The Sun. — London, England, 1844-07-03 00:00:00

5 per cent• 5 per cent. 5 per cent. 7 per cent. 4 per. cent. 7 5 7 -- 6 7 - 100 sa. wt. r sa. wt. r 100. MAY 20. buyers for ales of im ry limited. msumption departure lose quoted 1, 'however, tare fallen British bar ce been ob criptions of per candy. East mail at 'pees. Tin td sales can subjoin the .!r cwt. aonth have y equalled ;onots have ached long . There kJ 31ins are in ints, which lower than -tcd at un quired for. ed, the de r local con- rdinary de clined frOni A' sale, and s obtained• t continues pressed and :d from our rt sold at is ke following kollen cloth 3r. Ba. per ;rnent in th• reported to cckholni tar ne continuo the month, ur last pub s a sale of s at 1 rupee, en. Saunders's As remained idency, and rupees per e, has been e in the last candy since Cher decline eported th➢s 10i rupeeih last month's ly since our nd 111arwr tch remata during tbs (.1 Liverpo 3 rupees, t° [nee our lost 0 109. to 106 to 100 to 110 then:mow! Pnths' sigt" d. per rupe e ' On Madra , : days', 21 tanged, t bs um. Thos! ‘ ) 34 from I ± 22.) ntinue sins° Doo pieces of Ms. quantity ill at our qua' aye, if an," 11l prices ar 5t week ha' ' lest prospect 5 dolls., b ut in Canton 0 le at forma t f prices do i not so fir ° endency, f ° ,, r . :es of gr 3), otations, t' oing. eelined, and ations. do of all ltio sales to 0 01 , purcs e y are better e.hands, I'l'll cerning hear of fore, 060141 and is Olt ttle A the ox, treater 14— ig on 1001° been wade' ":,iantog, bils t week lower• P" se t and recent trvA-- on of 5 ° feet' n to 60141' Luoic 0 4s. 6 a' r . F i tt 4d., t o quivalenb for 100 0 1, do• Feb' !)i j)eC• Feb. Jan' Jo. 0 19 1 ) , of g a : e rf tinued.,loo, 3eas the, l ' ~ .xtract ' o t •e is n t bs ifusioe, is 0 611 ell' l e otie •antil° a n ere 113 , tl sure the fo e ,,re o in ho oi o f Pere °il ;Has ,eits„perli ad s P 4 . r ae tr aC o r rera the P e tor with 13 ,01 1 LAtot r" received on the state of the markets :—" The markets, with a very few exceptions, have presented an exceedingly gl o omy aspect tin s wee k ; almost every department of trade is in a most distressing state, and there is nearly a total cessation of business. The trades in whom confidence can be placed cannot be induced to purchase beyond their actual necessities though most articles rate below cost price. Several houses continue to press their merchandise into the market by the hammer, which has generally gone off at an immense sacri fice. The accounts from all the towns of the interior are of an uniform depressed position, nor do they anticipate an early improvement. Importations from the United Kingdom still continue adding to our stocks, of which the markets are fully supplied. No alteration need be expected in commercial matters till confidence is restored. The transactions during he week have been principally for cash, and no price can Possibly be affixed to any article." TilE AFFGHAN MASSACRE. A handsome tablet, executed by an eminent sculptor in London, has been erected in Alverstoke Church, near Gos port, to the memory of the officers and soldiers of the 44th Regiment who fell in the Affghan war, over which hangs the colours of that ill-fated regiment. The following is the inscription : tain " atered to the memory of Colonel T. Mackrell, A.D.C. to her Majesty; Major W. B. Scott, Captain T. Swaine, Cap- It B. ItPCrea, Captain F. R. Leighton, Captain T. Ro binson, Captain F. C. Collins, Lieutenant W. H. Dodgin, Lieutenant W. G. White, Lieutenant W. G. Wade, Lieute nant 11. 'Cadett, Lieutenant S. Swinton, Lieutenant F. J. C. tenant and Fortye, Lieutenant A. W. Gray, Paymaster T. Bourke, Lieu- Quartermaster R. B. Halahan, Surgeon J. Har court, Assi stant-Surgeons W. Balfour and W. Primrose, and 645 non -commanding officers and soldiers of the 44th Regi- I nept, who fell upon the field of battle in the disastrous Aff- Can war of 1841 and 1842. They sank with arms in their of climate, treachery, ndsolnconquered, but overpowered by the united horrors ned bY Captai n J . above this sate e, and barbarous warfare; their colours, Souter, one of the few survivors, hang e, which is erected to their memory by the Officers of the 44th Regirnent.—June, 1844." „" And if Thy ret e u n g people Israel be put to the worse before the , because they have sinned against Thee; and shall tio n bef ore and en Thv name, and pray and make supplica ' . Heavens, theen this house ; then hear thou from the s, and forgive the sins of Thy people Israel."-6th chapter of the sec o nd book of Chronicles, 24th and 25th verses Tl - r, ,-.,.._ —..... IMPUTA TI- ^,, N . OF RAILWAY DI RECTons TO SIR R. PEEL. I.londaduepopuntastion of Directors from most of the rail ways waited before the Right lionou ß rable B P aron l et f t r he t tr obert ee 0 i h r e l p l u o r v p s o s o e n otfhlea sub sect of the 3.lints- terial measure respecting the railways of the kingdom. A Chairma n of nong the members of; the deputation we observed the tern ~ the London 4n d Bi rm i ngham, the Great Wes !a:, the South-Western; and the South-Eastern Rail vs. (The names of the gentlemen present will be found "i the Court Circular.) .The Right H onoura bl e' Taronet received the deputation I;with his usual courtesy, alsd listened with great attention 0 t heir case, whi c h was lailJ. liefor.l3 him, at considerable "Ph. A lon g conferenmensued, in which the Directors en lerged on the objectionaile character of the whole mea- Z B nre, both i n i ts principleand details, and concluded by ex eseing a hope that, at the present late period of the session, e Bill would he postponed. Sir Robert Peel declined acceding to the request of the deputation for a postponement until next session. THE SPY SYSTEM. (From the Wen Towns' Messenger.) iot We do not at all wonder at the interest, as w ell as jea ,:sY, with which all parties in and out of Parlia ee.nt, have regarded theletter-opening question,. which ;was the subject of a Rebate and division in the :A1„ °115 .,9 of Commons on- Sionday night. In the debate, 'allies Graham, who tried to wrap himself still closer round in the mantle of dignified reserve, State .13°11 eY, and Governmeitt prerogative, was rather l' sh °ll o g rthl3l3: off handled, and ii the division he came ver y m, 44 b e i ng t h e w h ole ma j ority he could Guster in a Hou se o f n early 400 ! That Sir James raham is an unpopular \Home Secret ar y, th ere never h as much doubt; the resent A division shows with ow much diArest and !suspicion he is regarded. There is no point on which an Englishman is so psensitive as a letter. To read another's letter, or open other's lean-, is regarded, and very justly, as a moral el°llY. There is, however, no use in disguising, and it was not attempted to be disguised, that such a license must of necessity, for the safety and pro tectio n of the State, be vested in the Government, and such a license must not be interfered with or nestioned. This right, however, which no one in Willes senses would interfere with or question, if it of were only acted upon in very rare instances, and those discrxigelleY and importance, and with the greatest rathe r tion and delicacy, all of which extenuating or ionag'se,circumstances seem to be wanting in t a li 4p i r u e lti i.i fy t which is brought before the House anytl • very fair subect of complaint. We do not know Who kang the ore complaint. in question. M. Mazzini, s had 7poerlef tete; stare detained b and opened, and with Petty cuil a i n declares are was a necessity or not g carefully re-sealed—all of which he g f u o i l l . e o le p s e s n t ieg bu h t iswhleetttheersr, there 7was no necessity for the want of straightforwardness 8%1 ohonest.y in the way of dealing with him : and there ecessity, in spite of all Sir James Graham or his friends Public may urge there is a neces s ity f or th a t w h ic h Plan fn? an aith and public decency requ i re , name l y, an ex r.ation of the affair--a partial, if not a full explana tion,) Which is now a lt oge th er so d ogge dl y, so diseourt e '4sl.Yi so disdainfully withheld. (From the Liverpool Times Probabl y no discussion that has yet .) taken place in Parliament has damaged the Government so much as the debates on Monday and Tuesday nights, on t he s ubject, of the alleged Post-office espionage ; and °deser ve dl y so ; fur Ministers have degraded not tAly their own, but the national character, by prac ilees abhorrent to the feelings of Englishmen, and .11sPIrt 'd by motives of the most humiliating kind. W case t he public opinion was altogether against the Governal raeut- We believe that they have committed . moral s that after this deplorable act of Sir James `Eratlam, they can never face their countrymen on the hustings a A second time with any chance of success. h undred party defeats would not have ruined their A so utterly as their unblushing avowal of a system a ti c dence, breach of publi c h onour an d confi and their hardened unconsciousness that they w ere doin g anything wrong in committing an act hick, in p r i vate life, would send a man to 'Coventry hlfor the rest of his days. The Home Secretary and Sunseohelengues stood upon their ri g ht t o exerc i se t hi s nu and delicate power, forgetful of th e max i m , j us, summa injuria, and that, although they itight be shielded by the strict letter of the law from Personal re sponsibility, they were not the less guilty of Perpetrating a consummate wrong, and most despicable Meanness. _.For wh at could b e more i nfamous than that a dictatorial enp ow er, paramount t o a ll l aw, and only in - tend e d to be e xerc i sed in extrem i t i es _ ne quit quid tt a tru uesti I espublica capiat —should, in ordinary times, i nof i r l e se 4 as an engine to crush an unfortunate and of this co exile, not plotting against the social order 0_ accoun t 8 contry, but obnoxious to foreign despotisms eitt)ls.e,,,uthioefilhis efforts in favour of the ~ good old Englishmen, since the days of the R..Fious revolution, have been accustomed to honour ? Still more intolerable is it that this power should expanded into a systematic abuse of the con fidence reposed in the Post -office by private in hereafter i dtviduals i n n chi g i :u?ral, and that no Englishman can letterst he spY e in the boast that, unlike other countries, s t 6. . ? T s eln is unknown here —that the privacy of his is sacred from all eyes except those for whom they intended. Sir J. Graham has dispelled that proud ill mon for faVer. The Englishman's house may be his Ca stle, but his letters are not his own secrets. We mustwe hang our heads and confess that, in this respect, __ are no better than our neighbours so long as a Tory our continues in office. ior, differing from _air contemporaries, we believe that the whole U .. hinet share the dis itlie for this mean and g I.,r,ostance Toryism only ea,rbaiturdaryarepreceqtuiaeell.y In nsptohnis betrays the old sympathy for f'1213; Alliance princiles, the slavish subserviency to orZ.Tali doespots, and s the remorseless persecution of p a l m S f all countries which characterised it in the Y d ays of Sichnouth and Castlereagh. ""..+,!........-- The g reat GREAT FOOT RACE. the " Ame rican D which foot race between William Jackson, ~,,_ cr Deer, and Thomas Maxfield, the " North Star," . .a 43 eated much a came off on mond P e culation o ry Branch Tar ain th grounds of the Rosema upon ern, Peckham, and i e. of late in the pedestrian circles, ed some disappointment contest between men Yrhonsees pretensions to fame were se great, th°Be eungre gated to witness it. Instead of the bustling close tt l i _ho had been backed for 50/, a side, the assemblage, sguerent race, in ~,. pen was very numero were doomed to view a very in nt which " 'the winner never gave his oppone he Much more than a shadow of a chance. We have not t slightest doubt that the loser did his best, but his opponent's aPeed w as SO good, that he was not disposed to complete the distance. The match, as we have before stated, was for 501. as ide; the ground selected to try the speed of the men, three Miles. , Betting was 5 to 4 on the " American Deer," odds 'vvhich increased as the time of starting drew near. The men were prepared for the race, when " the pelting of the pitiless storm" induced them to defer it until the rain somewhat abated. The Star went away with the lead at a rattling pace, and kept it for the first mile and a quarter or so, when the beer came up, dashed by him, was ne vvertaken, and waS declared a winner in a few seconds over sixteen minutes. The Star, after trying very hard to keep pace with his opponent, SAFE up on comp___„......___..tt.__......__leting two miles and a quarter. NVEYXOI3TIT, JULY 21.--141; Majesty Saxony and suite arrived here unexpectedly last evening, in *lvo chariots and four, fro hero Oxford, on their way to Ports 'tenth. The inhabitants of the town were much pleased at kis Majesty's visit, fully expecting that he would remain here a day or two, for the purpose of visiting the Isle of Portland a other interesting places in our neighbourhood, especially' andhis Majesty was known to take so much interest in geolo teal pursuits ; but we were greatly disappointed, for he left the following morning. The clear profit of the late ball given for the bene fit of the Polish refugees, after payment of all expenses, ex ceeded 1,0001. Last year this ball at Willis's, for thes, same purpose, produced about 620/. only. thi s Mg. JAMES CociutunN BELANEY.---The parties in lamentable affair are well-known in the neighbourhood ot 13elford and Alnwick, and the following particulars will correct some of the mis-statements in the London papers. r. Belaney is a Scotchrnan, and is either a native of, or has lived several years in Berwickshire. His father was in humble circumstance; but by care and industry contrived to raise resources to enable his son to attend to the medical class at Edinburgh. For about four years he practised as a surgeon at North Sunderland, in this county. Here he amused himself in training hawks, and wrote a treatise on file°ritY• About a year and a half ago he married Rachel, the only child of the late Mr. John Skelly, of North Sunder land, and formerly of Deuwick Lane Erld. Mr. Skelly was the Proprietor of extensive lime -works at North Sunderland. The mother of the unfortunate lady was a Miss Wood, of Coaster West Fenn. The wife of Belaney was respectably connected on both sides, and was possessed of considerable Property ; she was an only child, lived a retired Rrivate life, !lid did not, of course, obtain notoriety as " the . Rose . of the arth" for , her beauty, and had no connection with the count af Westmoreland, as it has been stated in the London vaDer4.--21retvcastie 'Journal. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, July 2. Their Lordships assembled at Five o'clock. CORN LAWS. The Earl of RADNOR presented a petition against agricultural protection from Lyneham, in Wilts. The petitioners stated that to the petitions which had been presented in favour of protection to agriculture, many agricultural Lbourers had been compelled to attach their signatures. Lord METHUEN denied that such was the fact. The Duke of RICHMOND also denied this, and said that the Anti-Corn-law 'League had roused the agricultural body in this country, and the con • sequence was, that protection societies had been established, by which the falsehoods indulged in by the Anti-Corn-law League. had been exposed and laid bare to the public. He hoped his Noble Friend, the Noble Earl, when he next addressed the la bourers in his district, would tell them that free trade only meant low wages. The Noble Earl, on a former occasion, had alluded to a F:raphlet . which hail been pub lished on this subject by Mr. Caley. He (he Duke of Richmond) was glad the Noble Earl had alluded to it, because the result had been that the pamphlet of Mr. Caley, little' known before, was now eagerly sought after, and largely circu!ated. The Earl of RADNOR repeated that this pamphlet contained the grossest exaggerations and untruths. The Duke of CLEVELAND defended the agricul tural protection societies from the imputations which had been cast upon them. He did not wish to enter into a discussion on so extensive a subject on the presen tation of a petition. He should, however, be always ready to enter into a fair fight, and fully discuss the subject. The Earl of STRADBROKE argued that the rates of wages were always reduced when prices of corn were low, and ware raised as the price-of corn increased._ After a few words from the Duke of BEAUFORT, The Earl of RADNOR said, it was idle to attempt to disprove that wages depended upon the price of corn, because everybody knew that they did not.—(Laughter on the Ministerial Benches.) Lord ASHBURTON contended that cheap bread and high wages could not exi6t together. After a short conversation, the subject dropped. The Duke of B EAUFORT presented petitions against any alteration in the corn-laws. The Marquis of CLA.NRICARDE gave notice that he should, on Thursday, put a question to the Govern ment on the subject of the removal of Mr. C. O'Brien from the magistracy of Ireland. Earl St. VINCENT presented several petitions from Bristol and other places against _the Sugar Duties Bill. LIBEL BILE. Lord CAMPBELL postponed this Bill, in conse quence of the absence of Lord Denman. Lord BROUGHAM suggest€d that the Bill should be taken on Thursday. Lord CAMPBELL said a very important notice was on the paper respecting the Post office, which might occupy a considerable time. The LORD CHANCELLOR—WeII, I have a Bill on Friday, but, however, take it before my Marriage Bill on Friday.—(Laughter.) The Bill was then postponed till Friday. THE SUGAR DUTIES BILL. The Earl of DALHOUSIE rose to move the third reading of this Bill. He thought it was absolutely ne cessary that they should have an abundant supply of sugar at as cheap a rate as possible, seeing that this article had now become, not an article of luxury, but of necessity. It was to accomplish this object that the pre sent Bill had -been introduced. The Noble Earl then read several statements to show that, of late years, the supply of sugar, to this country had not been equal to the demand. He also read a comparative statement of prices within the last seven years. He then entered into an explanation of the general alterations which were in tended to be effected by the proposed measure, as they were lately explained in the debates on this Bill in the other House of Parliament. He contended that the coun tries producing sugar by means of slave-labour ought not tp be placed on the same footing as those countries producing sugar in which slave-labour was not employed; and in support of this view he re ferred to the opinion of Mr. Deacon Hume, as given be fore the Import Duties Committee on this subject. To admit slave-grown sugar on the same footing as free labour sugar would be to offer a bribe for the continua tion of slavery and the slave trade. He thought that the protection of 10s. per cwt., proposed by this Bill, in favour of the West India producers, was sufficient, and he, therefore, confidently recommended it to the adop tion of their Lordships. Lord MONT EAGLE deprecated the course of the Government in having left this question in a state of uncertainty. He thought this was unjust both to the consumer at home and to the producer in the West In dian colonies. He objected to this Bill because it would cause fluctuation in price, as it made the supply to this country dependent upon the laws of other countries. He had . no hesitation in saying that he should vote against an equalisation of the duty be tween all foreign sugar and West India sugar, as he believed that an equalisation of the duty at present would be an injustice to the West Indian produce. Ho ridiculed the system of certificates of origin, and contended that it would be useless. He also ridiculed the idea that this Bill would have the effect of curbing the slavery system, for he helieved that it would have just a contrary effect. In proportion as they consumed free-labour sugar in this country would a vacuum be created in foreign countries, and that vacuum would have to be filled up with a supply of slave-labour produce. This Bill would indirectly encourage the slave trade, and be could, therefore, but de signate the Bill as a hypocritical farce. The principle of this Bill, he contended, was bad, and the measure would, therefore, produce no beneficial results. Lord BROUGHAM differed entirely from his Noble Friend in supposing that this Bill would give encourage ment to slavery and the slave trade. He contended that such a measure as this was only carrying further into practice the principles upon which slavery and the slave trade were abolished. He did not deprecate the use of cotton on account of its being the produce of slaves, nor did he deprecate the use of coffee on the same ground; but the reason he deprecated the use of sugar, the pro duce of slave labour, was that the labour required for the production of sugar amounted to torment in the persons performing the labour. This, however, was not the case with respect to the production of cotton and coffee. He would always support any measure which would have the effect of checking the extension of the horrors of slavery as it existed in Cuba and Brazil, and he therefore gave this measure his fullest and most earnest support. Earl St. VINCENT complained of the West India planter having been placed in the position of being un able to command that labour which his trade and his wants required. This had placed the West Indies in a most disadvantageous situation. If they hail had a full supply of labour the necessity for this Bill would never have existed. The Earl of RADNOR denied that the distress which existed amongst the West India interest had arisen out of the emancipation of the slaves. Equal distress to that which existed now had frequently occurred long prior to the time of emancipation. He said the distress which the West India interest suffered arose out of the monopoly which they possessed. He thought it was a great hard ship on the West India proprietors that they should not be allowed to refine their sugar before they sent it to this country. He would remind their Lordships that the West Indies could not supply sugar sufficient for the consumption of this country. In 1801 the importation of sugar was upwards of four millions of pounds, while in 1844 the amount was not larger. Lord BROUGHAM—HaIf of that was for exporta tion in 1801. The Earl of RADNOR—No, it was for home con sumption. The Earl of DALHOUSIE—In 1815 four millions of pounds were imported, and of that two millions were taken for exportation, and two millions of pounds more were consumed last year than in 1815. The Earl of RADNOR contined. He maintanied that the existence of the monopoly in favour of the West Indies had the effect of retarding cultivation and im provement. That monopoly took away the incentive to produce to the fullest extent, because in the years when the most was produced the value obtained for the sugar was the least, but in years when little was produced, a very large value was obtained. This, he contended, was the mischievous effect of monopoly. To the Bill before their Lordships he could have no objection, because it was a step taken in the right direction. It was a step towards the abolition of differential duties, which were most injurious in their effects. He had no objection to give the West India interest protection, provided they could prose that they were entitled to it ; but he would never give it them by means of differential duties. He would rather pay . two millions annually than maintain differential duties in their favour—for differential duties were only taxes on the pockets of the consumers in this country. Earl ST. VINCENT explained. Lord ASHBURTON said the home consumption of sugar had doubled since the year 1801, and it was there fore necessary that such a Bill as this should pass, both to secure cheapness of price and a proper return to the revenue. The supply at present, though large, was not sufficient for the demand, and it was their duty there fore to adopt such measures as would increase the supply of sugar to the people of this country, to whom sugar had become an article of necessity. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE thought tbis mea sure partook of many good and sound principles, and he only regretted that it was not carried further. The prin ciple upon which the Bill proceeded was the interest of the consumer in this country—he whose interests had too long been neglected. He deprecated the system of certificates of origin, as he considered it to be useless. The most powerful Government in the world—that of Napoleon—had found it so. He calculated that it was impossible by such means as these to put down slavery, because those very countries possessing the greatest fa cilities for the production of sugar were the countries where slaves were employed. He hoped, therefore, that this Bill was only a step towards further legislation on the subject. Lord BROUGHAM explained. The Earl of DALHOUSIE briefly replied. The Bill was then read a third time and passed. Lord REDESDALE presented a petition from Pais ley against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill. Thir Lordships then adjourned. of disposing cf the points of law before the case pro ceeded to trial, and it never could happen in Scotland, that after the trial was concluded the proceedings were rendered nugatory because the matter set forth in thein dietment was not sufficient. After four witnesses had been examined, the prosecutor stated that he should abandon his case. The prisoner therefore had no op portunity of staking a defence ; and he must say, in allusion to what had been stated with respect to the foreman of the jury, that it was a most fortunate thing for the prisoner that that juryman did nut try him.— (Hear, hear.) If th e j ury d t d not return a verdict at all, it was the duty of the Court to dismiss the prisoner, never to be tried again. The protest was not given in until the next day. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then read a letter from the Clerk of the Court to the Solicitor-General, stating that when the question . of " not guilty" was put to the jury, they said they had no objection to that verdict. In this . particular case both judges were of opinion that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain a charge of rape. The girl's own evidence was contradictory. This he stated on the authority of the Advocate-Depute him self. Ha read a letter from that gentleman, stating that the evidence of that girl was shaken, and that a verdict of" not guilty" was returned, against which the written protest of the jury was not rresented till some time after ward. lie saw nothing to complain of in the case. He did not gather from the statements before him that the conduct of the judge was at all overbearing, and he informed the House that that gentleman had been for eighteen years at the head of his profession. He did not think that any ground for inquiring into the case had been made out. In his opinion, the motion ought to be negatived. Mr. WALLACE replied. As usual, whenever he brought any case before the House with respect to the conduct of his countrymen, he never received any assis tance from that House.—(A laugh.) He believed that Mr. Muir had been most improperly snubbed by the Lord Justice Clerk, and he had no doubt if the Learned Judge had been at the bar instead of being on the bench Mr. Muir would have pulled his nose.—(Great laughter.) The truth was, Mr. Muir had never intended to give up the case.—(Hear.) He felt confident that the Learned Lord Advocate would not wilfully misrepresent, but he (Mr. Wallace) believed that he had greatly misunderstood it. There could be no doubt whatever that the girl received treatment of a most brutal description, and had he (Mr. Wal lace) been one of the jury (and he had been accustomed to act as a j ury man) — he would certainly have come to the conclusion that the prisoner was guilty, and have returned a verdict accord ingly. The unfortunate girl was now thrown upon the wide world— a child, he might say, she being only twelve years of age—with a stain of the most serious nature on her character—that she had been a consenting party to the vile offence, and moreover, that she had perjured herself, and also that the respectable' woman with whom she lived had forsworn herself. He had a bundle of papers in his pocket, which if the Learned Lord would peruse might alter his opinion regarding the medical testimony which had been given. But this case had been met by Hon. Gentlemen opposite in the way they always met such cases ; they barely listened to such statements, but never with any intention of remedying the grievance complained of. He never felt more convinced of the justice of any case than that which he had laid before the House, and, feeling so, would consider it a breach of his duty if he did not push the matter to a division. _ _ The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion 3O Against it 149 Majority against the motion -119 Upon our re-admission to the gallery, we found Sir R. PEEL upon his legs, suggesting that lion. Members who had motions upon the paper for to-night, and who had precedence of the Hon. Member for Fins bury, should give way, in order to give that Hon. Member an opportunity of bringing forward his motion on the subject of the Post-office. Unless the Hon. Gentleman who had precedence gave way, it would be impossible for the Honourable Member to bring on his motion until a late hour, when it would be impossible to discuss it fully. Considering the notice which bad been given, and the attention the subject had attracted, he considered it of great importance that it should be decided this evening, and he hoped that other Hon. Members who had notices on the paper would give way. Mr. MACKINNON said, that after what had fallen from the Right lion. Baronet he should have no objec tion to comply with the wishes of her Majesty's Govern ment, and postpone his motion until another oppor tunity. Lord INGESTRE said he had a motion which stood next on the paper, and he would follow the example of the Hon. Member fur Lymington, on two conditions, one of which was, that other gentlemen who had mo tions on the paper should do the same, and the next, that there should be an understanding that they were to have precedence on another day in the same order that they stood at present. Captain PECHELL hoped that the Noble Lord would not give up his motion. The claims of the Gallant Officer (Captain Dickenson) had been before the House for some years.—(Loud cries of" Order, order.") Mr. TRELAWNY had a motion on the paper on the civil disabilities of the Jews; he should consider himself quite in the hands of Hon. Gentlemen on this side of the House.—(Cries of " Go on, go on.") The SPEAKER said, if other Members who had motions on the paper did not give way, and it was determined that the Qrders should be proceeded with, the Hon. Member for Lymington would, of course, have precedence.—(Cries of " Go on, go on.") Mr. WILLIAMS hoped that the Hon. Member would persist in his motion.—(Cries of " Order, order.") Mr. MACKINNON, after some hesitation, said he would withdraw his motion. Mr. MONKTON MILNES said he had a motion on the paper which he considered of great importance, with respect to the:trial of a Maltese at Tunis for murder, but he had too much experience of that House not to know that it would be useless to press it against the general wish. Her Majesty's Government had also ex pressed a desire for the Hon. Member for Finsbury to proceed. He should not press his motion ; at the same time, he could not see why Government were so anxious for it to come on to-night ; but, an anxiety to that effect having been expressed, he should, of course, give way. Sir C. NAPIER hoped the Noble Lord (Ingestre) would persist in the motion which he had on the paper. Lord INGESTRE was willing to give way, but hoped he would have some assurance as to the time when his motion on again. w ould see the imp oss ibili ty o f hi s assigning a Govern he s e i could i d i. bring i)E E said he was sure Hon. Gentlemen ment day for the se mot i ons. H e b egge d to state that her Majesty's Government were most anxious to meet the motion of the lion. Member for Finsbury, and he was surprised that impediments seemed to be thrown in the way by Hon. Gentlemen on the other side, who seemed to wish to force the other motions forward; but he hoped, without insisting on any conditions, the Hon. Gentlemen would postpone them. He hoped that consi derations justice.--considerations of the nature of the imputation made against the Government, and the im pressions produced- on the public mind, would induce Hon. Gentlemen, without making conditions, to allow the motion of the li on , M em b e r fur Finsbury to be brought forward. Lord INGESTRE said the Right Hon. Baronet had somewhat misunderstood him. He did not wish to make any conditions with the Government—all he wanted was for :these motions to be considered as dropped orders from to-night. Mr. TRELAWNy, after some short discussion, also postponed his motion with respect to the laws imposing civil disabilities on persons professing the Jewish religion. P OST- OFFICE—OPENING LETTERS. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE t h en rose t o b r i ng f orwar d the motion of w hi ch ho had given notice,_ for a . Select Committ ee to i nqu i re i nto the Secret Department of th e P ost - off i ce. In b r i ng i ng t h e su bj ect f orw ard, he begg e d to thank the Hon. Mem b ers who had pos tponed their m ot i ons in order that he might bring his on.—(Hear,hear.) He begged leave, however, to ob• serve, that when the llouse met at four o'clock, he was totally unable to discover any anxiety on the part of the G ove rnment, or it s o ffi c i als, to make. a House in order to allow him to bring the question forward. At that hour there was not a single member of the Government in their places, and it was the Speaker alone that made the House.—(llear, hear.) He was glad to learn that the Right Hou. Baronet was anxious upon this question, and he hoped that, being so, he would gran t th e i nqu i r y which he asked. The Bight Hon. Baronet had said that the public ought to be satisfied. If h e was s i ncere i n that, he (Mr. Duncombe) would tell hi m th a t th e on ly wa y to satisfyit was to grant his moti on . Th e matter h ad come on him rather by surprise, and many Members had left the House under the supposition that the motion would not come on before ten o'clock. He (Mr. Duncombe) knew not how this question was to be treated, whether as a vote of confidence, or whether the representative system was to be set aside, and, instead of the question being treated on its merits, it was to be looked upon as a vote of confidence. Now, if it Was to be looked at in the latter point of view, he must confess that that was a most unconstitutional way of treating it. Gentlemen might rote for it as a vote of confidence, but if they did so, he had no hesitation in saying that many Members would vote a confidence they did not feel. He wished this question to be treated on its own merits. He did not tk of their nowwhet letters the parties w h o comp l a i ne d o f t h e opening tters were to be told that they might go into a court of law. The answer that had been given by the Right Honourable Baronet on the subject had been considered most unworthy of a Minister of the Crown. how were the public to go to law, he would ask, with a Minister of the Crown ? It was not Mr. Mazzini's letters alone that had been opened. He could show that hundreds of letters had been so dealt with. Who, he would ask, were to be the wit nesses when the parties went to law? Not the Right Hon. Baronet, or the Postmaster-General, but their subordinates, and what chance he would ask was there for the public with such witnesses as those ?—(Hear.) ile (Mr. Duncombe) this q appealed t o t h e representat i ves of the people on question.—(Hear, hear.) He was de termined that it should be tried at the bar of public opinion —(Hear, hear) —and not in a pettifogging lawyer's o ffi ce . —(Great cheering.) A breach of confi dence had been perpetrated at the Post-office, under the authority of the Government. The inquiry he now asked was into the general system. They had already gone into the cases of Mr. Mazzini and Captain Stolz mann, and he wished now to inquire into the whole subject, and for that purpose he intended to move for a Select Committee, to inquire into a department of her Majesty's General Post-office, commonly called the Secret or Inner office, the duties and employment of the persons engaged therein, and the authority under which the functions of the said office are discharged. He meant to add these general words to the motion, and with which he had concluded a former motion on this subject—" that it be a direction to the Committee to report to the Rouse, whether it is expedient to make THE SUN, LONDON WEDNESDAY MORNING, JULY 3 1844 HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 2. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Foiir Mr. GLADSTONE moved certain alterations in the Standing Orders relating to railways, by which subscrip tion contracts entered into before the session of Parlia ment in which the particular railway Bill was introduced, should be valid. The present Standing Order provided that no subscription contract should be valid which was entered into subsequently to the last day of the session of Parliament preceding the session in which the rail way Bill was introd uce d. The alterations were agreed to. Mr. VILLIERS presented a petition from the agri culturists of Hartstone, in Norfolk, agreed to at a public meeting which was held in consequence of a recent de cision of the House on the subject of the corn-laws. The petitioners stated that they did not believe that a certain price for corn could be insured to them by law, and they prayed for a total repeal of those laws.—(Hear, hear.) RAILWAYS. In answer to a question from Sir J. GUEST, on the subject of railA ays, Mr. GLADSTONE said that he was afraid he could not give as full an explanation as he could wish to the first part of the question, because, the question in what degree it was desirable that future railway companies should be included in the provisions of the Joint-Stock Companies Bill, was one which required consideration. The whole of the provisions of the Bill might not be applicable to those companies, but certain of them would be found useful, as applicable to railways as well as to other joint stock companies, in their earlier stages. He was glad the lion. Baronet asked the question, because it gave him an opportunity of correcting a misapprehension which existed on this subject. He was at a loss to imagine how it could have originated, but a misapprehen sion had gone abroad that it was the intention of the Bill to take away from the shareholders of railways incorporated under Act of Parliament, the privilege of limited liability where it was conferred by Act of Parliament. There was no intention of inter fering with such privileges. He did not think that any man in the House would be ready to bring forward such a proposition, or if one such were found, he did not think a seconder could be got for it. The proposition would be utterly ridiculous and inadmissible. In answer to another question from Sir A. GUEST, Mr. GLADSTONE said, that the conferring the pri vilege of limited liability on new railways, was only just less absurd than the proposition he had just spoken of. CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN SCOTLAND. Mr. WALLACE rose to move that an humble address be presented to her Majesty, praying that her Majesty will be graciously pleased to appoint a Commission to inquire into the conduct of the Judges who presided at the as sizes held in the city of Glasgow, in the month of May last, and especially into the circumstances attending the trial of Alexander Walker, accused of an assault with in , tent to ravish a girl of tender age, named G race Macfarlane. The Hon. Member said he regretted that he felt it his duty to bring forward this subject, for it was one which referred to the misconduct of one of the highest Crimi nal Judges of Scotland. He had not determined to do so until he had well considered the course which he was about to pursue, and being confirmed in the view which he had taken by a great many persons in his own part of the country. At the late assizes held at Glasgow a person was tried for assaulting a young girl, who was not thirteen years of age, in the most violent and brutal manner, with intent to violate her person. It was necessary that he should detain the House for a very few moments, by endeavouring to ex plain to English and Irish Members the great distinction between the mode of conducting criminal cases in Scotland and the mode of conducting them in this country and in Ireland. In Scotland they had a public functionary who was now in that House, viz , the Lord Advocate, whose special duty it was to be public prosecutor in all cases of criminal delinquency. That individual, either in his person or in the persons of his representatives, was, in fact, the grand jury of Scotland, and it depended entirely upon the manner in which cases were brought before him or his represer.tatives whether or not any particular case was brought before the Criminal Court. There was another wide distinction between the two systems. Previous to the trial of any criminal in Scot land the evidence against him was first taken before the Local Court which was called the Sheriff's Court. It was then transmitted to the Lord Advocate, and after being sifted by him, or his deputies, it was decided whether or not the case should be brought on for trial. Such were the stringent measures taken to purge and purify the evidence before any crimi nal was brought up for trial. Another very ma terial distinction which existed was, that the judges were appealed to by the counsel on both sides as to the relevancy of the indictments, and after it had been decided that it was relevant the judge had no further right to interfere with the trial. Now, he had to complain of a most unprecedented and extra ordinary interference on the part of the judge, and he had to ask the House of Commons to institute an inquiry into these singular proceedings. In the case to which he had to call the attention of the House, Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Wood were the presiding judges. It was a regulation in f.:cotland, that trials for rape should be tried with closed doors, and in this ease he admitted that that regulation was complied with. The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to read the oath administered by the jury, which was, he said, of the most solemn character. He admitted that the usual forms were observed, and that the jury were chosen in the usual manner. The jury proceeded to the trial of Alexander Walker for the assault on the girl, and Lord Wood was the pre siding judge, when the case was in so extraordinary a manner broken in upon. The document he should now read to them was a statement of facts by one of the pro testing jury ; that gentleman said that the verdict was not that given by the jury at all. The return made to the House of Commons was therefore not a true return. The Hon. Member then read a le:ter, signed by a per son named Guffy, from which it appeared that Mr. David Muir, the Advocate Depute, had been treated in the most ungentlemanly manner by the Lord Jus tice Clerk, and in which it was denied that the jury had given a verdict of not guilty. Now he (Mr. Wallace) would unhesitatingly state that he believed there never was a more deserving assistant in the Lord Advocate's department than Mr. Muir, the young man who had been abused by the Lord Justice Clerk. There was not a more rising young man at the bar than Mr. Muir. No counsel had ever been so insulted or so brow-beaten as Mr. Muir had been by the Lord Justice Clerk. He wished to call the attention of the Home Secretary to the subject, for the appointments throughout the whole of Scotland had been ascribed to the Home Secretary. That judge had been placed over the heads of eleven of the judges, to many of whom he was greatly inferior, and he was speaking the opinions of the other judges who presided at Glasgow, and of the jurymen, and of all who were present in Court, when he said, that conduct more insufferable, more disreputable, more unprovoked, or more provoking, had never been exhibited than had been exhibited by the Lord Justice Clerk on that occasion. The trial had been carried on with closed doors. The girl who was the prosecutrix, was only twelve or thirteen years of age, and a more horrid, brutal, and disgusting assault, had never been brought before a court of justice. He had all the documents relating to this disgraceful transaction in his possession, but he would not weary the House with the disgusting details. It would be the duty of the Home Secretary or the Lord Abvocate, to defend the conduct of the judge if they could. He was passing through Glasgow at the time, and he was told that if he went to the Criminal Court he would see, on the part of the Lord Justice Clerk, the most disgraceful conduct in brow-beating witnesses and counsel, and that, in fact, he was acting like a bear. He had gone there a short time 1 before the Court rose, and the Lord Justice Clerk, interfering with counsel on both sides, had conducted himself in a manner that would have disgraced a petti fogging attorney. He had never heard of such imperti nence as had been exhibted by the Lord Justice Clerk on that occasion, and if an inquiry were allowed he would prove the truth of these statements by the testimony of j udges, counsel, magistrates, jurymen, and spectators of the Court of Assize. They would hear from the Lord Advocate if he had given a just description of the cha racter of Mr. Muir, his deputy. The Lord Justice Clerk had interfered in a manner which he dared not to have done if the Lord Advocate had been present. The office of Lord Advocate:was paramount to all others. No man could define the bounds of his jurisdiction, and no judge would dare to interfere with his conduct in the prosecution. He was the public prosecutor. It would be well if such an office existed in England. It was an office of the greatest benefit to Scotland, and if that office were degraded the people of Scotland would know that it had been so degraded by the present Government, and by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who now filled that high and important office. Relying with confidence upon the justice of the case, he had not the slightest hesitation in moving for a Com mission. The LORD ADVOCATE said, that he would en deavour, as far as possible, to avoid the niceties of the law alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman ; and would only state such circumstances as he thought constituted grounds for resisting the motion. The lien. Member alluded to the nature, the powers, and the duties attaching to the office he had the honour of holding ; he was fully sen sible of the importance of those duties, and the respon sibility which attached to the exercise of them ; and, therefore, he had endeavoured, being obliged to intrust the performance of some of those duties to other per sons, to select such persons as he thought were most competent to discharge those duties, and he subscribed, in every respect, to the character given by the Hon. Gentleman to Mr. Muir. It was true, as the Hon. Gen tleman bad stated, that a prisoner was not put upon his trial till his case was investigated before some local ma gistrate, and till such a body of evidence was adduced as would justify the committal of the prisoner—that being done the examination was submitted to those who acted with him in the office of Lord Advocate, and they saw if the evidence was sufficient to put the party on his trial. In the case of Walker, the public prosecutors were of opinion that the evidence adduced before the Magistrate was sufficient to put him on his trial ; but any person who watched the progress of trials, and particularly criminal trials, must be aware that the evidence adduced at the trial was not the same as that which the public prosecutor had reason to expect. Now in this par ticular case the trial proceeded with closed doors, under the authority of a statute, which directed that _ this course should be adopted in cases where the evidence was unfit to be heard. Now the charge against the judge, as he understood it, was this, that during the progress of the trial there was an undue interference— not on the part of the presiding Judge, but on the part of the Loru Justice Clerk, who was said to have con ducted himself in such a manner, that a course was abandoned which ought not to have been abandoned, and that a party was allowed to go away who ought to have been convicted. He did not admit that a judge sitting at the trial had a constitutional right to stop the course of a trial whic 1, in the opinion of the public prosecutor, ought to pro.:eed, because the public prosecutor was charged with the interest of all parties concerned, and he was to e that the interests of justice should not suffer ; but he thought it was conducive to the public interests for a judge, who saw the principal witness, on whom the weight of the prosecution rested, and the other witnesses also failing, and that there was no probability of a verdict being obtained, the opinion of the judge be ing decidedly against the prosecution in such a case, he did not think that it was improper or con stitutionally wrong for the judge to stop the prosecution. Now what was the record in this case? It appeared from that, that the prisoner having pleaded not guilty, an interlocutor of relevancy was asked, for the purpose any alteration in the law by which the secret opening, detaining, and delaying of letters is conducted." Al though the motion was of a general nature, he was pre pared to substantiate it, and to snake out the most com plete case for inquiry. He stated before that an infrac tion of the law had been committed—he repeated that assertion—the privilege, of whatever nature it might be, was vested in the Government. He would not fix upon the Home Secretary of State the whole odium of this proceeding • the Government must equally share the blame and the responsibility—(Hear, hear, from Sir B. Peel and Lord Stanley)—he repeated what he had already stated—he would not retract a single charge he had made. He fearlessly asserted, that for the last two years, a most unscrupulous use was made of the power which the Act of Parliament was said to vest in the Go vernment by opening the letters of different parties. He would state that it was done to a very great extent, and he believed that if inquiry were instituted, so far from its appearing that the Right Hon. Gentleman op posite had done what every Secretary of State had done since the time of Queen Anne, it would be proved to the satisfaction of every one that more letters had been opened in this manner during the last two years than during the ten or twenty years preceding, and that they had been opened, too, contrary to law. In the first place, he wished to inquire into that office in the General Post-office commonly known to the subordinates of the establishment, as well as by the superiors of the establishment, as the secret or inner office. In this office those deeds of darkness took place. —(Laughter.) Here was the Post-office inquisition held.—(A laugh.) Sometimes the letters of individuals were carried there, and from there sent to the Home office, where copies were taken of these letters accord ing to their contents. Sometimes, as he understood, whole bags of letters were taken down to this office. The messenger from the Home-office came in just when the mail arrived, and called for the bag from Cork, or the bag from Dublin. The letters were selected, and given to this individual, and having been examined, they were distributed, re-sealed to the sorters • those men, of course, did not know what had taken pace in the secret letter office, nor how many letters had been detained. Sometimes the letters were delayed an hour, and some times an hour and a half. He had not of course ob tained a copy of the warrant, but he understood that at this moment the letters of Foreign Ministers were opened and there examined and read. He believed that the letters to foreign Ministers were at this moment read and opened by the Right Hon. Baronet. Were foreign Ministers themselves aware of this ? He (Mr. Duncombe) must apologise for having spoken in the pre vious discussion on this subject disrespectfully of France. He had said that this inquisitorial system might suit the air of France or Austria, but it did not agree with the free air of Britain. The Hon. Member then read an extract from Galignani's Messenger, in which his words were quoted, also the words of Monsieur Guizot in the French Chambers, in which that distinguished statesman expressly denied that the secrecy of the Post-office had been violated in France. He (Mr. Duncombe) therefore in an ample manner begged to apologise to the French people for the insult he had so unknowingly, but yet so grievously, cast upon them.—(Hear, hear.) It would appear that this was a peculiarly English practice ; for in foreign countries, such as Austria or Italy, where they opened a letter, they always re-sealed it with the Go vernment stamp, and there was no attempt whatever at concealment ; it was reserved for an-English Post-office to combine the baseness and meanness of treachery with the meanness of violation of secresy. This mode was peculiarly English, however un-English it might seem in principle. The llonourable Member then read the extracts from foreign newspapers, showing that when the Austrian Government had opened letters they had boldly avowed it by affixing on them the seal of " the double-headed eagle," and the words " opened by authority" on them. The Right Hon. Baronet had not admitted that he had directed Mazzini's letters to be opened. He admitted that he had issued the warrant for one of the three mentioned, but, with scrupulous caution, refused to declare; which. However, the Right Hon. Baronet had said so much that he must needs say more. The public would not be satisfied with his mere avowal of responsibility. (The Hon. Gentleman then read an extract from a letter of a correspondent of the Morning Chronicle, and which appeared in this morning's impres sion of that paper, stating, that although the Duke of Wellington had declared that the letters of Mazzini had not been opened at the instance of the Sardinian Govern ment, he would bring forward proofs to show that letters had been detained, opened, and copied, and given to the Sardinian embassy, at the request of persons con nected with the Sardinian Government; and the same correspondent asked if the British Government did so for one Government why not do so for another, and what signified whether it was one letter or one hundred? He added that he had several letters opened, and that if he had anything important to communicate he would transmit his letters through other channels than through the spy office. He (Mr. Duncombe) had stated, and it had been admitted, that one letter had been opened, but he could prove that fifty or sixty letters had been opened, and that this system had been going on for two years in the most unscrupulous manner. He understood that during the disturbance in the manufacturing dis tricts in 1842, scouts had been dispatched from the General Post office by the Home Secretary to the post offices throughout those districts, who opened all sus pected letters, and transmitted their contents to the Right Hon. Baronet.—(Hear, hear.) It was impossible that they could have a warrant for each opening—they must have had a general order.—(Hear, hear.) He believed there was a wholesale opening of letters on that occasion, and he would furnish proofs of it. He stated this broadly in his place in Parliament. He had been further informed that some times the messengers from the Post-office demanded the letters of a particular street, or place—the Albany, for instance; where the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh and the Noble Lord the Member for Newark resided.—(Laughter.) He had found great dif ficulty in obtaining any information on this subject, for it appeared that since he had last addressed the House the messengers and officials about the Post-office had been warned at their peril to keep their lips sealed, so that they would not utter a word with reference to it. The other charge was—that the letters of the foreign Minis ters had been opened—that the letters of foreigners had been opened at the instance of foreign Governments — letters of Austrians, Poles, and Italians. He wanted to know what was the reason of this? What had we to do with the unfortunate misunderstandings in Italy at the present moment? How little was it known in foreign countries that such treachery had been resorted to in England ? Mr. Mazzini had received a letter that day from one of his expatriated countrymen the son of Admiral Bandieri. He supposed the Right Hon. Baronet had seen and read this letter.—(Laughter.) The writer, in it, had congratulated his fellow country men on his residence in Great Britain, and added that, unlike his own country, he might now rely on the in tegrity of the British post.—(Laughter.) Poor deluded man.—(Renewed laughter.) Mr. Mazzini had been con gratulated on his arrival in British soil by the in dividual who had assisted his escape, and though that individual might entertain no hostile feel ings towards the Austrian Government, his letters having been copied and transmitted by the Aus trian Ambassador to the Austrian Government, he must be now thrown into a prison. He (Mr. Duncombe) be lieved that, at that moment, there were fifty or sixty individuals immured in the Austrian prisons in conse quence of the information communicated to the Austrian Ambassador by the British Government. The habeas corpus, it was known, did not exist in Austria, and hence those unfortunate creatures must remain in confinement, or, perhaps, be subjected to the torture, in order to extract a confession from them. The posi tion in which the question now stood was neither satis factory to the public, creditable to the House, nor ho nourable to the Government.—(llear, hear.) The Go vernment, when they went so far as to say that a war rant had been issued, ought to have told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ; and the Right Honourable Gentleman should not have endea voured to mystify the subject by saying that he had issued a warrant, but not stating against whose letters the warrant had been issued. The warrant, it appeared, no longer existed ; but with re gard to Mazzini, there appeared to be just as much reason now for opening Mazzini's letters, as there ever had been. He did not believe that the letters of Mazzini to these individuals had been opened, but he believed that there could be no doubt that the letters of these three persons to Mazzini, whose petitions he held, had been opened. The letters of Lovett to Mazzini had been opened. lie could prove that Mr. Lovett's letter to Mazzini had been opened just as certainly as that the Right Hon. Gentleman had his hat on.—(A laugh.) One of these letters contained a paragraph stating that the Emperor Nicholas was expected to arrive in this country in a few days, and that the writer did not think that the reception of this distinguished in dividual could be very flattering. The very next morning there appeared in the two Government prints a denial that the Emperor was com ing here ; yet in five days after the announcement, to the surprise of every one, the Emperor arrived. Now he did not say that this was a conclusive proof— (Laughter from the Opposition)—but yet it was an ex traordinary coincidence. He knew the Right Hon. Ba ronet opened and read this letter, and although he could not prove it in a court of law he would establish a moral conviction on this point. The Right Hon. Gen tleman could no longer shroud himself under the mere delaration of responsibility.—{Hear, hear.) As the Minister of the Crown, as the paid servant of the public, as responsible to that House and to the country, he was bound to give further explanation. The Post office enjoyed a monopoly in the transmission of letters, in fact, parties were punishable for transmitting their letters through any other channel ; and it was only fair that the power which it was said the law conferred upon the Secretary of State to violate secrecy should not be further acted upon, unless it was absolutely neces sary. If they intended to open letters, they must proclaim their intention to the public, but he could find no part of the Act of Parliament which justified the fraud that had been committed by re-sealing the letters with a counterfeit seal. The Right Hon. Baronet had attempted to shield himself behind the statute-book, but he (Mr. I).) would that night hear from the Soli citor-General a full statement what the law on this matter really was—what was the nature of these war rants—to what extent the system could be carried— what was lawful, and what was unlawful.—(Hear.) He maintained that this was a question that could not rest where it was.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped he had made out a good prima facie case for inquiry. It would not do to entrench themselves behind official silence, nor would it do to be supported by a majority that appeared ' ready to carry them through an act of this kind, which was most odious to the people.—(Loud cheers.) Mr. ROEBUCK rose to second the motion, but gave way to Sir James Graham, who rose also. The question was then put, when , Sir JAMES GRAHAM rose, and said he felt obliged to the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath for giving way on this occasion; and he felt confident the House would feel that he was, in justice, entitled to a hearing, after the speech of the Hon. Gentleman—(Hear, hear) — and, .in the first place, he was most anxious to assure the House, on the part of her Majesty's Government, that there was the most earnest desire on their part that this discussion should not be post poned, and that there should be a House this evening ; and if there was any Member more anxious than another on the subject, he was that individual ; and he was now most glad that he had the opportunity of addressing them.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman said that this was a question of confidence, and that it was their wish to conceal some portion of the truth, and to mistify the matter. Now, he thought he might appeal to the House whether it was not, in a great measure, owing to his strict adherence to truth that this question was now before the House?—(Hear.) He might have given an eva sive answer, which would have prevented this question from being brought under the notice of the House ; but he scorned such a subterfuge.—(Hear, hear.) He thought he was in honour bound not to give an evasive answer ; and whatever the consequences might be to him self, he thought he was in duty and in honour bound to state the facts as they were. On'a former oc casion he had said that a legal remedy was open to the party injured. He did not think that was an improper though it might be an unnecessary answer. He thought it a justifiable answer, and he could not conceive any great illegal injury inflicted by a public servant where the law did not provide a remedy. But it was not his intention torepeat that answer now; it was considered unnecessary. On the former occasion the Hon. Gentleman said this was a question between the people of England and the Government. Whatever it might have been he admitted it assumed that aspect now.—(Hear, hear.) He stated on a former occasion he did not undervalue the importance of the discussion from the moment it was brought under the notice of the House.—(Hear.) He said it was a grave question, involving great national interests, and exciting national feelings. He repeated that now, and he said he regarded this as a question of primary importance, and it was his intention to prove that he so esteemed it.—(Hear, hear.) He regarded this as a question between the people and the executive Government.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman said that within the two last years—for he specified the time —there had been a most unscrupulous use of this parti cular power, which was exercised contrary to law. A nore grave charge could not be preferred against any Government by any Member of the House. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he made use of the words " on a former occasion." Sir J. GRAHAM said he hoped, considering the gravity of the question, the House would permit him to proceed without interruption.—(Hear, hear.) He was sure the • Hon. Gentleman did not intend it. He was about to state that the importance of this question was greatly magnified by the assertions made, not only on the former occasion by the Hon. Gentleman, but re iterated through the press, and it had grown in magni tude from the assertions made that evening by the Hon. Gentleman. The Hon. Gentleman said it was notorious that as the mails arrived there was a cry first for the Dublin bag—then for the Brighton bag—then for let. ters directed to particular streets, and he stated that he believed everybody's letters were opened. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he did not say that. Sir J. GRAHAM said lie begged the House would not allow him to be interrupted. If he made any mis statement, he was open to correction after he sat down. But he appealed to the justice of the House whether he was not entitled to a fair hearing.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman said that he was now called on to say more than he had on a former occasion, and that he said so much that it was necessary that he should say more. He (Sir J. Graham) was disposed to agree with him in that. He thought the time was arrived when he must say more.—Cheers from both sides of the House.) When he considered the state of the public mind, so sen sitive on this point—(Hear, hear)—the efforts which had been made to inflame the public mind—the assiduous, successful, designed attempts—(Hear, hear)—which were made for this purpose, he agreed with the Hon. Gentleman the time was come when he must say more— when he was desirous to say more—(Cheers)--and when he was desirous, to use the words of the Honourable Gentleman, " that the truth, the whole truth, and no thing but the truth, should be made known."—(Renewed cheers.) When he last addressed the House, he ad dressed it under circumstances different from those which now presented themselves for consideration, for his immediate predecessor in the office he had the honour of holding, had stated in the most solemn and authentic manner, and in his place in Parliament, that he had no reason to believe that the power given to the Secretary of State, with regard to the delaying and opening letters, and which power was necessary for the safety of the State should be exercised by a responsible Minister, had been exercised by him in a manner different from the way in which it had been exercised by his predecessors. It was in those circumstances he last addressed the House on this subject. But, since then, sworn servants of her Majesty, Privy-Councillors, men versed in the affairs of State, conversant with the habits of office, well knowing what it was their duty t o do, cognisant of what their predecessors had done, the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, ,did not think it unbecoming his station and abilities, and those powers of declamation which were unsurpassed by any Member of that House, to come down to the House, and apparently—prepared for the occasion —(Hear, hear) —and address to it an impassioned speech, raising the indignation of the House and the public, not against the law, not against the system, but against the individual. The Right Hon. Gentleman stated it was not of the ex istence of the law that he complained, but of the de parture from established usage, and of the mode in which the power had been exercised by her Majesty's present Government ?—(Hear ' hear.) Did he stand alone ? (Hear, hear.) Were there no other sworn Members of her Majesty's Privy Council ?—(Hear.) What was the tone of the Noble Lord, the Member for Sunderland? They might not be conversant with the peculiar details of the Home-office; but the Noble Lord, the Member for London, who, though not his immediate predecessor in office in the Home Department, had for several years been connected with that office, he also did not think it inconsistent with his duty to vote for inquiry— (Hear, hear)—not because he objected to the legal power, but because he was not of opinion that it was exercised by him (Sir J. Graham) in the accustomed manner and according to constitutional usage.—(Hear, hear.) What had been the effect of this on the public mind ? It bad been to induce a convic tion that he laboured under a stigma peculiar to himself, of introducing a new practice and of departing, in some important particulars, from the precedent set in former times, and pursued by his predecessors from an early period of the history of England. Now, he would tell the House frankly that no load of bloquy (though he would not say it was unworthy to seek to crush him under a load of obloquy), no amount of injustice cast upon him, would induce him to consent to inquiry, if he thought it was not for the public good ; but he was satisfied, after what had taken place within these ten days—after the votes which had been given on the former occasion by the Noble Lord tbo Member fur Sunderland, the Noble Lord the Member for London, the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Devonport, all of whom were Cabinet Ministers, and more or less acquainted with the practice of the execu tive Government—after the votes they gave for inquiry on the ground of a departure from established usage — be did say that from that moment the maintenance of this power, without inquiry, was impossible. He was glad that he could consent to this inquiry without any sacri fice of his duty to the Crown or to the public, and that he could remove from himself this unjust load of obloquy without any risk to the legal power, now not only in danger, but destroyed. He repeated, that he could now indulge his own feelings consistently with the public good, and he would be a party—a willing party—to the most searching inquiry —(Loud cheers)—into the state of the law, and the practice under the law, from the earliest period to the latest times.—(Cheers.) So far as he was concerned, nothing should be concealed, and he was prepared to go before a Committee of the louse, the nature of which he would state, and to state fully everything he had done.—(Hear and cheers) and he hoped that the Committee would call not only bis colleagues but his predecessors —(Loud cheers)—and that there should be a full and entire examination and revelation of what had taken place. He would propose terms as general as would insure a full inquiry. The power given by law was not confined to the Secretary of State, but was given to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and he hoped the inquiry would be extended to him.—(Hear, hear.) The result of that inquiry would be, as far as he was concerned, that the power exercised by him had been in strict con formity with the usage of his office—that the usage was not only recognised by statute, but that in particular cases it had been brought under the notice of the House by reports of Committees ap pointed by the House. Neither in the mode in which that power had been exercised, nor to the extent to which it had been used, would his conduct suffer by comparison with that of his immediate predecessors, and he was now rejoiced to think there would be no mysti fication.—(Loud cheers.) He hoped the result would be as satisfactory to the Hon. Gentleman himself; and those who sat around him.—(Hear, hear, and Tory cheers.) He intended to move an amendment to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. He stated on a former occasion that he did think a revela tion in that House of the exercise of this power would not be conducive to the public good. He re tained that opinion, and he thought there should be an inquiry, not before a Select, but before a Secret Com mittee. He thought it was expedient to follow prece dent, and that a Secret Committee should be appointed to inquire into the extent he had stated. It was of the last importance that the powers given to the Committee should be ample, and he was prepared to grant them as large as the Mouse might require.—(Hear, hear.) Much wonld depend on the composition of this Com • mittee. Now, he was most particularly anxious that no delay should take place. Considering the im portance of the subject, and the state of the public mind, he thought this inquiry ought to take place without delay. He did not know whether the strict rules of the House permitted, but it was his intention to move as an amendment to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman that a Committee of Secrecy be appointed to inquire into the state of the law in respect to the detaining and opening of letters at the General Post-office, and into the mode in which the authority given for such detaining and opening had been exercised, and that the Committee report their opinions and observations to the House. A great deal would depend upon the composition of the Committee. He could conceive no higher trust delegated by the House to any gentlemen. They were anxious that it should be impartial ; and, as a proof of that wish, he proposed that there should be a Committee of nine, and it was his intention to propose that five out of the nine should be gentlemen who opposed her Majesty's Go vernment.—(Hear, hear.) He proposed that four should be gentlemen who generally voted with her Majesty's • Government, and that those four should be Lord Sandon, Mr. Home Drummond, Mr. Thomas Baring, and Sir William Heathcote. The five others who opposed her Majesty's Government, he proposed should be Sir Charles Lemon, Mr. Warburton, Mr. Strutt, The O'Conor Don, and Mr. Ord, the Member for Newcastle. He should say, that he had carefully excluded from his list every gentleman connected with offiee—(Hear, hear)—and he had also excluded the Hon. Gentleman who brought forward the motion, not from any want of respset, but because he thought it better that the accuser and the accused should have nothing to do with the Committee. To those he surrendered his case, and his personal honour without fear.—(Hear, hear.) They could report what the former usages had - been, what was the state of the law, as it existed from the earliest time, sanctioned by men long since gone to their great account—men of spotless private honour, who dearly loved the liberties of England, for the use of which an attempt was made to crush him. He entrusted the matter to the Committee, confident that they would discharge their duty, and though there were some evils in the late discussion, and the agitation of the public mind on the subject, yet he hoped, he helieved, and he prayed that good might ensue, and with this feeling, thanking the House for the patience with which they had heard him, he would place- this amendment in the Speaker's hands.—(Loud cheers.) The amendment having been put, Mr. SHELL said it seemed to him a most extraordi nary circumstance, that a Committee to inquire into the state of the law and the manner into which it had been carried into effect, should not contain a single lawyer. — (Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman expressed a wish that the investigation should be of the most search ing character.—(Hear, hear.) He presumed, therefore, that he had no objection to have the different function aries of the Post-office examined respecting its various details.—(" Hear, hear," from Ministers.) Then it fol lowed that they must have some persons on the Commit tee who were accustomed to putting questions.— (Laughter.) If they wished to have a thorough investi gation, they must have, if the Committee would allow him to use such a phrase, a forensic inquisitor.—(No, no.) Observe, they wished to have the course pursued by their predecessors, as well as their own, investigated.—(Hear, hear.) It was a cause, and plus cause.—(Hear, hear.) The predecessors of the Government were as much interested in the issue at stake as they themselves were. They said that they were not more criminal than those who had gone before them. Was it not desirable, then, that the Committee should contain two individuals, one on one side aid the other on the other side, both of whom were accustomed to the examination of witnesses ?—(No, no.) He cer tainly could not help thinking that when they were re ferring to the consideration of a Committee the con struction of the law, and the manner in which this law had been acted upon. that Committee should consist of persons who would be able thoroughly to investigate the whole subject.—(Hear.) Sir GEORGE GREY said, as the Right Honour able Gentleman had alluded to the vote which he (Sir George Grey) had given on a former occasion, he wished to disclaim altogether, if such dis claimer were necessary, the attempt which would be made to throw upon him all the responsibility connected with this power. It was hardly necessary that he should refer to the arguments which he had used in support of the motion of his Hon. Friend. He had, however, stated distinctly that the single ground on which he sup ported that motion was, that the Government had been utterly silent, not only as to the details of a particular case, but as to the broad principle upon which they ex ercised the power which was admitted, on all hands, to be vested in them by law.—(Hear, hear.) He felt that the real charge which would be brought against the Government was, that a power given tor one purpose had been exercised for another—(Hear, hear)—that the power which had been given for the purpose of securing the throne of this country from con spiracy—he did not say whether the charge was well founded or not, but in the absence of all asser tion to the contrary, he was bound to assume its cor rectness—had been exercised by the Right Hon. Gentle man, not for that constitutional object, but for purposes entirely unconnected with these dominions, and exclu sively connected with a foreign country. That, he repeated, was the single ground upon which he supported the motion ; and he begged to remind the Hon. Gentle man that he stated, that if he disavowed such an exer cise of power, he, for one, should be satisfied.—(Hear, hear.) Having said so much as to what passed on a, former occasion, ho begged to say that he entirely ap proved of the course now taken by the Right Hon. Gen tleman.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the terms of the motion were not very material. The Right Hon. Gen tleman had distinctly stated that he wished for a full and comprehensive inquiry.( Hear," from Sir J. Graham.) As they had the substance, therefore, he did not think the precise form was material. As to the constitution of the Committee, he thought it was desirable to avoid expressing any final opinion upon that subject on that occasion. —(Hear, hear.) He presumed that, in con formity with the ordinary practice, the names would be laid on the table to-morrow. The Right Honourable Baronet (Sir James Graham) shook his head, but as the House met at twelve o'clock, to-morrow, if his suegesti Na were complied with, it would only cause a delay of about 12 hours • and was it desirable to violate the ordinary rule of the House for the purpose of gaining twelve hours? He saw no ob. jection to the names proposed, except that of his Right Hon. Friend in reference to the absence of gentle men connected with the law. He begged to correct himself. He understood that there was one gentleman who possessed that advantage. If that were the case, he thought there should be one from each side of the House. He could not help expressing his satisfaction at the change . of tone on the part of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, after the avowed ignorance of his colleagues. He was sure that not one of his predeces sors would shrink from the most full and complete in quiry as to the manner in which they had exercised the power which was vested in them. After the observe, don which had been made in that House, and by men of the highest authority on the subject, it was of the ut most importance that the law should be placed on grounds which would render it clear and unambiguous. Mr. ROEBUCK said he understood that the object of appointing the Committee was to create a feeling of security in the public mind, that feeling of security which had been so much shaken by what had taken place within the last few days. The Right Hon. Gen tleman wished to have a thorough scrutiny into all the circumstances connected with the administration of the Post-office, for. the purpose of creating a feeling of se curity out of doors. They . were about to institute a Committee—first of all to inquire into the actual state of the law on that subject, he thought it would be found that there were great doubts in the minds of the most learned lawyers. The next question was, how that law had been administered—whether it had been departed from or acted upon, by whom departed from and by whom acted upon. He would ask the House, if they thought the most likely means of creating se curity out of doors was to make this Committee secret ? —(Hear, hear.) He had no objection to the inquiry being carried on with closed doors, but he wished to insure was the full and complete publication of the evi dence.—(Hear, hear.) He had stated that the state of the law was doubtful. After what had passed else where, could they for a moment hesitate to admit that such was the case? They found Learned Law Lords on one side opposed by equally learned authorities on the other, and taking directly opposite views of the sub ject. If, therefore, they instituted an inquiry into the actual state of the law, the Committee should be com posed of very sagacious persons, and persons accus tomed to common law. Whilst referring to the state of the law, he begged to state one or two facts bearing on this subject. By an Act of Parliament of the 9th of Queen Anne, certain powers were given to the Post office, and a proviso was introduced into that Act by which persons opening letters under the warrant of the Secretary of State should be free from the penal ties imposed. The 9th of Anne had been repealed, and tin Act was passed in 1837, by which certain powers were also given, and a proviso was inserted in that Act. Now, he asserted, on the very highest authority that the proviso in the Act of Parliament simply protected the persons who opened the letters, it gave no authority to any Secretary of State to issue any warrant, and if the Secretary of State had any authority at all, it was a power which he possessed in the common law.—(Hear, hear.) He was only stating this for the purpose of showing the sort of inquiry upon which this Committee was about to enter. The Hon. and Learned Member then referred to the Act of Parliament in support of the statement which he had just made. He begged now to direct the attention of the House to the language of Lord Camden, in the case of the seizure of Mr. Wilkes' papers. "Papers," said Lord Camden, " were the owners goods and chattels, they were his dearest property, and were so far from enduring a seizure, that they would hardly bear an in spection ; and though the eye conld not, by the law of England, be guilty of a trespass, yet the carrying goods away w hich were of a secret nature, was an act of trespass." There was no law which gave any man the power to do that ; and it was too much for them, without such authority, to pronounce a practice legal which would be subversive of all the comforts of society. Now he (Mr. Roebuck) wanted to have per sons appointed from that House, who would be able to report as to the actual state of the law, as well as the manner in which it had been carried out. In an ordi nary case they had a j u d ge , w h ose duty it was to tell thejury what was the state of the law ; and he did not think that the Committee now nominated would be able to decide that question. lie fully sym pathised with the Right Hon. Gentleman in what he had said as to the advantage which had been taken of this incident to call down public indignation upon a public officer who had done nothing more than follow in the footsteps of his predecessors.—(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches.) That feeling had been created out of doors by all those vile arts which attached to the daily press.—(Hear, hear.) A viler instrument of calumny could not be used, and all its vileness had been used on the present occasion, and poured on the head of the Right Hon. Gentleman.—(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches.) He would not do honour to one more than another of those detestable channels.—(Laughter.) He was delighted at this inquiry. He was convinced that the moment this power was understood the people of this country would consign it to destruction.—(Cheers.) It was not necessary for the safety and peace of the country.—(Hear, hear.) It was only used to gratify a base passion. —(Cheers from the Opposition.) It was used for paltry, disingenuous, and detestable pur poses—(Hear, hear)—and it could not be of any use to a Government which rested on the affections of the people. Those affections could not be gained but by a straightforward and honest course. They could not be gained unless the people were suffered to perform all those acts which society considered harmless and useful. He held in his hand a paper which he desired to bring I before the House. The Hon. Member for Finsbury said that M. Guizot had thought fit to say, that he was not • aware that any breach of the privacy of letters in France now took place. He did not attach much credit to that statement as a piece of information. The Hon. and Learned Member then read a letter from M. Carnot, the Minister of the Interior, to M. le Prefet du Department • des Postes, stating that he had been informed that in certain parts of the empire the privacy of letters cwt. ■