Consul had the power t ) open any letters. He did not think he had the slightest right to do such an act. He hoped the noble earl would take the opinion of the law officers of the Crown in the question. Lord CII :LMSFORD wished to know whether any in formation had been rceeived relative to accounts he had seen in the evening papers—viz., that four more English vessels had been seized ? Earl 13,USSELL said h 5 had not re c ei ve d an y o ffi c i a l information on the sulj-ct, but what was certain was, that for many months English scssela had run the blockade, and othcr3 had attempted to do so without success. Some: of those had been captured, and more than likely the information referred to some of those ship% The Margais of CLANRICAEtDB addressed another question to the noble earl, in a very indistinct manner. E irl RUSSELL said he had given a copy of Mr. Seward's let t - r to Parliament, and ha would take the opportunity of asking the law officers of the Crown to look into the law of nations on this point. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGII asked how the British consul was to discover a letter containing anything of a treasonable nature. Was ho to open it, or judge from supervision? _ The Earl of lIARDWICKE thought that the ploposi• tion was nothing more than that a British consul should be made use of to attack British subjects. Lord TAUNTON commended this prudence of the Go vernment. War was a very serious thing, and he hoped that England would not allow herself to be entangled in it. The Earl of MALMESBURY wished to know whether the Government had admitted or repudiated the demand ? Earl RUSSELL said the Government had expressed an opinion, but had (as we understood the noble earl) issued a modified order. Until he had obtained the opinion of the law officers of the Crown upon the questions he should place before them, he should reserve his reply. The subject then dropped. QUALIFICATION FOR OFFICES ABOLITION BILL. Lord WODEHOUSE moved ihe second reading of 'this bill, the object of which was to do away with the oaths and declarations required by the Act of Geo. IV. on taking pub lic appointments. His lordship said the opponents of The mcasuTe had tried to excite a prejudice against it by de scribing it as the offspring of a Dissenting body called the Church Liberation Society ; but he believed it was sincerely intended as a relief to a large number of persons who had COIIF ci eat ous objection to oaths. The EP.rl of DERBY (in the absence of the Duke of Buckingham, who had been just sent for from the house on account of some domestic calamity) opposed the bill. He said he did not do so because he hat' any illiberal feeling towards the Dissenting body, or because he feared their injuring the Church of which he was an attached member. If the Established Church could not live and prosper without those oaths, he was quite sure they would not save her. The bill, however, had been rejected five times already upon good ground and after full discus sion, and, as he did not think it was intended to remedy any real grievance, he should move that it be read a second time that day six months. Earl COWPER (who addressed the house for the first time) and the Earl of ELLENBOROUGH also opposed the bill. Lord LYTTLETON said he should certainly give the bill tho strongest opwsition. The parties who promoted it had no real complaint, and that was only another of the con stantly repeated attempts by the agitators of the Dissenting community to make headway against the established reli gion of the country. It was well known that there was a party who boasted that they would never rest until they had effected a complete separation of the Church from the State, and their disposition was no doubt good. Up to the pre sent time, however, it was satisfactory to find that their charitable attempts had done about as much harm to that venerable institution as Mr. John Bright's speeches had done to the party who sat opposite. (Laughter.) Earl RUSSELL said, as ho hal been instrumental in br'•nging the bill for ward in the other house, he should give it, his support there. Earl GRANVILLE also briefly supported it, but upon a division the bill was thrown out by 69 to 52. BILLS FROM THE COMMONS. Upon tho rnotior. of Lord RE DESDALE, it was resolved that no private bill or enclosure bill from the Commons be read after July 2. NEW ZEALAND BOUNDARIES BILL. This bill was read a second time. LEASES AND SALES OF SETTLED ESTATES ACT AMENDMENT BILL. This bill was read a second time, TRUSTEES (SCOTLAND) ACT AMENDMENT. This bill was read a second time. OFFICE OF SECRETARY AT WAR. Thee bill for the abolition of this office paTsed through ccmrnittee, DOCKYARDS PROTECTION ACT AMENDMENT BILL. This bill paned through committee. ii it I , )rdships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS—Last Evening. The SPEAKER took the chair at the usual hour. THIRD READINGS. The following bills were read a third time :—Rusthall Manor and Sowerby Bridge Local Board. The Norwich Poor Bill was considered and ordered to be read a third time. PETITIONS. -—-- - - - By Sir J. Dux; from Farringdoo Ward, praying that the Holborn -hill improvement might be proceeded with ; Mr, Baines, Leed s ; Sir H. Verner, Armagh ; Mr. Lawson, Haddington,"end others, in favour of closing public-houses on the Sabbath. THE METROPOLITAN AND CITY POLICE. The LORD MAYOR gave notice of his intention to move for a return of the number and description of troops employed in the route o f tho procession from the Ericklayers' Arms to Paddington, on the 7th of March last, specifying the number in the three por tions of the route; also copies of all the correspondence be tween Sir Richard Mayne and the War Office on the sub ject of employing troops. Col. FRENCH also gave notice that on Monday he should ask the Secretary of State for the Home Depart ment wheth er, as the bill he bad introduce d f or the amalga mation of the Metropolitan with the City police was be • iievcd to Partake of a hybrid character—being, Strictly six eking, neith er a publi c nor a pr i vate bill , an d p r oposed to deal with corporations acting under charters and Acts of Parliament -he intended to proceed with it? MERCANTILE SHIPS AND FEDERAL CRUISERS, Lord A. CHURCHILL aske3 the Solicitor General w hether merchant ships in the prosecution of a-voyage be t we( n neutral ports, would be legally justified in defending themselves by the use of arms, from capture by the cruisers of the Federal States of America? Tho SOLICITOR-GENERAL replied that such ves sel:3 would certainly not be justified in defending them selves from capture by force of arms, and cited the case of the Swedish convoy in . support of this opinion. Vessels so defending thetoselved would be exposed . to ca2turo and condemnation. INCREASE OF SMALL PDX. Lord NAAS asked the Secretary of State for the Home artment whether tho attention of the Government had b, en drawn to the increa se o f sma ll pox i n the metropolis; d an whether it was his intention to propose during the pre sent session any measure for the p romo ti on o f vacc i nat i on ? Mr. LOWE replied that the subject had, of late, much engaged the attention of the Government. There was a tr.eaure in existence compelling compulsory v acc i na ti on , and though not a very complete i measure, yet, unl ess b a dl y c arried out by local authorities, it had. beenfound exceedingly useful. There was no law of the kind in Scotland; and the question of making the law more efficient, and the propriety of extending IL to Seotland,was now engaging the attenti on of the Government, but no pos itive decision had yet been arrived at. HE VOTE FOR THE PRINCE CONSORT'S MEMORIAL. Mr. CONINGIIAM gave notice of his intention to move that the vote for the Prince Consort's memorial be post- Pen,ed until such time as the noble lord at tho head of the C 't t nuent was in a position ' to say. that the estimate I i a- conatzuction wou ld not. be exceeded. (Cries of , ll Unless the noble lord could give a satisfactory g7'Pit'atl°4 to the effect that the cost would not exce o the j estimated amount, he should take the sense of tha house upon the matter. THE CITY AND METROPOLITAN POLICE. Mr. HENLEY gave notice that ha should move an amendment to this bill when it was next leeforc the house, t 3 the effect that the bill be read a seccnd times that day six months. (HO3-, hear ) STAGE COACH DUTY. In reply to Sir C. DouGLA.s, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that it was his intention to mitigate the present inequality of taxation, and hence he had proposed a duty of lls. 6d. The hon. member for the Tower Hamlets had. a notice on the subject on the paper, but he desired to state that in the present stats of the revenue he could not consent to forego the tax on stage carriages. H e apprehended that the plan he had proposed would work well, especially in local districts. The tax would nit fall upon those who did not now pay it. RIOT AT THE ROMAN CATHOLIC REFORMA TORY IN LEICESTERSHIRE-DISMISSAL OF THE VISITING PRIEST OF DARTMOOzt PRI SON. In reply to Mr. NEWDEGATE, Sir G. GREY replied that he had received information to the cffict that a riot had broken ont in the St. Bernard's Reformatory, Whitwich, Leicestershire, among the inmates, and that the police had been called in to suppr, so it. He had desired Mr. Sidney Turner, one of the inspectors of reformatories, to investigate the affair, and to report thereon. That report had not yet reached the Home-office. Mr. Henderson, the visiting Catholic priest at Dartmoor Pri son, had been sup nded for lacking that temper and dis cretion requisite for the proper discharge of his duties. OSTEND AND DOVER MAILS. In reply to Mr. BERKELEY, Mr. F. PEEL explained ;he nature of these mail con tracts, and said an eligible contract had been accepted for these mails. SAILORS' HOMES. On the motion for going into committee otsupply, Sir 11. STRACEY brought under the fillfention of the house the subject of these homes, and moved that the Board of Trade be empowered to aid them with some of the means belonging to the Mercantilo Marine and Seamen's Fund. Mr. M. GIBSON opposed the motion, and it was nega tived without a division. THE CASE OF JESSIE MACLAUCIILAN. Mr. STIRLING rose to move for copies of the prccEed • ings at this trial, and of the subsequent proceedings before Mr. Young- which led to the commutatien of the sentence. Ho stated the circumstances of the case, which are well known ; the result being that after the trial and conviction, it having been thought that some suspicon of the murder attached to Fleming-, petitions were sent to the Home Secre tary, who ordered an inquiry to be made, ex-officially and in private, into the matter. He urged that the Home Secre tary had no right, in the exercise of his prerogative, to re view and revise a sentence in a capital case, and that by means of an irresponsible and private tribunal, collecting and acting upon evidence in its own discretion. He wished to know what share the Lord Advocate had in the trans action, as he thought, as public prosecutor in Scotland, that functionary ought not to have any share in the exercise of the prerogative of mercy. He complained of the treatment to which Fleming had been subjected by its being implied that he was guilty, owing to the course which had been taken by the Home-office. Sir G. GREY could not accept the doctrine that the Home Secretary was bound to accept as final every verdict and to refuse to inquire into facts which might have arisen calculated to impeach verdicts; on the contrary, he was bound to take that very course; and in the case in ques tion it was plainly his duty to do so. On the evidence at the trial of Maclachlan the jury could not have found any other verdict than that which they brought in; but the statement of the prisoner taken down five or six weeks be - fore the trial, and not inconsistent with the evidence then given, produced a profound impression on the public mind that justice had not been done, and that, admitting her par ticipation in the crime, suspicion attached to others. Being of opinion that a further inquiry was necessary, he left the m, de of conducting it to the discretion of the Lord Advo cate, who took the best means in his power to test the truth of the prisoner's statement, and in the result he came to the conclusion that the capital sentence should not be carried out, but that, as a participator in the crime, the prisoner should be subjected to other punishment. As by Scotch law Fleming, having been a witness in the case, could not be tried afterwards, he had no other course to take than that which he had adopted consistently with his sense of duty. In answer to Mr. DENMAN, The LORD ADVOCATE said that according to the law of Scotland a person having given evidence on a criminal trial, could not be tried for the offence in question. Some discussion followed, and Sir G. GB.EY said he would consider whether he world give the papers asked, and the subject dropped. THE SEIZURE OF THE ALEXANDRA. Mr. HORSFALL rose to call attention to the recent capture of the Alexandra, and to move for papers and cor respondence relative thereto. He said that in calling the attention of the house to the seizure of the Alexandra, of Liverpool, he had no desire to provoke . , a general discus sion, either on the Foreign Enlistment Act or the state of affairs in America, and if the hon. member for Rochdale, who had a motion on the paper, considered it right to do so be (Mr. Hordell) had no right to take exception to it. He ventured to express a hope that the house would not allow itself to be carried away in general discussion on a general principle in considering an individual caee of hardship, which he thought it his duty to bring Mote the house. His case was the seizure of a British vessel on the ocean by an American cruiser, not the capture and subsequent con demnation of a British vessel in an American prize court, but the calm and deliberate act of her Majesty's Govern ment that he complained of, which had inflicted most se rious injury to the owners of the ship Alexandra. He would state as briefly as possible the facts connected with the building, launching, outfitting, and seizing of the vessel. She was built by Mr. Miller, of Liverpool, for Messrs. Fawcett, Preston, and Co., a firm of 50 years' standing in Liverpool, and was being fitted out in the docks, when a Custom-house officer went on board her on the 6th of April last and handed the builder a notice to the effect that, in pursuance of instructions from the Commissioners of Cus toms at Liverpool, the Alexandra was seized pending fur ther directions from the commissioners. After that notice was served he received a communication from Messrs. Fawcett and Co., giving a general outline of their position with regard to the vessel. They stated that, having had many inquiries for a vessel of her description, they had had her built as a speculation. She was completing her outfit when she was seized by the Custom-house officers. She was a three-masted vessel, of 300 tons and. GO-herse power, capable of steaming from nine to ten knots an hour, and was designed and fitted out and adapted for a passenger vessel, a mail-boat, or a yacht. At the time of the seizure he was at Liverpool, and he went on board of her and examined her, and he could truly say that the result of his observa tions was to be able to confirm every word contained in her owners' letters. The hon, gentleman then proceeded to read a letter forwarded by the owners of the vessel to the com missioners of customs, in which they declared they would hold him liable for any loss or damage arising from the sei zure. Weil, that letter was dated March 7; and having waited until the 9th without receiving any reply to it, they addressed a further letter to the commissioners. The hon. member read the letter, which set out the protest of Messrs. Fawcett and Co. against their being prevented from finish ing the vessel, and demanding to be furnished with the evi dence on which the proceedings against them were taken On the day following they received this reply from the corn missioners—" The Alexandra has been seized by order of the Government, and the usual proceedings will ensue. Your letter of this day, protesting against the seizure, I will transmit to the board." Upon that, Messrs. Fawcett and Co. instructed their solicitors, Messrs. Fletcher and Hall, to ask the collector to be allowed to see the deposi tions on which the proceedings were based; but the col lector told those gentlemen that he had no discretion in the matter, and that the depositions were in the hands of the police. Well, the solicitors then waited upon the head of the police, who told them, however, that the de positions had been transa itted to the mayor, and that they could not be seen without his previous sanction. Accordingly, Messrs. Fletcher and Hal applied for that purpose to the mayor, and also to the town-clerk, but thei r application was refused. They then addressed a letter to the mayor, stating that they had been informed that the seizure of the Alexandra bad taken place in consequence of depositions made at the i ns t ance o f the Consul of the United States, and they requested the pe rusal of these documents. To that letter the mayor replied saying that he had co mm u nica ted their request t o th e Go , vornmont, and that the decision on th e matter would be communicated to them with as little delayaa possible. Well further communicatiuns took place between Fletcher and Hall and the mayor, they asking, on behalf of Me ssrs , Fawcett and Co., to be allowed to finish the vessel, as well as the names of the parties making the depositions. How ever, as regarded both requests they met with a refusal. At this juncture they received a letter from the collector of customs informing them that the depositions were in the hands of Mr. Hamill, the solicitor to the Crown, and submitting that they should apply to that gentleman to be allowed to see them. Having done so, Mr. Hamill referred ' them to the answer given in that house with respect to the seizure of the Alexandra, viz., that the matter wss under consideration. Now he was one of those who thought that although so far as regarded the seizure of vessels by Ame rican cruisers it was quite proper that such an answer should be given; yet, that where her Majesty's vessels had thought proper to seize a vessel, they should have consi dered first and seized afterwards. (Loud cries of " Hear , hear.") But then Mr. Hamill went on to say that Messrs. Fawcett and Co. would be furnished with the information which they requested at the earliest possible moment it might be required for the preparation of their defence. Messrs. Fletcher and Hall heard no more of the matter until they received a note that the Alexandra had been exchequered. W e ll , the vessel was charged with being intended for the service of persons presuming to exercise powers of government. Now, ho had already read a statement made by Messrs. Fawcett and Co. that no such intention was entertained, He had read what was stated by them to be their object in building the vessel, and he was I quite sure their countrymen would take the statement of such a house in preference to the statement of the anony mous parties who supplied this itlfvrxudtivn. (Ilear,,lacar.) But in order to show how far this seizure was made consis tently with the previsions of the Foreign Enlistment Act, he would state the view taken by the Solicitor-General of the provisions of that Act, It would - be a great• iislake, said the learned gentleman, to suppose that the Foreign Enlistment Act was intended to prevent all dealings in ships of war. Two things must be proved to render such a transaction illegal; there must be a fitting out and an equipment of an armed ship of war; and, secondly, that must be done with the intent of her being employed in the service of a foreign Gsvernrnent. The hon. member hav ing read a further passage from the speech of the Solicitor- General, proceeded to lay before the house an extract from a letter addressed to himself by Messrs. Fawcett and Co., in which they said it was an anomalous tondition of things that it was permitted to them to supply whole batteries to the known agents of both Governments, vhite they were not allowed to build and complete an unarmed vessel, be cause it was supposed she might be resold to the Confede•• rate States. (Hear) The hon. =ember then read a poet script to that letter, and to which he directed the particu lar attention of the house, and which referred to a commu nication addressed to Messrs. Fawcett and Co. by Messrs. Peabody and Co., confirming an order given to Messrs. Fawcett by General Fremont for the supply of twelve fle'd pieces, and the payment for which, namely £1,700, Messrs. Peabody guaranteed. (Hear.) Now, to follow up that statement, he would ask the Government had may steps been taken to arrest the shipment of arms from Liverpool to America. (Loud cries of Bear, hear.) He held in his hand a return cf the arms which had been so shipped since his hon. fiend the member for Birkenhead (Mr. Laird) addressed the house on the subject; and he found that at Liverpool, instead of shipping rifles as rifles, they shipped them as bundles of gun bane's. The hon. member then read a long statement R 3 to the quantity of percussion caps and gun barrels exported to America from Liverpool be tween the 24th of March and the 23d of April. But that was not all. Not satisfied with sending rifles to America, they were sending there the hands to use them, for up to the present moment the emigration of Irizh labourers to America from Liverpool was greater than at any period since 1853. Well, they had no right to stop that emigra tion, but they had a right to know by whom all these people were sent. He had been told that their passage-money was paid far in America. (Hear, hear.) It was said the Foreign Enlistment Act only applied to ships, and that it did not apply to arms. Well, if that was so, it was the duty of the G.vernment to amend it accordingly, (Hear.) In conclu sion, the hon. member protested against the system of es pionage which had been introduced into this country, and which was furnishing fictitious information to the Ameri can consuls, and which was leading the merchants of our country into the most serious difficulties. (Cheers ) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that even if it had been compatible with the forms of the house for the hon. member to have moved for the papers to which he had re ferred, the hon. member must himself be sensible that it was impossible for the Government to consent to their production. The house would aseume that the seizure of the Alexandra had not been unadvised by those who were responsible for the advice tendered to the executive, The vessenies now in the hands of the law, and that being so, nothing was more calculated to subvert the ends of justice than to supply the accused parties with the materials on which the charge against them proceeded. In his opinion a discussion on the case of the Alexandra at that moment would be most inopportune. The hon. member complained that the Government, so vigilant with respect to that vessel, had shut its eyes to other flagrant violations of the law. Now, he begged to tell the hon. member that it was not competent for the Government to interfere with the ship ment of arms from Liverpool. There was no provision in the Foreign Enlistment Act which would enable the Go vernment to interfere with the shipment of arms, and there fore the complaint of the hon. gentleman, that the Govern ment had not interfered by force to prevent the shipment of arms, though they had interfered to prevent further in fringement of the law in this vessel—the accusation being that the Government winked at transgression of the law in one case, and visited it with condign punishment in the other—fell entirely to the ground. With reference to the other allegation that, under the name of emigrants, men, who were really recruits for the Federal armies, were being forwarded to America, he could assure the hon. member that if he would furnish reliable and reasonable evidence of such a fact, the provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act would be carried into effect. In the absence of any such evidence it was not fair for the hon. member to charge the Govern ment in one case with undue severity, and, in the other case, with failing to put the law into execution. Mr. WHITESIDE thought the motion one of a very serious kind, and did not see. that the Attorney-General had answered the point. The transaction appeared to be a very simple and honest one. Some shipbuilders had built a ship upon contract, the Government had seized her, and the owners had had the presumption to inquire the reason why. (Laughter.) They had not, however, been so for tunate as to get an answer to that question. He did not understand the Attorney-General to say that there was anything to justify the imputation that the owners of the Alexandra intended to violate the Foreign Enlistment Act. What was the offence ? The merchants in Liverpool asked upon what ground their property had been seized ; and the officials, in their wisdom, had refused to say. Ho wished to know whether this crime differed from all others. When depositions were made against the meanest criminal, the person accused had a right to get a copy of the accusation. (Hear.) Surely, therefore, the Government should not withhold from the merchants of Liverpool the advantage of having a copy of the information to enable them to make such an answer to it as they could. As the matter now stood, on the statement of the hon. member for Liverpool and the statement of the Attorney-General, the case was clearly with the hon. member for Liverpool and against the Attorney-General. (H ear.) Mr. COLLIER said that if the observations of the hon. member for Liverpool had been confined to the case of the Alexandra he should have taken no part in the discussion ; but as the hon. member had referred to other questions of great importance, namely, under what circumstances it might be the duty of the Government to prohibit the ex port of arms and ammunition, and to put in force the Foreign Enlistment Act, ho would state in a few words his views on the question. In dealing with this ques tion it would be very undesirable to view it solely from a neutral point of view. We had been belligerents, and it was impossible to say how soon we might be belligerents again. If, therefore, we laid down a rule appli cable only to our usual position, that rule might.be used against us very inconveniently when we became bellige rents. It was our duty to ascertain as far as we could what was really the law applicable to the subject which the hon. member had introduced, and, having ascertained what was really the law, to apply it epially to all nations. Upon principles of international law, every State had a right to exclusive sovereignty within its own dominions , . It had a right to prevent the intrusion of any foreign belligerent, and to prevent him carrying on hostilities within the State. Such an intrusion was an offence against the sovereignty of the State, and any individual who aided and assisted the foreign belligerents in carrying on hostilities within the neu tral State was guilty of an offence against the sovereign power. If, on the other hand, a neutral allowed one belli gerent to use his territories for hostile purposes against the other belligerent, that other belligerent would have ground of complaint independently of any Foreign Enlistment Act, which merely provided a'remedy for that which was an of fence at common law. It was on that ground that we had protested, in 1793, against the United States permitting the French ambassador to use their pcirtsi to fit out privateers to cruise against our commerce. We had remonstrated with the American Government on two grounds; first, that they had permitted the export of arms and ammunition to France ; and secondly, that they had allowed the French to equip vessels of war. The American Government thendis tinctly repudiated their obligations to prevent the shipment of arms and ammunition; but they as distinctly admitted their obligation to prevent the equipment of vessels of war. It was manifest, therefore, from what the Americans them selves had done, that they had no right to object to the ex port of arms to either belligerent. Carrying on hostilities in the territory of a neutral by one belligerent was a breach of neutrality of which the cobelligerent had a right to com plain ; and, therefore, the Americans and ourselves had passed Foreign Enlistment Acts, which prohibited the arm ing or equipping of vessels. The hon. and learned member quoted decisions under the American Foreign Enlistment Act, which. he said, was very much the same as our own, to show that . the American held that building, equipping, and arming vessels for sale in a foreign port, watt not a breach of the Foreign Enlistment Act. Thus the construction put by the Americans on their Foreign Enlistment Act was t that it was necessary that a vessel to be liable to seizure must be equipped for war with tho intention of being employed in the service of a foreign nation. He agreed with the Soli citor-General, that Groat Britain ought to enforce the Foreign Enlistment Act on proper evidence, not only for its own sake, to support its dignity, but for the sake of other nations, to do to them what we should expect from them. fie would, f or th e moment, suppose Great Britain involved i momentEuro be supposed th a t s h e wou ld a ll ow th e ports o f fnoraa war with A mer i ca, and blockading her ports. Could it other peen nations to recei ve A mer i can pr i va t eers ? If such were d one b y any nation, it would be ground for re— monstrance, even if the foreign country so acting had no Foreign Enlistment Act of its own. On the principles of international law, the Americans had aright to excect that Great Britain would not allow its shores to be made the seat of operations against them. Non-enforcement of the Foreign Enlistment Act was not a proper ground for war. Now, the case of the Alabama was ono fur the enforcement of the Foreign Enlistment Act, but because the law officers took a reasonable time to come to their decision, and the vessel escaped, there was no ground for war. He was sure that the law officers of the Crown could not have acted in the case of the Alexandra without clear and distinct evi dence on oath, and he would suspend his judgment until he saw the evidence. Whatever cause of complaint Great Bri tain had against the American Government, it had none on the ground that the Foreign Enlistment Act had not teen enforced. The first American Foreign Enlistment Act was passed at our request ; the second in 1818, during our war with Canada. During the Russian war the American Go vernment stopped the building of a vessel at our request. e a ea I sv h : G l e e ro t sv. G )e r r n e Hra a t B ndt r i i dw t a ne i r n oet egn e u e foi u lrt h ey s e c oi l ft s s u br b irg m e ha i cta s h s i ;e o sb n u . otf b l ej n f t h at eur e sne A ait n oh e n r l t other grounds ; of complaint' it Was not to fail to enforce , its own Foreign Enlistment Act. He believed that not only this :country but .the American people desired peace. He knew that irritating language had been used and irrita ting acts had been done by them; but we should be as wrong in supposing that every word of the kind that was uttered there represented the feeling of the people as if it were supposed that the irritating language used by hon. members in this house represented the feelings of the majo rity. (Cheers.) But if there were to be war, it became us to demean ourselves so that the opinion of the civilised world may be with ns, and to show that We had left no thing undone to avert that calamity consistently with our national honour. (Loud cheers.) • Sir H. CAIRNS was anxious to recall the question from the erroneous footing on which it had been placed by the hon, member for Plymouth (Mr. Collier) to the definite basis on which it had been laid before the house by the hon• member for Liverpool (Mr. Horsfall). This was no question of the Foreign "Enlistment Act, or the duty of the Govern ment to enforce it. That act ought to be enforced without reference to its bearings on other countries. This was simply a question between the Government of this country and one of its subjects. The noble krd at the head of the Go vernment on a for mer occasion said that he felt what weuld be the consequence of proposing to alter the laws of this country at the request of a foreign Power. But there was another thing which it behoved the house to watch—we ought not to suspend or stretch the laws we had to pacify or gratify a foreign Power. (Hear, hear) No explanation had been given of thept oceedingsat Liverpool,and the Home office declined to show the affirmations sworn prior to the seizure of the Alexandra. Had the Government any prece dent for the course which they had taken ? The lion, and learned gentleman said the most ordinary prisoner was en titled,if not always by law, certainly by courtesy and a sense of justice, to a copy of information sworn against him, and with respect to which he was to be accused. The house had not heard a word upon this point from the learned Attorney General. The Attorney -General said he would not enter into the merits of the case. He did not want him to do so ; but he wanted to know the reason why, when the Ame rican consul had put this matter in motion, copies of the de positions had not been furnished ? And this was the third and last charge. What was the position of those merchants at this moment ? That on the 21st or 22d, after the lapse of more than a fortnight, a formal document was served upon them declaring the seizure of their vessel, and that it had been exchequered. The document had been served, and what was the crime alleged against the owners, for then, at least, they would see what it was that led to the forfeiture of the ship. Ho (Sir H. Cairns), on seeing it, said there must be some mistake,as the main portion had been loft out, and thero was not e eteen in a solicitor., ~men but would say there had been some mistake in its composition. This was not a question about the Foreign Enliatment Act, but whether any offence had been committed by Messrs. Faw cett, Prescott, and Co. Heasked the house to hear the crime these gentlemen had committed. The document ran thus " Seized by officer Edward Morgan. Cause of seizure, for being equipped, fiirniehed, and fitted out with intent to be employed in the service of persons exercising, or assuming to exercise, the power of self-government in and over a fo reign State." (A. laugh.) Of all the views of law he had ever heard, this was one of the most extraordinary, (Hear.) What I were the-shipbuilders of this country to be informed that if they built shins that were tobe employed by a foreign State, such ships would be seized ? He had asked the Attor ney-General across the table to name the clause of the act, and he said the 7th; but on reference to it he found the only part of that clause which constituted an offence was left out of the document. (Laughter.) The point in the Foreign En • listment Act was that a ship should be equipped as a trans port or storeship, with intent to cruise or commence hosti lities against some State with which her Majesty was at peace. But the whole point of this matter had been left out of the information. The Solicitor-General might say that the Government could not be answerable for the way in which the business had been managed, as it had been ma naged by the American consul at Liverpool. (Hear.) But, in truth, that was enforcing the Foreign Enlistment Act with a vengeance—(laughter)—and no one could doubt but that Fawcett, Prescott, and Co. were in a state of great ex citement and wonder. It was not unnatural, therefore, that these members should ask the hon, member for Liverpool to bring the case before the House of Commons in the hope of obtaining some explanation as to the conduct of the Go vernment. It was no doubt a hard case on merchants that for a whole fortnight after the seizure of one of their ships no information on the subject could be afforded them. If an offence had been committed under the 7th clause of the Foreign Enlistment Act, the modes of bringing to trial the alleged offenders were prescribed by it, and penalties were [ provided which might be enforced in the local courts of Liverpool. Had that course been taken the whole case might ; have been placed before the public in a few days. Instead of pursuing that course the Government had resorted to a , practice not altogether unknown, but very seldom exercised, of exchequering the ship. (Hear, hear.) The Attorney- General would no doubt pursue the ship into the Exchequer, and sue for a condemnation. If he succeeded it would be upon the merits of the case; but if he failed, who was to pay the merchants for the damages they had sustained in dis charging their workmen, and for not having the ship em ployed in the trade for which it had been intended, and for the expense of having to defend themselves in the Court of Exchequer. He found, from a document placed in his hands, that ho was wrong in saying these gentlemen had had notice served upon them, for up to the present time no notice bad been given to them ; but that document had been ob• tained by their solicitors from the Court of Exchequer. (Hear, hear.) These were the points upon which he desired information, and not upon the general question of the policy of the Foreign Enlistment Act. (Cheers.) Mr. COBDEN said the legal points which had been discussed were undoubtedly of the greatest importance, but he apprehended that no one would think that any con= elusive result would arise from this passage of arms between gentlemen learned in the law upon a question which was pending in the law courts. When the hon. member for Liverpool gave notice of his motion, he (Mr. Cobden) had no idea that ho himself could have contemplated such a result as that the question would be confined to the mere technical aspect. Ho thought a larger question was before them, for it was not merely a question about the vessel under consideration, and that these parties had committed an offence against the statute law. It had been said that many vessels were being built for the same purpose, and this was the proper time, when in the interests of this country, for offering a few remarks upon the subject. He said in the 1 interests of this country, for he wished to consider British interests in the observations he should make with reference of maintained international there was for the Foreign Enlistment Act. Ile system no other country in the world that had one- quar t er of the interests at stake in upholding a law on which the Foreign Enlistment Act was based. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Liverpool had mixed up a question which tended to confuse the public mind on two points Welly distinct. He had referred to the practice of buying and selling and exporting arms and munitions of t war. There was no law in this country to prohibit the buying and selling and exporting arms and munitions of war ; and no country, as had been stated by the hon. and learned member for Plymouth and the Attorney-General, which had furnished such high authorities on the point as America herself. From the time of Jefferson to the present, every high authority iu that country had clearly laid down that the Government was not responsible for the con duct of their subjects in dealing with munitions of war, and that persons 'carried on that traffic at their own risk. He was astonished that-' Mr. Adams and Mr. Seward should have mixed up these questions in their correspon dence, and yet he was not astonished at Mr. Seward doing so, for he wrote so much that he must necessarily write upon every side of a subject. (Laughter, and hear, hear.) But he was astonished that Mr. Adams should have mixed up this question with the equipment of ships of war, There was cnly one reason why he was not sorry that question had been raised. Mr. Adams had referred to the °sending of ships of war to the blockaded ports, and that involved the risk of their being seized by the cruisers of the Federal States; and as the only punishment for violating the block ade was in the hands of these who maintained it through their prize courts, it was well the country should know that it was going on wholesale ;bemuse if the crowds of • steamers that were now for the fast time carrying on com merce in the West Indies, one or two were irrevocably seized, he thought Mr. Adams had so far done good, and was entitled to toleration at the hands of this country. (Cries of No, no.) He woulcrlFlrwith the question of blockade more fully at another time. But, coming to the real question before them, the enfringenaent of the Foreign Enlistment Act of this country, ho thought the Government should exereisn'the utmost vigilance in preventing the vie lation of that hies; 'because they of all others bad the greatr at interests at stake; and he hoped to see the Government sup ported by the public opinion in upholding the law, and the Americani had a right to expect this, for they had at ail times exercised reciprocity towards this country when ap plied to (Cries of No.) He liked to bear an opponent say No ; but if he would listen tolim, he would challege him to show any record in the diplomatic correspondence between the two countries complaining of an unredreseed grievance under the Foreign Enlistment Act of the United States. The hon. member then read extracts from the speeches of Mr, Canning And Lord. Castlereagh, to show that in the case of the Spanish American colonies, and subsequently in the case of France, the American people, in opposition to their own sympathies; did justices to England by passing a Foreign Enlistment Act, forbidding American citizens from assist ing those countries. ' 'He was now coming to the strongest proof of all ; he was going to bring in as a witness the noble lord at the head of the Government. (Laugher.) In 1837 the rebellion broke out in Canada, and in Jan. 1838, when that house met, we were in a state of great apprehension as to the condition of things in the North American Continent, not so much at the rebellion of our colorists as to what was passing on the frontiers of the United States. He quoted the speech of the noble lot d on that ocoasion, when ho was Foreign Secretary, which washighly in favour-of the United States. for having not only observed the law of neutrality to the letter, but in spirit, and in her having passed a tempo rary law, to make the operation of her foreign enlistment law more stringent and more favourable to England. By that temporary law the United States officials were to seize all vessels, &c., which they suspected, and detain them for ' ten days, to give them time to produce proofs, and if they I failed, then the ship was to be set at liberty, but subject to 1 fresh capture as soon as they obtained that proof. During i the Crimean war America, at thi joint request of Eng- _ 1 land and France, respected the foreign enlistment law. The American Government had from the first always shown a willingness to maintain and enforce strict neu trality in the wars that had taken place on the European continent, And at times when popular feeling was very strong against it. He therefore challenged any hon. member to-show him in the diplomatic correspondence between this country and America any complaint that America had violated the principles of the foreign enlist ment laws, and what he asked in return was that we should act towards America as America had acted towards us. (Hear.) He next referred to the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman the Solicitor-General on this subj -at de livered a short time since, and combated the principles then laid down, maintaining it was unsound in law, and would act most injuriously towards this country if acted upon. France as well as America had a stringent law upon the subject, and every one found guilty of breaking it in France was liable to transportation: (Hear, hr_ar, and oh.) All he asked for was reciprocity. What, therefore, was to be done ? Was there no way of protecting the commerce of a friendly country? It was well known that three ships had beon built and fitted out in this country that had never gone to any destination, but had marked their progress by fire and devastation. (Hear, hear.) There was from 100 to 120 millions sterling of British capital annually floating upon the ocean, while no other country had 30 millions. So long as we were attacked only on our own home we had nothing to fear, but the moment we began a system of reprisals we were attacked in our most vulnerable part. (Hear, and No.) He would make those who engaged in building and.fitting out ships like the Alabama, tlao Florida, and the Japan liable to fine and imprisonment. After referring to the manner in which these vessels had left this country, he alluded to Earl Russell having elegraphed to Nassau to stop the Alabama. If, there fore, he asked, she could have been stopped at Nassau, why cou d she not have been stopped elsewhere ? (Hear, hear.) There was a legal difficulty raised in that case, that we could not stop a vessel like the Alabama after she had made her first voyage. His answer was, that the Ala bama never bad made a voyage.—(hear)—but that she had been cruising about without a home. (Hear, hear.) such essels ought to be forbidden from entering any of our ports —(hear, hear)--Land he called upon her Majesty's Govern ment to issue a proclamation to that effect, and outlaw them so tar as our ports were concerned—(hear, hear)—which would soon put an end to them by making the speculation unprofitable. That, he urged, was our duty with reference to past obligations, and our regard for the future required its immediate fulfilment. The Foreign Enlistment Act was passed two centuries ago for the benign object of preventing wars arra :tavern:tug our eivilisattuu. Tho ancicuto as ...- Lions were ignorant of such a wo, d as neutrality ; and iu the Middle ages, when war was carried on indiscriminately, neu trality was hardly known. Well, then, would England be be tha first to turn back—to roll back, as it were, the moral axis of the world, and recur to the barbarism of the middle ages by repealing this international code? He could not help feeling that when the house and the country reflected upon the facts of the case, both would come to the conclu sion that, in so doing, they would be sanctioning a retro grade policy, unworthy of themselves, and that they would he committing a great crime against humanity. (Cheers.) Mr. HO RSMAN rose, together with the Solicitor-Gene ral, but there being loud cries of " Horsman," the Solicitor- General resumed his seat, and the right hon. gentleman proceeded to addre: s the house. He said the state of the American war, and the position of England with regard to the belligerent parties, had become such that it was evident at no distant date a very serious and practical dis cussion must take place with respect to the duties and responsibilities of our position. In England war with America was not desired—(hear, hear)—and since war with England was entirely against the interest of America, it was apparent this country could only drift into a war because the House of Commons neglected its duty. Up to this he had thought that a discussion on America was to be deprecated ; but when such a discussion was raised by the friends and advocates of the North, in a manner so disparaging to the Government of England—. (loud cheers)—he felt that nothing but mischief could ensue from evading:such a discussion. He had come to the con elusion, in conformity, he believed, with the majority of the house, that the Government of England had endeavoured, with perfect integrity, to carry out a policy of strict and undeviating neutrality. (Cheers.) He admitted that they were bound to enforce the Act of the 59th George 111., and therefore he was not the apologist of those whose illegal acts had so embarrassed the best interests of the country, (Hear, hear.) No one would deny that it had been the de . sire of this country to observe a strict neutrality in this war—no one would deny that it was her desire to avoid being engaged in a war with America. (Hear.) The object of the speech made by the hon. member for Rochdale ho was unable to see, although he could see that one effect of it must be to furnish the American press with a justification for the reprisals of Admiral Wilkes. The House of Com mons bad not been anxious to enter upon the discussion of American affairs, and so long as the issue of the contest was dubious, Parliament had refrained from expressing any judgment that might wound American sympathies. But the case was very different when all uncertainty was dispelled by the inexorable logic of facts. (Hear, hear.) ! They saw the spirit of the North broken and her army driven back with nothing to show but failure and humi• Nation; the:conquest of the South rendered more hopeless than ever, and Washington in greater jeopardy than Richmond. (Hear, hear.) They saw the aggressive and menacing attitude displayed towards England, forgetful of how she had borne with patience the destitution of her ope ratives and the crippling:of her trade; they saw, abov3 all, the announcement that certificates of license were to be given to our merchantmen by a foreign Minister, and when notwithstanding all they themselves,asked that even ing to impose fresh fetters upon the Government, by the exercise of a greater vigilance in obedience to the require ments of a foreign Power ; bearing in mind these things he was not surprised the question was asked, How long were those inflictions to be endured ? (Cheers.) How long France and England were to be interdicted from communi cating with the South ? How long English operatives were to be the victims of a deposed and extinct authority, and of an aggressive and insolent legislature ? (Loud cheers.) At the commencement of the war the sympathies of nine-tenths of England tended towards the North, but as events proceeded our expectations that the war would be speedily over were falsified,and the South had now brought the second year of the war of independence to a successful close. What judgment could they in that Christian as sembly pass on the proclamation of President Lincoln with respect to the emancipation of the slaves than it was one of the most atrocious crimes against civilisation and huma • nity the world had ever seen? (Cheers.) And yet an• other thing that Englishmen hated more than slavery was cant; and John Bull was far too sagacious to be per suaded that a war of extermination was carried on in the interests of humanity. (Renewed cheers,) The Government of President Lincoln having played their last desperate card, which had been followed by failure and dis grace, professed now still to cherish the delusion that the Union was to be recovered by war. The attempt to cement that Union with blood had broken down the whole Govern ment. The free republic had been metamorphosed into a military tyranny, and the President had become mere of a despot than the Czar of Russia. Liberty was abolished. Liberty of motion, of speech, of writing, and of thought, were all gone. Tho press was coerced and gagged. Tho State prisons were filled with political suspects, as they used to be in Italy. In fact, the constitution was at an end. While such was their political condition, what was their financial state? In three years they had created a debt half as large as that of England, with double the rate of interest. In three years they had the largest debt in Europe, with the least credit. Their Ming was in process of dissolution, Their short enlistments expired in June, and were not likely to be renewed by soldiers whose pay was in arrear. The Irish and Germans, who were the fighting element, were either killed or had deserted. The negroes, who were the last hope of the Union, had proved a failure, because, at the first volley, these sable warriors had thrown down their muskets and run away. Suchiwas the political, financial, and military condition of a country which seemed to think that • the best way to stop their internal discord was by a war with England. Coming to the point which the house had discussed, he did not believe that the Northern States had the smallest desire to go to war with this country. (Hear.) But ho did believe that it was the deliberate policy of the Washington Cabinet to provoke England to put an end to the blockade, as the readiest mode of escape from their own domestic difficulties. Submission to England would save them from the humiliation of submission to the South, and he believed it was for that reason that boastful assurances of approach ing victory and conquest became more loud and confident as achievement had proved more notoriously impossible.' He believed it was that foreign Powers might bo represented as having at the eleventh hour stepped in to be the saviours of the South, and thus be made the instrument of a disruption which, without that foreign intervention, it would be said never could have been accomplished. The question had teen asked in the house, and elsewhere, how it was that we were enduring all this for the Northern Stater, when we would not endure it horn the strongest of the old monarchies of Europe. The answer to that was twofold. We hadshown them once that we knew how to silence their bravado. To repeat it too soon would be to lay us open to the charge of acting with bravado; therefore we could afford to pass by such nonsense as involved no materialinjury. Though that might explain the past, it did not suffice to justify our sub mission to injuries so flagrant-and so systematic in charac ter as those which were now reported by every packet. The reasons for the endurat co of that were of a higher character. The Northern States were passing through a crisis, the magnitude of which they were not even them selves aware of. The war with the Southerners was vir tually at an cud, the independence of the South being an accomplished fact. (Hear.) The prolongation of the war would aggravate the evils of the North to an intolerable degree, whilst peace with the South must lead to complete disorganisation. It was no doubt because her Majesty's Government foresaw the ruin and anarchy impending over the North that they feared to facilitate the crisis. It was not the strength of the North, but its weakness, that the Government and people of England had to apprehend. It was not peril, but responsibility, wo should incur. It was the duty, therefore, of all parties in this country to press upon the Government the solemn duty of maintaining under every provocation, an immovable attitude of peace. (Hear.) Repudiating the idea that the NortherP sYmPs-. thisere in. this country who had gone to Mr. Adams with addresses, represent , tel the feelings of this country, the hon. member said that it behoved that house to takecareand pre serve the country from the stain of such misrepresentation, and to make it known to all parties in America—especially to those who were raising a still timid voice for peace—that the apologists for despotism and bloodshed amongst us repre sented but an infinitesimal portion of the sentimentof Eng land—(hear)—and that the great mass of our countrymen, of all creeds and classes, were united in one common feeling of abhorrence and condemnation of the suicidal war that was destroying the Union and disgracing the nation. (Cheers.) The SOLICITOR-GENERAL deprecated the tone which , the discussion had taken, and expressed doubt whether the tenor of the speech of the hon, member for Stroud was quite so peaceful as he des'red it to be. In that, as in other assemblies, the expressions of individual members must not be taken as an expression of the opinion of he assembly itse.f. He had heard with very great pleasure from the hon, member for Belfast that in his opinion there was no question about the policy of the Foreign Enlistment Act, or about the duty of enforcing it. it would be a great support to the Govern ment if that were generally understood throughout the country. He denied that anything he had said in recent debates had been inconsistent with enforcing the provisiors of that act. The Government had all along stated their in tention of enforcing it in all oases in which sufficient infor mation, supported by sufficient evidence, could be brought to bear. With regard to, the case of the Alexandra, the hon. and learned gentleman denied that the Act of Parliament required that the Government should give the grounds upon which they seized vessels under such circumstances. The Government had proceeded on the evidence—on which they were bound to proceed—that the vessel was being built for persons exercising government in a foreign State against a State at peace with this country. The law advisers of the Crown said that the evidence before them was sufficient to meet the requirements of the Foreign Enlistment Act, and in discharge of their duty they were bound to act upon it, especially if they wished to fulfil the pledges given to the country. But it was asked, "Why not sue for penalties be fore the magistrates ?" Ho would say that though we are not to go out of our way to comply with the unreasonable demands of any Powers, they were not to go out of their way to put themselves under the imputation that they were not in earnest. Ilad the Government acted on this advice, and gone to the magistrates, the vessel would have sailed out of port as in the case of the Alabama. It was the duty of the Government to act on its own responsit ility under the guidance of the Foreign Enlistment Act. The hon. member for Liverpool referred to a system of espionage. He (the So licitor-General) disclaimed on the part of the Government having to do with such a system. Their sole object was to enforce the law of the country, and this they sought to do in a fair way ; but if any person not connected with the Go. vernment resorted to such practices the Government was not responsible for them. Far be it from him by any rash word to diminish the chances of maintaining peace and goodwill, which he was always anxious to maintain. But it was the duty of Great Britain in the interests of peace and goodwill between the two countries not to plead guilty to offencesvehich they had not committed—(hear)—and that they should not suffer, without remonstrance, charges to be made against them of offences of which they were not guilty. If by any unfortunate circumstances there should be a rupture between the two countries, they must nen by any admission that it was their duty to do that which they were not bound to do—they must not, by any deviation from that position which they were entitled to hold under the law of nations, give colour to any one to say, " You your selves have admitted that you were wrong." This was the object he had iu view in laying before the house on this oc casion the position of this seizure. They were most anxious to prevent violations of neutrality by their subjects, but were determined not to accept responsibility which did not belong to them, or to admit to the United States that they had been guilty of breaches of international law. Caro must be had to distinguish between acts of hostility and breaches of the municipal law of Great Britain, (Cheers.) Sir F. KELLY pointed out that the Government had pursued the harshest possible course to the owners of the Alexandra. They might have indicted them, and thus had an opportunity of testing the truth of the information, or have commenced an action for penalties or gone before a jury; but instead of either of these courses, they seized the vessel, and left the owners no opportunity of knowing the character of the evidence given against them. He urged upon the Government to let the owners know the nature of the charges against them. He would call the attention of the hon. gentleman the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and of the noble lord at the head of the Government, to a subject closely connected with the matter before the house, and of which he had given notice. The question he wished to put was, whether the Government had adopted any measures to facilitate and protect postal communi cation between this country and the different ports near the Gulf of Mexico. Ho had been prepared for vigilance on the part of the noble lord the Foreign Secretary more espe cially when he was under the guidance of the noble lord at the head of the Government. His surprise was, therefore, all the more when he found that the Foreign Secretary, upon application having been made to him by the owner of a vessel, the Sea Queen, for protection in carrying a sealed bag of letters from the Post-office, a department of the Go vernment, thought proper to relieve the vessel from the obligation of carrying the mail bag, fro fear of something that might be done by a nation in amity with this country. Tt appeared to him that this was a humiliating course for a Minister of the Crown to pursue—and he was afraid the result would be that the merchants connected with the various ports of the Gulf of Mexico and the West India Islands would henceforth be unable to carry on their cor respondence. (Hear, hear.) Mr. M. MILNES protested against the accuracy of the facts and the logic of the conclusions of the right hon. gen tleman the member for Stroud, and expressed his opinion that it would be better if that right hon. gentleman would abstain from making such speeches. One important point Ind been overlooked, that whilst the United States had the means of building their own ships the Confederate States had not, and must rely upon us for a navy to send forth to burn and destroy. He expressed a hope that the people of America would not be led away by the speeches that had been made by those who found fault with the Government. It was ungenerous to promote a war between this country and the United States when we were armed to the teeth and the United States was in tho agony of htr destiny. (Hear, hear.> Lord PALMERSTON—Thehon. and learned gentleman has asked what security there is for mercantile communica tion with Mexico, and communication by letter. With re gard to merchant vessels, in the first place, the best security, and I trust a sufficient one, is that the American Govern ment will no doubt observe the law of nations ; and if their cruisers intercept and capture any merchantman with out sufficient cause, they are liable to damages in their courts, and we have no reason to believe that their courts will not act justly. (Hear, hear.) With regard to bags of letters that may bo carried by a merchantman, if the ves sel is captured upon suspicion of being concerned in an ille gal voyage, by that order which my noble friend the Sec retary for Foreign Affairs read in another place yesterday, it will be seen what the American Government prescribes with regard to bags so found. They are not to be opened, the seal is not to be broken, they are to be delivered to the consul of the nation to which they belong when the vessel comes into port, and that consul is bound to open those bags himself, and if there should be found anything con trary to the good faith of nations and against the Govern ment of the Country, then he is bound to give that to the Go vernment, but the letters in the bags are to be forwarded by him to the destination to which they are directed. I appre hend, therefore, that there is no necessity for any other pro ceedings on the part of her Majesty's Government than that of calling the attention of the United Statt s Govern ment to_the circumstances, and expressing a hope that they will act in conformity with the orders which they them selves have laid down. Tho house then went into committee, but immediately resumed. SUPPLY REPORT. The report.of supply was then brought up, Mr. CONINGIIAM asked the noble lord to assure the house that the Prince Consort memorial would not ex ceed £lOO,OOO, He s had reason to believe that it would cost near pOO,OOO. He moved that the report be post poned till they had a full and reliable estimate before them. Sir H. VERNEY seconded the motion. Sir M. PE £0 said that, as it was understood that her Majesty had given her approval to the form of the memorial, they were of course precluded from all further discussion as to the adaptability of the form selected. But he must say he thought the sum asked for by the Government was in sufficient, and therefore he would counsel• the noble lord at the head of the Ciovernment to take a day or two to de. terrine on that point. Lord PALMERSTON said his hon. friend the mem ber for Brighton had misunderstood the nature of the pro posal made by him yesterday. (Hear, hear.) He did not propose to the house to sanction any particular plan, but simply that the house should grant a cer tain sum, with the distinct understanding that it should rest with her Majesty to determine what should be the form of the memorial; but though plans had been exhibited in parts of that building, he was not aware that her Majesty had determined as yet upon any particular plan. What they proposed was that a sum of £50,000 should be tendered to her Majesty towards the expense of the memorial, in ad dition to the private subscriptions, and if it was stated that any particular design could not be executed for that amount, he might remind hon. gentlemen that it was easy for a man of genius either to reduce a plan or the amount of orna mentation which it displayed. Under these circumstances he did not see the reason for postponing the vote, (Hear, hear.) After some further discus: ion, Mr. CONINGIIAM said that, after hearing the state ment of the noble lord, he could not do otherwise than withdraw his motion, but subject of courso to the clear understanding that the vote was to be a clear gift to her Majesty, to be dealt with as she might think best. Tho resolution was then agreed to, as were also the other resolutions. SUPPLY. The report of supply was brought up and agreed to. POST OFFICE SAVINGS BANKS. The Lords' amendments for this bill were considered and agreed to. TELEGRAPH BILL. Tho amendments to this bill were considered and agreed to. Lord C. PAGET obtained leave to introduce a bill to amend the Naval Medical Supplemental Fand Society Winding-up Act - . The bill was read a first time. CUSTOMS BILL. This bill was read a first time. NEW WRIT. Colonel TAYLOR moved for a new writ for the county of Antrim, in the place of General Upton, now Lord Templetown. The house adj urned at twenty minutes to one o'clock. RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE. TRAFFIC RECEIPTS FOR THE WEEK' Miles Opened. Receipts. Railways. 1863. 1862. 1863. 1862. X £ Belfast and N, Counties 136 136 Belfast and County Down 4O 49 Blyth and Tyne 2B 28 Bristol and Exeter 1215 1215 Caledonian Cockermouth & Workington Bl 85 Cork and Bandon 2O 20 Cork, Illackrock, & Passage 6l 6.1 Cork and Yong hal . 325 324 Cornwall 531 535 Deeside l7 17 Dublin & Belt ast Junction. Dublin and Drogheda 75 63 Dub. & Wickloi , and Wexf d 485 485 Dundee, Perth, & Aber. Jun 3l 31 Edinburgh and Glasgow 1691 1691 Forth & Clyde Junction Furness, &c 5O 5 Glasgow & South-Western Gt. Eastern,Nrik.,&E.Union Great Northern 330 330 Great North of Scotland 5B 58 ot. Northn. & Westn. (Irel.) 715 451 qt.Southn. & Westn.(lrind.) 329 329 Great Western 992 A6ll Inverness & Aberdeen June 865 734 Irish North-Western 145 130 Irish South-Eastern 251 251 Lancashire & Yorkshire 3954 3951 Limerick and Ennis.. Limerick and Foynes 26 261 Llanelly 46' 46 London & North-Western London and Blackwall 55 51 London & South-Western Lond. Brighton, &S. Coast London, Chatham & Dover 725 724 Lond., Tilbury, & Southend Man.,Sheffield,&Lincolnsh blanch. S.Jun.& Altrincham— 91 91 Maryport and Carlisle Metropolitan 35 Midland (incl. N.-Western) 630 Midland Gt.Westn. of Irind 2191 Monkland 7l Monmouthsh. Rail. & Canal 44 North British, Edin., Perth and Dundee N-Eastern and New. & Can B94i North London 9 North Staffordshire 254 Oswestry and Newton.... 42 Rhymney l9l St. Helen's Canal& Railway 52 Scottish Central Scottish North-Eastern 1321 Somerset and Dorset 394 South Devon South-Eastern 306 Stockton and Darlington ... • 155 Taff Yale 55 Ulster 641 Vale of Clwyd. Vale of Neath 255 Waterford and Kilkenny , 3l Waterford and Limerick 77 West Cornwall 275 W.Hartlepool Harbn&RaiL W'haven,Cleator,&Egrmnt 7 Whitehaven Junction l2 Whitehaven & Furness Jun 35 2,130 1-.81, '6 2 620 2,215 1,568 6,149 5,/.77 15,512 14,741 293 203 339 Sul 162 209 402 1,376 1,320 3,8 272 1,391 1,350 1,635 1,651 I,ulB 1,563 1,114 1,141 7,804 7,293 282 2n 2,969 2,017 8,258 8,103 29,156 28.330 27,299 25,005 1,b71 1,881 517 237 0,699 8,022 58,303 54 690 1,116 862 1,911 1,817 333 276 31,460 33,497 314 166 165 126 GB2 514 00,125 24,210 1,731 1,681 23,24 21458 19,438 21,168 3,567 2,612 1351 1,007 14,183 13,727 1,233 1,311 1,313 1,133 1,977 --„: FOREIGN AND COLONIAL. Antwerp and Rotterdam 52 Austrian B2B Belgian Eastern Junction 26f Bombay, Baroda, & Cen. India 1851 Buffalo and Lake Huron l6 li Detroit and Milwaukie lB5 Dutch Rhenish 10.4 Eastern of France East Indian Grand Trunk of Canada lO9O Great Indian Peninsula 405 Great Luxembourg 134 Great Western of Canada 345 Madrid, Saragossa &Alicant 429 Northern of Canada .......• Northern of France 7Ol Norwegian Trunk Ottoman Paris, Lyons, & M e dit errn 1491 Paris and Orleans 1340 Pernambuco 774 Royal Danish 0 Sambre and Meuse 6B ... oc, South Austrian Southern of France .. .. 777 Welland. •• • • 25 West Flanders W. and N.W. of France 758 6144 1924 71} 44 38,877 4,827 345% 8671 9 252 1321 391 76i 306 161 1354 1204 1323 777 1,461 '4501 11,241 42,255 3,k17 8,1 , 51 J,033 38,2(8 1,6 a 2,373 10,005 39,2.9 2989 7.579 710 896 2,140 3,361 5,004 370 3.526 19,107 9,32 s 5,619 1,011 153 2,0,2 675 1,820 3,205 4.0:14 4G5 1,284 777 4,341 634 802 850 1,177 1,122 25,704 33,612 300 261 3,343 1,05 2 2,033 2,41 2 3,239 2,229 4,201 4,186 50,676 51,371 18,887 1 ~718 16,433 1707 0 8,525 8,175 4,825 4,61 0 14,180 12,310 17,289 14,320 1,563 1,373 51,040 47,51 0 603 6 56 417 225 122,512 120,38 0 64,631 57, 482 1,192 1,485 1,188 47,667 58,1 14 23,559 25,258 1,019 837 4b 1 026 38,016 COUNTRY MARKETS. .. 1., WAKEFIELD—APRIL 24. The wheat trade is steady to-day, and prices were about es dear as last week for fresh qualities. Foreign bailey good supply, and rather lower. In other articles there 95 no change. STAMFORD—Arum 24. White wheat, 46s:to 50s ; red, 44s to 47s per 36 sto.ne. Barley, malting, 36s to 40s; grinding, 30s to 33a per (1 1. ' Oats, 20s to 26s per 24 stone. Beans, old, 40s to --a per ; new, 35s to —s. LIVERPOOL-APRIL 24. At this day's market there was a fur attendance of the town and country trade, and wheat met a good inquiry for all descriptions, at prices tending upwards. Oats brought full rates. Flour was in active demand, at rather more money. Oatmeal firm, at late rates. Indian corn held for 3d per qr advance. Barley, beans, and peas only saleable in retail. EXETE •APRIL 24. CATTLE. Fat beef, p se., 10s0d to 11s6d Ewes, per lb 4.. , 54d to 64 A Pork carcases, 7s Od to 8s Od- Wethers, d 0...., 7d to --u Lamb, p to d Fat calves, d0...60 told. Rough fat, 31-cl per lb. Wheat, white, .6s 3d to 6s 4d Barley. Ditto red. .6 s Od t o 6 s 3d O ats .........2358 6d dd t 0 0 0 4 3 0, (33 ' 11 _Flour, fine, 35s to 36s ; seconds,;34s to —s per sack. BRISTOL SUGAR—APRIL 24. There is a rather better feeling in the market, and sever parcels on the spot and to arrive have been sold this Wc v at prices not previou.ly obtainable. R e fi ne d se ll s s t e ad' l l at about former rates to 6d advance. No ruin offering. COAL .ARKET. Prioes of Coal per Ton a s. d. Byass's Bebside West Hartley ....15 6 Cowpen Hartley ...... 15 6 Wylam 15 6 Lambert's West Hart ley 15 3 Carway and Duffryn Malting l9 6 Edon Main 14 6 West Hartley 15 6 Holywell ..15 6 Hastings Hartley ....15 6 Tar-field Moor 12 6 Tanfield Moor Butes l2 6 Walker Primrose 11 6 Ships at market the close of the market. Walls End. s. U. Russel's Hatton A , 5 6 0 Hartlepool. l7 6 South Hardepoo) 1 5 s 11 elloe Riddell Whitworth l5 6 Hetton ......17 6 Cassop ....15 0 BrrddylPs Hetton ..... 16 6 South Hetton ... 1 7 4 0 Gosforth Wharnoliffe • ...14 6 Tunstall 128; sold. 83. Foreign Mail Packet List. MAILS DUE.' 1' AnKralia and Mauritius, via Southampton .. M A Y 0 9 , brazil and Ca via Marseill es ... .. May A, pe Yards, by British p ac k e t. MaY • Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena.. May 3 : Falkland Islands China, Penang, and Singapore, via Southarapton.MaY 2 wi, via Marseilles ...Apr. ii . O 2 6 Gibraltar, via So u th ampton M Apr• ' . India (Calcr,tta), and Ceylon, via Southampton MaY 0 via Marseilles Apr' 0, , 'lndia (Bombay), via Southampton Apr. 6, via Marseilles MO Portugal .... Malta, Egypt, and Men, via Southampton Arr. 21, via Marseilles Apr. 2 ,, Newfoundland Oporto and Vigo .. 2 9 ' U. S. and British N. Ame r i ca , b y B r it. pac k e t.... Apr. by U.S. packet. ~. O. by Canadian packet. Apr. 1 0, W.C. of Africa, Madeira, and Teneritfe Mil Bahamas, via New York Mexico 00410.0..A.104 All parts of 'West Indie s , i nc l u di ng C hil i , Peru, }Apr. 2 ' a ' .California, and B r iti s h C o l um b ia.. _..4 Births. wife BULWER.--On the 22d inst., at Deerham, Norfolk, the • of Captain W. G. Bulwer, of a daughter. ' the PEEL.—On the 23d inst., at 161, Westbourne-terrac e ' wife of Frederick Peel, Esq., of a son. SPARROW.—On the 23d inst , the wifo of Dr. Robe rt Sparrow, of Dover House, &uthsoa, of a son. the S3ITTII.—On the 23d inst., at 9, Church-road, Brixton, wife of T. E. Smith, Esq., of a son. Marriages. *feet rEAsz—WiLsoN.—On the 23d i ns t., at the Friends' Pvbri ing House, Kendal, Gurn e y, son of Joseph Peen'' 01001 of Darlington, to Katherine, daughter of John J. " Esq., of Kendal, lull] Wlt ll STELIART—M UIRITEAD —On the 22d inst ,at -- 1 - I I Episcopal Chapel, Robert Dalrymple Steuart, Es,,L., ° Hussars, only son of the late Robert Steuart , P'„4.th Alderston, M.P., to Emily Eliza, eldest daughtfii r ecii o ' late Henry R. Du Vernet G. Muirhead, EFT, o' holm, Lanarkshiro. Deaths. He re' BuLLocK.— On the 21st inst., at Widemarsh-stre et, ford, William Bullock, Esq., aged 56. pete r ILtuni . .— On. the 23d inst., in Guildford-stre et ' Hardy, F.R,S., aged 50. h.stre e MEAD.—On the 22d i ns t., a t th e G rey h oun d, Iktig Pimlico, Isaac Mead, aged 74. itt• PEEL —On tt e 17th inst., in the Ardennes, I3elgi , u — „ ..0 Kennedy Peel, Esq., son of the Right Hon. L ie—. and Lady Alice Peel. val r TOWNSEND.—On the 22d inst , at Lindon Ledg„,ell, Esc° water, the Hon. Louisa, wife Of Joseph Towriee— of Alveston House, `Warwickshire, tured 60. WARE.—On the 23d inst., John Ware, Esq., 3 1 9 i' a e10 3e3. ney-road, late of 6 A, Upper nurioc-placo , place, aged 67. London : Printed and Published by WILLI 0 $O. s ' o f of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at Tuz Surf 31'eedousa Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy , ' ti le 45. 1 4dleaeac..—Saturday, April ? , 5) 1S" THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, APRIL 25, 1863,