The Sun. — London, England, 1845-02-28 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, Feb. 27. The Loan CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool sa2k shortly after Fire o'clock. The Duke of BUCCLEUGH presented a petition fr th 3 schoolmasters of LarOmm, praying for pro tiOn. TEMPERANCE. The Bishop of NORWICH presented fourteen peti tions, signed by upwards of 2,000 persons residing In his diocese, in favour of temperance. He must con fess that at first he was averse to it, but since then he had entertained different opinions, because he was convinced that it was attended with the best results. He thought they were greatly indebted to one individual for the success of the movement that had taken place on the subject. The great object of the petition wv, that beer-shops shculd be closed on Sundays. These petitions were signed by the clergy of every parish in his diocese, showing the interest they took in the subject, and the advantages they expected to be derived from those temperance societies. TII - E RUBRIC. Earl FORTESCUE said that the petition of which he had given notice from Exeter and Southmolton, and from the Reverend William Carwithen, D.D., fur a revision of the law attached to the observance of the rubric in the service of the Church, would oblige him to state the facts of the proceedings that have resulted from the agitation of that question; because, although the circumstances themselves were of a local nature, they were to be taken in connexion with the opinions which were expressed on the subject in the other districts. On the 19th of last November the Right Rev. Prelate who presided over the diocese, ad dressed a pastoral letter to his clergy, in which he com manded a greater uniformity to the directions of the rubric. Whether the Right Rev. Prelate were correct or not in his construction of the law of the Church, he seemed to be prepared for considerable opposition to his orders, but he (Lord Fortescue) believed that he was quite unprepared for the amount of opposition that was offered. This excitement was occasioned without the slightest efforts of any political party, for in most cases the question was taken up by the religious portion of the community. Indeed, he believed it was confined almost entirely to the members of the Established Church. Various meetings were held on the subject and requisitions were forwarded to nearly every church warden, requesting them to confer with their congrega ti fns on the subject. At these meetings resolutions, strongly framed, and against the conduct of the Right Revels id Prelate, were unanimously agreed to. But even where these meetings were not held, still a feeling of great excitement prevailed amongst the congregations, and the letter of the Right Rev. Prelate was spoken of in terms of a deprecatory character. They declared that the Right Reverend Prela'e was inciting them to depart from the established maxims of the Protestant Church, and numerous protests were entered against the recommended course. After this fer ment and excitement had prevailed for three or four weeks, more or less, the Right Rev. Prelate issued a second communication, quashing the directions con tained in his former letter. But still this had not the (desired effect, for the Right Reverend Prelate found it a matter of some difficulty to restore the former peaceful state of his diocese. Notwithstanding the can celling of the first letter, the unpopular practices still prevailed in one of the parishes in the city of Exeter. In this state things continued, until the petitioners thought they had no other mode of proceeding than to present an appeal to this House. The first petition which he had to present was from the city of Exeter. Tnis petition was agreed upon at a meeting convened by the mayor of that city, and was signed by upwards of 3,200 members of the Church of England. The petition was, he believed, signed unanimously ; and that circumstance, in his opinion, gave it the gre 'ter vreieht. The petitioners complained that their feelings had been outraged by the violations of the privileges which they had hitherto enjoyed ; that these proceedings tended to impose laws inconsistent with the feelines of the people ; that the attempt to revive usages now obsolete were rapidly destroying the uniformity of one diocese and another; and that this led to circumstances which deeply violated their sense of the necessity of peace and good feeling in the Established Church. The petitioners said that the effect of these proceedings lied been gr ••atly to disturb the quietude of the Established Church. They asserted that the Book of Common Prayer contained directions for alter ing the usages of the Church whenever the events of the times should render it necessary. The petition concluded by praying for an alteration in the rubric, so as to establish uniformity in the Church. He was persuaded that the feelings which were expressed in the petition were entertained by a very large portion both of the clergy and laity in the county with which he was connected.—(Hear.) It was impossible that the whole of the rubric could be fulfilled, and yet a clergyman, omitting to conform to it in any par ticular, was liable, for the first omission, to twevle months' imprisonment ; for the second, a longer period ; and for the third, imprisonment for life. He had, both in public and private, uniformly depre cated the expression of angry feeling or the use of vitu perative language. At the only meeting he attended the petition lie had now presented was substituted for a resolu tion that was proposed. He thought the Legislature ought to interpose for the purpose of regulating the for multe of the Church in all parts of the country. (The Noble Lord then read extracts from a pamphlet, written by Mr. Benson, the Master of the Temple, in which that Rev. Divine recommended some alterations in the rubric of the Church.) He cordially supported the prayer of the petition. He had another petition to pre sent to their Lordships, and although it was differently worded, it was to the same effect. It was numerously signed by members of the Church of England residing in the parish of Uppingham. The last petition he had to present was from the Rev. William Carwithen, D.D., The Rev. Gentleman complained that the rubric of the Established Church had been altered, and prayed their Lordships to take the matter into their serious considera tion. The Reverend Gentleman had been long attached to the Protestant Church, and no man performed the functions of a clergyman more conscientiously, or with more benefit to his flock, than the Rev. Gentleman whose petit o t he had then the pleasure of laying before the .r Lordships. Thanking their Lordships for the attention with which they had listened to him, he begged to move that the petition he had just mentioned be immediately taken into consideration, and afterwards printed. The Bishop of EXETER asked permission to occupy their Lordships' attention for a short time, while he answered the speech of the Noble Lord. He did not expect that the House would wish him to enter upon his defence. Had he to make that defence, certainly there was no place he would choose for it so readily as the House of Lords. He felt it a great honour and a great privilege to make his defence before that House. That House was the very sanctuary of honour and of privilege. But he did not ask their Lord ships to hear his defence, for he had no defence to make. He was charged with the spiritual care of a diocese. He was an officer of the Church of Christ, and fer his conduct responsible to no other tribunal, but only to the Church. Ile should, therefore, at once refuse to enter into any defence, but he did not refuse to enter into a statement of what had led to his conduct in the matters referred to, and of what his conduct had been. He should state, they, that he had not voluntarily taken up this line of conduct. It had been foxed upon him by circumstances. This was ono of the effects of the attention to ecclesiastical subjects in England. When a gentleman took upon himself the care of souls, he took upon himself, in the m ,st solemn manner, by his ordination vow, to observe the usages of the Church. Several gentlemen who felt their consciences thus bonud had applied to him fur permission to follow out the usages whoh V e rubric prescribed. He felt bound to grant that permission ; but matters had not stood there. Com plaints had been made, and differences had occurred. As the ecclesiastical prop of the diocese, he felt it to be his duty to settle this dispute, and in attempting to obviate the objections from Taunton, and other places, had arisen the circumstances which prompted the complaints contained in the petition presented by the Noble Lord. Under these circumstances he called a canonical council to assist him with their advice. There were nineteen members of that council, two thirds of whom advised him to take the steps which he subsequently took, and every one of those had the charge and care of a pariah. Under these circumstances he put forth that letter of which the Noble Lord had spoken. There were parties in the country who wanted to make most important changes in society, and they were not merely confined to laymen or to churchmen; they were a considerable body of men objecting to the Liturgy, be cause it opposed the doctrines which they themselves advocated. It had happened to him (the Bishop of Exeter) to be obliged to proceed against one or two persons for setting at nought the injunctions of the Liturgy, and (he believed the thing was common) this had happened in one or two instances in the parishes of his own diocese, that portions of the Prayer Book were tampered with or set at nought. He had heard it said—" How is it possible for the Bishop to proceed against clergymen for leaving out portions of the baptismal service, when, every time he goes to church, he must have portions of the rubric set at nought. That was one reason he could assure their Lordships for his seeking to introduce those changes. The Noble Lord said that he (the Bishop of Exeter) was attempting to revive ancient usages which had long fallen into disuse.—(Hear, hear.) There was a meeting called in his diocese of individuals described in the circulars as worshippers of the Church of England in the town of Southmolton, he believed, and at that meeting certain resolutions were passed in ac cordance with the wishes of the Noble Earl, who be it remembered was Lord-Lieutenant and Custos Rotalerum of the county. The meeting was only too happy to adopt the resolutions of the Noble Earl. It was not to be supposed that the petition, although it expressed the opinion of the Noble Earl and those with whom he was associated, represented the opinions of all the people of Southmolton. Ile felt the:great advantage of standing Nee to face with the Noble Earl.—(Hear, hear.) He was glad to biseepposed to a generous oppo nent like the Noble East and he trusted that he would tell him what they were all about, as he confess he did not know.---(A. laugh.) He must not aware what ceremonies had fallen into di suse in the wet Church. The meeting at which the petition was got up that had been presented by the Noble Earl, was presided over by the Mayor of Exeter, a most worthy individual., He (the Bishop of Exeter) had not latel y read the I newspapers much, but he understood that the speeches that had been delivered were singular for the ignorance they displayed. There was one speech, however, he had read, and only one, Mr. Bere's, a barrister of five years' standing, that did not take the tame line as the Noble Earl. He proposed petitioning the Queen, and not cowing to that .House. The example was set by the Noble Lord opposite, and afterwards followed by the Mayor of Exeter, and other persons. At first they petitioned the Queen, but now they were petitioning their Lordships. But he must say he thought their determination not to go THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY '2B l 1845. to Parliament was much more constitutional * than their present step, and for this reason. The Queen could, if she were advised to do so by Parliament, take a course which would really settle this business on a con stitutional principle, At the meeting held in Exeter this learned gentleman said the Queen, through her supre macy, had power to alter and settle the rubric. The learned gentleman told the meeting that this early supre macy came from the Pope. The learned gentleman con tended, that because the Pope was the supreme head of the Church during his usurpation of power in this country, and had the privilege of settling the rubric, the Queen possessed the same jurisdiction by the statute law. Now he (the Right Rev. Prelate) would venture to say that no such jurisdiction was given to Henry VIII. by Parliament. No spiritual jurisdiction whatever was given to the Crown, and the power of altering the rubric was left entirely to the Church. No ancient law what ever gave the Crown power to impose upon the Church any change or alteration in the rubric. But this learned gentleman said the Queen had the power of doing this and acting alone in the Privy Council. The learned gentleman added that the Archbishops and Bishops were members of this Council, and of course they would be her Majesty's advisers in this matter. Now, he was not aware, of this before, but the learned gentleman said they were called " Right Rev. Prelates," by virtue of their office of Privy Councillors. He believed that that gentleman was a man of high respectability. He was certainly a man of very considerable property, and he (the Bishop of Exeter) knew that he administered it with great advantage to the people around him. He be lieved also that he fulfilled the duties of Judge over the Court over which he presided with very great ability. But perhaps his ignorant* of the subject on which he bad now entered gave him more time to attend to the Court of Bankruptcy. He had now done with South molton. The next point he bad to take up was the pe tition of Dr. Carwithen, which he believed had occa sioned great excitement. He (the Bishop of Exeter) believed that Dr. Carwithen was a very strict observer of the rubrics. Indeed, he bad an impression that there was no more strict observer of the rubrics in England than Dr. Carwithen. He believed that it had been the practice of Dr. Carwithen to carry out every one of the rubrics. How, then, could the leToble Earl say that these practices were utterly obsolete? He believed his last pastoral letter had taken from Dr. Carwithen the distinction of observing all the rubrics. Ile did not mean to say that Dr. Care ithen would feel this as a grievance ; but it appeared that he was placed in a state of great excitement by those frightful statutes of 2d and 3d of Edward VI., and the Ist of Elizabeth. Now if the Noble Lord would bring in a Bill 0> repeal those statutes, and thus free the Rev. petitioner from the tremendous penalties which those statutes imposed, he would be one of the first to support that Bill.—(Hear, hear.) Knowing the excitement which had been raised by a petition presented in another place, he had felt it his duty, under the fear of falling into any misapprehen sion, to consult two very learned friends, whose opinion their Lordships were accustomed very much to rely on. They confirmed distinctly the construction he had put on the Act. That Act did not apply, except there was a resolute and obstinate refusal to obey the rubric. The phrase was; that if any obstinate person should refuse, &c., he would be liable to the penalties. What became, then, of the anxiety of the Noble Earl for the bishops? It was very true that there were instances of indictments being preferred at an early period in the reign of James 1., when certainly no case of obstinacy was proved against the defendant, but their Lordships would bear in mind that at that time the non-observance of the statute was the exception, and in those times there would be sufficient reason for a conviction; but he lied been in formed by the learned person to whom he had referred that now an indictment could not possibly be sustained under similar circumstanees. Dr. Carwithen stated that the Marriage Act had set aside a portion of the rubric, inasmuch as it provided that in certain cases banns might be published in the afternoon. The rubric provided for this, and therefore Dr. Carwithen was mistaken in his allegation. The Marriage Act, so far from altering the rubric, carefully avoided dealing with it. The rubric recognised the right of the Crown to require any thing that could be law fully published in the church to be pub fished, because it directed that nothing should be pub lished in the church except by the order of the Crown or the ordinary. He earnestly entreated their Lordships to remember what would be the effect of the course they were now called upon to pursuse. In the year 1643 their Lordships' predecessors formed themselves into a Committee of religion. Their Lordships' House at that time consisted of men of great talent; they were warm supporters of the Church, and when some alterations were made in the Liturgy, they required that c monon prayer should be used according to the laws of the land with respect to common prayer. In three years the same House that began by inquiry agreed to abolish the common law with respect to prayer. He trusted their Lordships would not enter into a question of that sort, if they found it was not their duty to do so. For his own part he did not think the House had the power to do so, but that it lay in the Crown. The principle had ever been recognised by Parliament that in matters re lating to the Church, those who were appointed instruc tors by the Divine head of the Church were to propose the laws which guided them, and that the lay members of it were to signify their assent or dissent, as it might be, to what was so proposed. He did hope that if at any time any proceeding of that kind should be deemed necessary, it would emanate from the Crown, and not, as in this case, to bring by petition the subject before their Lordships' House. He thought at the present time it was very de sirable to adopt that course, in order to let the excite ment which had astonished no one more than himself to die away. If before that time it was thought necessary to act otherwise, he would venture to predict that the practices of 1645 would be again but too fearfully ap parent. Lord BROUGHAM deprecated all Parliamentary in terference in the controversy which was at present di viding the Church ; and he might, perhaps, be allowed to congratulate the House and the country that there was no more important matter to divide the Church than this mere matter of discipline—a question 'nerdy involving the propriety of whether a sermon should be delivered in a surplice or a black gown.—(Laughter.) Many persons conscientiously advocated the use of sur plices, and it was not for him, God forbid ! to say that a matter affecting men's consciences should be in any way trifled with. Undoubtedly a difference of opinion did prevail, and it had happened that ci rtain things, laid down 170 years ago, or more, matters of form which we re deemed fit and proper to be exacted from clergy men, should, since they had fallen into other hands — (Laughter)—and upon other views, be so changed that they were no longer a matter of moment; and he (Lord Brougham) thought, therefore, that it would have been a matter of common sense to have allowed things to go on as they were, whether they were trifling or important, as the revival of them only gave rise to discontent and anarchy, and scandalous dissensions between the pastors and the flocks, of all things that which should most care fully have been avoided. He (Lord Brougham) ngreed in the general recommendation issued by the Right Reverend Prelate to his spiritual children; he agreed in the humanity, the wisdom, and the cha rity of that recommendation, and at the time when he first saw the pastoral letter he admired the tone of wisdom, humanity, and charity exhibited in it. On no account whatever would he wish the subject brought before Parliament, for he was quite sure that the very worst thing they could do was to call for Parlia mentary interference. He agreed with the Right Rev. Prelate in some things he had advocated, but he dis agreed with him in others. As a son of the Church he certainly agreed to the rule that the laws of the Church should be made by her fathers, and he certainly did not think that that was the place for discussion upon this subject. The Bishop of EXETER, in reference to a remark of the Noble Lord, did not believe that in any one of the churches in his diocese the rubric had got into univesral disuse. But in one parish one practice prevailed, and in another another prevailed ; and his object, in promul gating his letter, was to reduce their various practices to something like regularity. Earl FORTESCLTE, while giving credit to the Bishop of Exeter for the zeal and conscientiousness with which he had performed his duties, could not help wishing that he had left things as they were; and in that case the petitions which he had that night presented might have been spared to the House. The Bishop of EXETER said the way in which he was alluded to by the Noble Earl called upon him for an explanation. Ile requested the House to remark the animus which pervaded his letter. His sole object in effecting a change, was to prevent the necessity for future change. The Bishop of NORWICH had no wish to interfere in the discussion on a subject relating to one peculiar diocese, but he could not avoid sayine that the general feeling of his own diocese was opposed to the re vival of any form that approximated in a dis tant degree to the rites of the Roman Catholic Church. and he rejoiced that this feeling was so universal, and that therefore those petitions had been presented. It showed at least that the leity were alive to the subject, and the temperate and calm, and dispassionate address which they had presented would he hoped animate the masses of the people of England. They could never return - to the rubrical forms, which were imprac ticable in the present state of society. The Right Rev. Prelate said that they were under stringent obligations to abide by the rubric. He (the Bishop of Norwich) said they were not so stringently bound, because they in fast could not be so. He did not see by what right any Right Rev. Bishop could say " This part of the rubric I will order in my diocese, and that I will dis pense with," and so forth. He felt that that was utterly impracticable, and therefore he rejoiced that they at tempted to remove some of the difficulties which beset the question. The Bishop of LONDON was understood to say, that where the rubric could be enforced it was incumbent en them to do so. The petitions were ordered to be printed. ITALIAN EXILES. Lord BEAUMONT proceeded to fulfil the notice which he had given on the previous day, of putting a question to the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, relative to an expedition which sailed last year from Corfu to the coast of Italy. He felt that considerable importance attached to this question, in asmuch as upon the answer he should receive would depend the truth or falsehood of a charge which had been made against her Majesty's Govern ment of having participated in one of the most violent acts that had ever been perpetrated by any country. — (Hear, hear.) In putting this question it would be ne cessary s y ary for him briefly t o r e l a t e the events which formed history refert o o f th th o i se s event.tsrtaagtienicalenti which In wereso be doing,before h e e theshould pub. lie. The version he should give then would be the version of the public, as collected from detached wh ich had wch had gone forth to the public. If, therefore, he should during his statement fall into an error o f fact, it, would be for the Noble Earl to correct him, in theanswer he sh ou ld make to the question he w as about to put, as well as to set him right should he make any false coneksiona or deductions. The history of the case appeared to be this, as far as he could collect it from the information now before their Lordships. In the year 1843 informa tion was received by this Government that the exiles and refugees from the States of Italy, who at the time re sided in the British possessions in the Mediterranean, including the lonian Islands, were then plotting or con cocting a conspiracy, which had for its object to make a descent upon the Papal States, and spread the same spirit through Italy whch bad existed in the year 1834. He understood, moreover, that a remonstrance was ad dressed by the Government of Austria. complaining of the British Government allowing the lonian Islands to be made a shelter for those persons who had fled from Italy. This remonstrance was accompanied by a threat that if any revolution or commotion took place in the Papal States, the Austrian Government would send forth an army to overrun those States. This led to the exercise of a power in this country which he would not then stop to inquire if it were wise or not. But the fact was, the Secretary of State for the Home De partment issued a warrant for opening the letters in the Post-office of a certain individual named Signor Mazzini, an Italian, residing in this country, ho was supposed to be corresponding with those refugees who were at the time in the British pos sessions of the Mediterranean. According to this autho rity, the letters and correspondence of this gentleman were opened, and from them it was a,certained that a conspiracy was forming amor , these refugees, and that a general descent upon the Papal States was contem plated. Austria was put in possession of this informa tion ; but it would appear from the report of the Secret Committee appointed to inquire into the opening of these letters, that the information was communicated in such a manner as not to compromise the safety of any individual in the power of that Government. From subsequent letters it turned out that,' by the advice of Signor Mazzini, this plot was abandoned ; and would that the scene had closed here—would that the curtain had fallen, and no other act been added. But it was not so ; and to this part of the subject he invited the particular attention of their Lordships. The same emissaries of the Neapolitan Government were instructed —no doubt upon information re ceived from Austria with regard to the disposition of these refugees who had once contemplated a descent upon the Papal States, but afterwards abandoned the idea to proceed to Corfu, where two sons of General Bandiera had taken refuge. Under the disguise of be- big fellow-conspirators they induced these - refugees to favour a new plot against the Neapolitan Government. He must diverge here for a moment to state that neither the Papal nor the Austrian consul made any remon strance on the subject to Lord Seaton. They took no notice of this new plot. On the 12th of June, 22 per sons, including these emigrant , , sailed from Corfu, and then, and not till then, did the Papal Consul and the Neapolitan consul apply for as istance to Lord Seaton. Lord Seaton, however, declined to follow their suggestion of sending an armed power to capture this expedition. On the 13th, the succeeding day, informa tion was forwarded to the two Powers, intimating that the expedition had sailed. On the 16th the expeition landed on the coast of Calabria; on the 17th they pro ceeded onwards to Otranto, and on the following day they were met by some armed police, just sufficient to master the expedition. One of them was shot in the encounter, and the rest were made prisoners. On the 25th nine of them were put to death, and amongst them were the two sons of Admiral Ilandieri, and seven others of the misguided men whom Signor Mazzini had before prevented from putting their design into execution. Now, if the Government had supplied the information which led to these sad results, he must say a more disgraceful proceeding was hardly to be met with in the annals of this country. lie hoped, there fore, the Noble Earl was prepared fir the question he • • was about to put, in order that this matter tnight be set at rest. Now he wished to know if the British Govern ment had supplied any foreign Power with information calculated to compromise the rights of individuals, and whether they were aware of this information having been communicated to another Government? And also, whether the British Government had any knowledge of tiv: intended expedition from Corfu ; and if they had, whether they had taken any, and what measures, to prevf nt it ? The Earl of ABERDEEN said their Lordships would proLablv remember that, for the last two years, great politicjexciternent had prevailed in Italy. Insutrec tions had b: en made in the Papal States, which had created great alarm, and led to the Austrian Govern ment determining upon sending an armed force into the States, in the event of any further outbreak. Ile need not point out to their Lordships what would be the pro bable consequences of such an attack. It was not im probable that, if it had been attempted, the peace of Europe could not have been maintained. Their Lord ships were aware that this conspiracy and these projects were planned, not in the lonian Islands, or in the Bri tish possessions of the Mediterranean, but in London. It was, on that account, thought necessary to detain and open the letters to Signor Mazzini. He need not remind their Lordships that the warrant was not issued by him, or under his direction. Saying this, however, the House must not understand that he was in the least prepared to censure the issuing of that warrant. On the eentrary, he was prepared, as well he believed as every other Member of her Majesty's Gover ment, to defend and sustain the full responsibilities of that act. Those letters when detained were sent from him to the Home. office, and, acting ,unon his discretion, it appeared to him to he consistent with his duties to communicate the informa tion which they contained to a foreign Power. The course he adopted was this—he determined that no agent of a foreign Government should see a single syllable of these letters ; nor, indeed, did he intend that any foreign Government should know that any letters existed. In addition to this, he determined to keep in view a necessary regard to the personal safety of all individuals who might be compromised by any information on the subject. With this de termination and with these precautions lie com municated, from time to time, such information as he thought was necessary for the safety of a foreign State. Acting on this principle, he felt entitled to make a communication to the Neapolitan Minister. But he did not state that any letters had been submitted to the in spection of the Government. Their Lordships would re member that complaints were made last year that the lodgings of a Polish gentleman had been entered, that his writing-desk had been broken open, and his papers taken and delivered to the Rwsian Government. This, however, was denied at the time ; and in answer to a question put to him by a Noble Marquis, lie positively contradicted an assertion that Mr. Mazzini's letters had been submitted to the inspection of a foreign Govern ment. He was happy to say that these precautions had proved successful, and he believed not a syl lable of these letters was made known to the Govern ments alluded to. He wool' now approach the immediate question of the Noble Lord. It had been presumed, from a passage in the report of the Secret Committee appointed to inquire into the opening of letters, that in formation had been supplied to a foreign Government which had endangered the personal safety of persons under its power. But this was incorrect. The fact stated in the report was the result of an answer made to him, by a question put by the Committee, as to whether any person in the power of the Austrian Government was in danger from the information which had been given to it? He replied, certainly not. It did not follow, therefore, that they had given information to one Power, knowing that it would be transferred to another, where it would endanger the safety of individuals. Now, with respect to the question of the Noble Lord, he begged to say that lie never had any conception of an attempt being about to be made to recover the Papal States by the refugees of Corfu. He knew that a certain number of Italian refugees resided in Corfu, but he had not the remotest knowledge of their intentions. He was aware also that one of the sons of General Bandiera had been at Corfu, because the Austrian Minister complained to him of his being suffered to remain there. He be lieved, if he recollected rightly, that when this person deserter: from Venice, the newspapers announced that he had gone to Corfu. He was quite aware of his being there ; he knew also that another of the sons of General Bandiera was at Malta, because a captain of an Austrian ship had made a demand upon the Government to have him surrendered as a deserter. Sir P. Stewart, in answer to that application, said he had no power to surrender him, and in his (Lord Aberdeen's) opinion, very properly so. But still this was not sufficimt to make him aware of the practical projects intended by the Bandiera Their Lordships must recollect that the desertion of these persons from the Austrian navy had created great alarm, because it was impossible to say how far this example might extend, and this probably would account for the precautions taken by the Papal and Neapolitan Governments. The whole of the preparation for the expedition and the putting it into execution occupied only one week. Had Lord Seaton received any instructions, he would doubtless have taken measures to prevent the insurrection. In a letter which had been received at the Foreign-office, Lori Seatoh says that the younger Bandiera arrived in Corfu in February, and not finding his brother there, he left by the Austrian packet for Malta ; having proceeded to that island in search of his brother. In this, however, he was not successful, and not meeting with his brother there, he went to Greece, and the brothers did not meet in Corfu till the month of June. Colonel Rieciotti ar rived in Corfu on the sth June, in the hope of getting into Italy by some unknown and unexpected means. These persons did not arrive in Corfu until the sth of June, and the expedition took place on the 12th. It was therefore impossible for him (Lord Aberdeen) to have received any notice of this expedition. The whole of the time which elapsed between the planning of the expedi tion or, at least between the meetings of the parties who were to carry it into effect, was one week, so that it was utterly impossible for him (Lord Aberdeen) to have re ceived any notice of this expedition before it was carried into effect. If any notice had been given to him, unques tionably instructions would have been sent to Lord Seaton to prevent it. When, then, it was asserted that the Government were acquainted with this expedition, and refused any measure to prevent it, he could only say that the Government had no informa tion whatever of the intended descent on the coast of Calabria. The expedition was planned on the sth, and was put into effect on the 12th. Had there been any such notice, certainly he should have felt it a duty to prevent these unfortunate men from undertaking such a perilous enterprise, and he did think that he should be able to prove to their Lordships that neither he nor Lord Seaton had any knowledge ► f its probability, and that the Austrian and Neapolitan Governments acted no treacherous part in the course of this transaction. When it was ascertained by the Austrian and Neapolitan con suls at Corfu, on the morning of the 13th of June, that these men had sailed the evening before, they imme • diately went to Lord Seaton, and requested him to take measures to prevent the expedition, and arrest them before their arrival in Italy. Was that the conduct of persons wishing to entrap? The existils of Austria, Naples, and the Pontifical States, waited upon Lord Seaton at ten o'clock in the morning of the 13t1iJune, and requested him to take measures for the arresting of the refugees. His Lordship replied that he could not at all conceive that such an expedition was likely to be planned in Corfu, and conceived it to be merely somo idle report in the town. He, however, desired the di rector of police in the island to investigate the matter. Before however Lord Seaton had received the report of the director of police, the several consuls of Austria, Na ples, and the Pontifical States returned to his Lordship, at halt-past eleven, and requested him to dispatch the Medea steamer to bring back the r. fugees. His Lord ship replied that the Medea could net be used for that purpose, for he did not conceive that such a number of persons could meditate any serious design on the Neapo litan Government, but that a boat might be sent to Otranto with information of the intended descent, and that that information might be transmitted to Naples by telegraph. There were bitter complaints against Lord Seaton, for the sea at the time was calm, and the steamer might without any difficulty have overtaken these mis guided men. For his own part he (Lord Aberdeen) deeply regretted that Lord Seaton had not complied with the request which had been made to him, for if he ho,d dispatched the steamer there was littledoubt but that it would have brought back the personswho had gone on this expedition. Now, With respect to the parts which it was said other Governments had had in this unhappy transaction, he thou.2ht that there would be no difficulty in proving that they had had none. At any rate, he felt assured that this was the case with respect to the Nea politan Government. The Bandieras and their party sailed on the evening of the 12th of June ; they were three days at sea, and landed, on the 16th, at Otranto. Was it reasonable to suppose that, if the Neapolitan Government had had any intimation of the descent, they would have suffered these men to be three days at sea,and then have suffered them to land on the coast, without any interruption from their troops? Net only was this the case, but that Government had absolutely no troops in the neighbourhood. and the only opposition the party who raised the insurrection met with, was from the people of the country. For three days after landing they ad vanced through a thinly peopled country,without opposi tion, but on the 19th they were encountered by a party of persons who had gathered together from the surround ing country—a kind of rural police. By these persons, who acted without any definite plan, they were opposed, but ineffectively, for over them the Bandieras and their party obtained the advantage, and killed their leader and one or two of the rural police. The promoters of the insurrection then proceeded to Osenza, and the same night a great number of persons collected and advanced to attack the party. Mr. Temple, in a letter which had been received at the Foreign-office, confirms these facts. He says that the insurrectionists advanced to Osenza on the 16th, aretwere there met by a consider able number of the country people, who were joined by one of the civic guard and three gendarmes. A conflict ensued, and the result was that one of the gendarmes was killed, but the people on behalf of the Go- . . vernmen had the advantage. Their efforts were attended with complete success, and they killed or took as prisoners the whole number of the expedition, with the exception of five who fled. The resu't of this attempt was exceedingly satisfactory to the Government, because it was put down by the people themselves, with out the intervention of any troops ; for the fact was, that there were no troops nearer to the place where the con flict took place than the city of Naples itself. Now it was a strange mode of proceeding for a Government who were privy to such an undertaking as this, to have no troops to put down the insurrection, and he did think that it was quite clear that the Neapolitan Government had not any other part in this insurrection than to sup press it. lie (Lord Aberdeen) could not say that he saw any reason to suppose that the Government had any part in these transactions, from the different sentences passed upon the prisoners. Of these, nine were shot, seven were condemned to death, and one was sentenced to five years' imprisonment. What argument was to be founded on this result he could not understand, for this was no light sentence, and was put into rigorous execu tion. The person on whom this sentence was passed was a Corsican, and was in no collusion with the Government in Naples. That he was suffering a severe punishment was evident from the fact that, whilst incarcerated, he had written to Mr. Temple for pecuniary assistance, and to request that gentleman's interference with the Neapolitan Government for the remission or alleviation of his sentence, on the ground of his being a British subject. The fact was, that it appeared on investiga tion that his father and his family had formerly en joyed the protection of the British authorities in some place abroad. Mr. Temple replied that he did not see how it was his business to interfere with the punishment of a person engaged in such an enterprise as that against a State with which the British Government was at the time holding friendly relations. But though he (Lord Aberdeen) fully exonerated the Neapolitan Government from any collusion in this matter, he did not mean to say that there had been no treachery, for he believed that there had been, but where the treachery originated, and how far it extended, he was not prepared to say. All he could say was, that he believed the Neapolitan Government to be free from it, for so strongly was the Neapolitan Minister urged to remonstrate with the British Government, that his charge amounted to something more than imputative eolusion, and in his cemplaint he was strongly inclined to charge the British Government with negligence at least. With respect to treachery, it was a most extraordinary circumstance that one of the conspirators was not taken with his (Lord Aberdeen's) passport in his pocket. The principal person connected with this conspiracy was not either of the Bandieras, who were young, thoughtless, and enthusiastic men ; but a certain Colonel Ricciotti, a man whohad been frequently engaged in affairs of this sort, and was well known on the Conti nent. Colonel Ricciotti came to the Foreign-office to demand a passport ; but, as Noble Lords knew, it was not the custom of the Foreign-office to grant passports to foreigners without a recommendation. Colonel lie ciotti represented himself to be a native of Gibraltar, a merchant, who wanted to go to his residence. On being refused the passport, on the ground of his being a fo reigner, he came back recommended by a London tract( s man. He was again refused, because the re commendation was not sufficient ; and he again applied with his recommendation backed by a most highly respectable banking-house, and the passport was granted and he left London. But he was well known to the French police, and on his arrival at Marseilles he was arrested. Hew he got out to Malta he (Lord Aberdeen) had never learn( d. And here he that when foreigners were re could not help observing, eeived, as they always were received, with kindly hos pitality, he thought it was their duty to refrain from any proceedings might cause any trouble to those who received h •ecele i c e l h them. For his own part. whether in had his public or in his private capacity, he had always re ceived the exiles of other countries with the most cordial kindness. He had receive d Spanish exiles, Polish exiles, and Italian exiles, with all the kindness that it was in his power to show ; and he thought that some thing was due from these persons for !he hospitality they had received. Of the unfortunate man of whom he had just spoken he would say nothing; he had met with an unhappy end, but he (Lord Aberdeen) was glad that his passport had not been found on his person. He had proved to the Austrian and Neapolitan Govern ments that with these transactions the British Government had nothing to do ; and he felt personally, that by . partaking of them, he was acquitted by his conscience of the slightest share. In that last great da) of account, in which they all must appear, everyone must answer for his actions, and he knew that all, even the very best of them, would have to cry for mercy and forbearance. But if the Noble Lord opposite were to him the nearest and dearest that his , art could desire. he could wish for nothing better for him, as he did for himself, than that he might have no thing more to an sw er for than than his (Lord Aber deen's) share of these transactions ; for of even the slightest share he felt by his conscience to be entirely T e x eu o l rd B p a t e t l E . — A u said the version of the Noble ( hear, and c h eers .) L Earl was very different to that wlsich had gone forth to the public. lie we , fully satisfied with the explanation which had been given, as it had completely vindicated the Noble Earl from any participation in the matter. He (Lord Beaumont)had never suspected that the Noble Earl had any participation in it. but he thought it was necessary that an explanation should be given on the subject. After the vindication of the Neapolitan Government by the Noble Earl, he must say that the charge, with respect to them, stood on so frail a basis that he could no longer give credit to it. lle would say, however, that he could not agree with the course of the Noble Earl in entering into a minute examination of correspondence, in consequence of a threat by the the Austrian Government. He thought it would have been better to hove waited until the Austrian Government had put their threat into execution. The subject then dropped. The Earl of DALHOUSIE laid on the table a Bill for the appointment of constables in Scotland. I Their Lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF CO2II TONS, Feo. 27. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Twelv o'clock, but a House was not made till a quarter-past Twelve.e RAILWAY CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION BILL. On the order of the day for considering the Report of the Company's Clauses Consolidation Bill, Mr. HAVES said, that before the House went into Com mittee on the Railway Clauses 9nsolidation Bill, he wished to ask the Noble Lord o pposite (Lord Granville Somerset) what the course was which he meant to pursue with respect to this Bill. The Noble Lord was aware that he (Mr. Hawes) entertained a very strong objection to the power exercised by the Board of Trade in the revision of railway projects. Now the 47th clause of this Act conferred these powers to a much greater extent than they had ever before been exercised. The discussion of that clause would natu rally open up an investigation of those powers, and he should take that opportunity to oppose this plenary jurisdic tion of the Board of Trade. his . object, however, was not to impede the progress of the Bill in the Committee, and he therefore wished to ask the Noble Lord in the event of his (Mr. Hawes) waiving his objections at present, what course he meant to take with resp ect to this Bill, and especially with respect to the powe rs to which he had alluded, and which to him and many others appeared so objectionable? Lord G. SOMERSET concurred in the observations of the Hon. Member. He admitted that the point to which he had been calling attention was one of very great importance, and that it would be well to have it discussed before a full House. But, considering the great financial questions that vet rema i ned to be disposed of, and the deep interest the determination of them was to the trade of the country, lie would ask would it not be better to get through the remaining clauses of the Bill with as little delay as possible, reserving the discussion. upon those points which were more technical ones, to the time when the Bill should be reported upon ? Mr. FOX MAULS differed from the Noble Lord, and conceived it would be much better to discuss the merit of each clause as they went on, and dispose of it. The Noble Lord knew the Hous e of Commons better than he (Mr. Fox Maule) did, and therefore lie would not remind him that it would be almost in vain to expect this question to be dis cusse by it. Mr d . AGLIONBY agreed with the Noble Lord. The sug gestions were mere technical ones, and could be easily made when the report was brought up. Lord. G. SOMERSET begg-d to assure Hon. Members op• poeite that his Hon. Friend the Vice-President of the Board of Trade had bestowed great attention on the alterations and amendments seggcsted ; but they were all of a technical character, and could therefore be ceaiiy disposed of on the report being brought up. With regard to the clause affect ing officers refusing to make up their accounts, Ms., he (Lord G. Somerset) proposed that bail might be taken by the magistrates. With respect to clause 120, on the subject of dividends, he had found that it admitted of no doubt in its construction, and therefore need not be altered. Mr. lIAWES thought there was great objection to it. The clause provided that the capital stock of a company should not be disturbed. Now, how were they to determine what was and was not capital stock? for unless this term " capital stock" were defined, he thought that great practical inconvenience would arise. He should therefore move that the words " by which their capital stock should be diminished," should be struck out. Mr. HAYTER said he thought it was not the intention of the Noble Lord to prevent the payment of dividends by any company who were realising interest on their paid-up capital. There was no absolute necessity for interpreting the clause in this way. If they were to strike out the word " such " after the word "any," and before the word " dividends " in the preceding clause, the. difficulty would be obviated. For instance, if 900,000/. had been paid up for the construction of a railway, he believed it was not the intention of the Noble Lord to prevent the Directors of a company from paying the interest accruing from this capital. Mr. GISBORNE said that the whole difficulty arose from the ambiguity in the term "dividends." Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET said it was not the object of the clause to prevent the payment of dividends from the interest of capital, for that he thought was legitimate; but to prevent the payment of dividends out of the capital stock after the works were completed, and when no profits had been obtained. It was well known that many companies had gone on paying dividends out of their capital stock, as if they were in a meat flourishing condition. Ile did not mean to sav that there might not let some special cases, but there would be in the several Acts out of which those arose special provi sions for them, and he did not think that the words should be struck out on that account. his object was to prevent the practice which had been adopted by the com panies to whom he had alluded, who went on paying divi dends when, in fact, they had realised no profits, until their capital no longer existed. Mr. AGLION BY said that be quite understood the Noble Lord meant the clause to apply to fictitious profits. But the cases which he had put the other day had not yet been met. The first was the case of a coal company—whether they could consider the coal as part of the capital stock of the company. The other that of a land company, who, sup posing they laid out 100,000/. in the purchase of 100,000 acres, and they sold 10,000 of those acres for 20,0001., was one-half of that sum to be divided as a bonus, or was it to be considered as part of the capital stock of the company. Mr. GLADSTONE said, that if any difficulty existed in the apprehension of the clause, it would be better to obviate it by the introduction of some other words. But it must be recollected that this was a general Act, and intended only to regulate other special Acts to be introduced hereafter. Those special Acts would provide for their own peculiar exigen cies, and he did not think that there was any difficulty in this clause which might not be readily adjudicated by a legal tribunal. Mr. GLADSTONE did not think there was more difficulty to be encountered in dealing with this clause than any other involving questions of commercial legislation ; and it should be recollected that it had the sanction of lonee-continued pre cedent for its present shape. Mr. HAWES—As it had now been admitted on all hands that this clause required some amendment, he would divide the House upon it. Mr. ENTWISLE—The object of the clause appeared to him to be, not to prevent the company from making divi dends, and applying their surplus fund otherwise than it should be, but to prevent them disposing of that fund to any other purpose than diminishing their liabilities. - Sometimes a company purchased an estate through which their line was to run, and then they sold the remainder of that estate ; and the object of this clause was to take care that the produce of that sale should be applied to diminishing the liabilities of the company. Mr. Hawes's amendment was then withdrawn. Mr. AGLIONBY said he had an amendment to propose which was so crudely and hastily drawn that he was not quite sure whether it would carry out the object which he had in view. His object was to enable parties under special circum stances to return a portion of their capital, or in other words, to diminish their capital stock, which the Right Hon. Gen tleman (Mr. Gladstone) said was in many cases extremely desirable. The words which he proposed to add to the clause were :—" Provided always that the word dividend shall not be construed to apply to a return of any portion of the capital stock, except after due notice given for that pur pose, at an extraordinary meeting, to be convened for that object." Mr. lIAWES was understood to say, that though he did not entirely approve of the amendment, he should not oppose it. Lord G. SOMERSET Okought it would be more prudent to reserve the consideration of the words until the third reading. The amendment was then withdrawn. On the reading of clause 142, which gives the power of distraint upon the treasurer, Mr. SPOON ER said it would be a great hardship to give the creditor of the railway the power of dietraining the goods of the treasurer for the debt of the company. He would have no objection that there should be a power to distrain for the amount of the balance iu the hands of the treasurer belonging to the company. Lord G. SOMERSET admitted that there was a seeming hardship to allow distraint upon the treasurer of an insolvent or bankrupt company. But the treasurer could at any time relieve himself by resigning his office, when the creditors would know what balance really existed. At present the creditors were frequently evaded by the treasurer's denying the possession of a balance. Mr. AGLIONBY said that the clause would go in direct opposition to the policy of all the Acts which had been passed of late years, which policy was to give creditors a full remedy against the company; and, at the same time, to protect the officers. The Act, the 7th Vic toria, was passed to enable companies to wind up their affairs, or to enable the creditors to compel them to wind up, so that there was no reason for the introduction of so stringent a clause as the present. He approved, therefore, of the amend ment proposed by the Hon. Member for Birmingham. • Mr. HAYTER and Mr. PLUmrTRE supported the amend ment. Mr. II AWES said that the treasurer ought not to be made responsible fur the whole of the debts of the company, whereas he knew nothing of their assets beyond the book account. The effect of the clause as it stood would be to deter from accepting the office of treasurer the class of per sons whom it was most desirable to have placed in that office. Lord G. SOMERSET said he would take time to consider the clause before the third reading. For the present he would withdraw it. Mr. GLADSTONE said, the clause had been introduced into all joint- stock companies' Bills for sonic years past. Mr. AGLIONBY—More shame for it.—(Great laughter.) Colonel SIBTHORP could not see why persons with pro perty, connected with these. companies, such as the treasurer, should not be liable as well others, if from no other reason, for that merely of keeping them out of bad company.— (Laughter.) In fact, he looked upon all these companies as delusive, or very little better than humbugs.—(Laughter.) The remaining clauses were then gone through, and the Bill was ordered to be engrossed, and read a third time on Monday. RMiMAY COMPANIES CONSOLIDATION BILL. The House then went into Committee on this Bill. Clauses 12 and 13 having been read, Colonel SIBTHORP said he wished to call attention to the powers conferred by those clauses, and particularly to those in clause 14. He did not mean to say that anything that fell from so humble an individual as himself should be deemed worthy of being reported in the public papers—(A laugh) — but it was his wish that what he had to say upon this subject should go forth to the public —(Hear; hear.) He begged to be understood as pro testing against these clauses altogether, but to some of them in particular, such as clause 14. He always understood that in residing in England he lived in a free land, where any man's property, be it small or large, was preserved to him, and his right to it recognised and respected ; and particularly the property of the poor man—(Cries of " Hear, hear") —for the invioliability of whose right he was more anxious than those of the rich, or than even of his own ; therefore, he should get credit for not having any selfish motive in his opposition to the clause, fir his object was the public good. He admitted that the Board of Trade were an intelligent and even, he believed, a disinterested body ; but of what value would it be to a poor man, to have the power of appealing to them, when he had not the means of doing so ? and be sides, he looked upon the Board of Trade as in competent to decide such questions. The 14th, 15th, 16th, and on to the 20th clauses gave a company a power of devi ating 100 yards either to the north, south, east, or west, as they thought proper. Why, he would say, that this deviation would have the effect of render ing the property of many poor men totally valueless, and of completely annihilating that of others.—(Hear.) Many poor men had been driven from their habitations in disgust by those encroachments rather than resort to this appeal. And then, as to compensation, don't talk to him of such a thing. (Laughter.) There might be circumstances under which no compensation could be sufficient. He had in his possession pro perty that could not be taken from him, and that no amount of compensation could make amends to him for the deprivation of it by this sort of encroachment. But he would ask why should not the rights of the smallest cottager be as much respected as his ? (Hear, hear.) By whom was this power of cutting down a poor man's pro perty to be- exercised ? Why, by Aorß or C, who had no consideration whatever for him ; and therefore he would pro test against such a power being given them. Talk of the despotism of the Emperor of Russia on the Dey of Algiers.— ( Laughter.) Why, they were respectable men in compari son.—(Laughter.) If this power of deviation was to be given, where might not the company deviate to ?—(Hear.) An HON. MEMBER—They may deviate a thousand yards. Colonel SIBTHORP--Aye, or why might they not deviate ten thousand? Oh, but then it had been said that the Company would purchase the land; but then the t r easurer might not have a balance in his hands sufficient to pay ; and he (Colonel Sibthorp) would tell that gentle man to take care how he trusted people.—(Loud laughter.) When the purchase-money was demanded, it might be said, " No assets—go to law."—(Laughter.) If this system be per mitted, then he would say England was no longer a free land, and her sun indeed had set.—(Hear.) In fact, no man in the country would be fool enough to buy property in the country so circumstanced. He felt assured that the Noble Lord near him would be the last man in the world to - do any man an injury; he was sitting here only in the capacity of a public officer, and therefore no blame attached to him. He (Colonel Sibthorp) knew how useless it was for him to expect that he would have any weight in this House; but he would divide the House upon this ques tion, in order to record his vete upon it. Lord G. SOMERSET said the encroachments could not be made without the sanction of the proprietors and holders of the land. This, he thought, would remove the objection of the Gallant Gentleman behind him. Mr. AGLIONBY protested that there was great objection to the clause, and he only regretted that it had not been fully considered before it was introduced into former Bills. The present system of encroachment male by railway companies was most disgraceful. From the nature of the plans lodged by competing companies it was quite impossible for a farmer to recognise his land, even if he had an opportunity of inspecting them.—(llear, hear.) He knew this from experience; and not unfrequently the plans were purposely prepared to mislead the owners of land over which it was intended the line should pass. It was the duty of Parliament, there fore, to tie companies down by such stringent rules as would effectually prevent the continuance of this disgraceful system. Lord G. SOMERSET said he thought the Hon. Member need not have put the protection of the small proprietors so strongly upon him. No man had been more careful of these proprietors than himself. But he conceived that the observa tions of the Hon. Member applied, not to the deviation, but to the main line. lie might say that privats proprietors should be protected, because when a proprietor gave his con sent to a railway, and parted with a hundred yards breadth of his land, he was in fact assenting to the use of three hun dred yards. The clause was in fact restricting rather than enlarging the powers of railway companies to take the land. Mr. AGLIONBY begged to assure the Noble Lord that he never intended to impute to hiin or to any other member of 1 time Government, or, indeed, of that House, the slightest neglect of public interests. Nothing was more contrary to his feeling. Mr. HAYTER was not astonished at the Hon. and Gal lant Officer's attack, for he believed that he would attack any and every railroad in every country and of every time. He (Mr. Havter) conceived that this objection to the power to make a deviation was quite unnecessary, and likely to be mischievous. He believed that if any great engineer were called before them he would assure them that it was abso lutely required. Mr. GLADSTONE said, that he must confess that he felt much sympathy' with those who objected to this clause, though he could not see on what ground they based their objection. The fact was, the clause, instead of extend ing the powers of deviation, contracted them. The clause proposed three limitations ; in the first place, that they should not deviate from the lines marked down in the plans ; in the second, that the deviation should be according to the specifications, and in the third that the deviation should not be extended into the lands of persons whose names were not in the book. At any rate he was fear. ful that if the clause were to be altered more mischief would be occasioned than by adhering to it, and he was not prepared to take such a leap in the dark as was proposed by those who opposed the clause. lie could not consent to the alteration without having sonic engineering evidence to show them that these deviations were unnecessary. Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR said that he considered the power to ii ake these deviations essential, and to the extent spe titled in the clause, for in his county he knew that very great inconvenience had arisen to several parties from the obligation to abide by the black line on the plan. He felt, therefore, that it would be better to abide by the provisions of the clause as they then stood. Colonel SIBTHORP said he felt bound to treat the obser vations of the Hon. Member for Well - (Mr. Hayter). un founded as they were, in the many-. Ant they deserved. It would be well for that Hon. Gentleman if he had shown throughout his Parliamentary conduct that disinterested ness which he hoped that he ever had evinced, and ever should evince ; and in spite of the unfounded observations which might fall from any Hon. Member within the walls of that House, he should not be deterred from prosecuting his humble opinions when he considered it his duty so to do, without any selfish motive or feeling whatever. He (Colonel Sibthorp) had no share in railroads. He would not condescend to ask the Honourable Member for Wells whether he had or had not—he did not care whether he had or not. He would simply say, once for all, that he threw back his imputations with the contempt which they deserved. Mr. HAY TER said he thought the expression used by the Hon. and Gallant Member was not one which, on reflection, he would be disposed to maintain, because it was wholly' un deserved. As, however, he would be sorry to be out done by him in courtesy, he would at once say that if he had used any language which the Hon. and Gallant Member considered to be personally offensive, he was quite willing to retract it. Colonel SIBTHORP said he had not the slightest objection to accept the explanation which had been offered. Mr. AGLIONBY adhered to his opinion that the deviation of one hundred yards was too much. Lord G. SOMERSET said that it was not to be expected that a general Act could provide for all particular cases and objections. The parties concerned in each measure ought to see that their interests were secured by a special enactment. The clause was then agreed to. On the reading of the 15th clause, Mr. AGLIONBY was about to state objections to the clause, when Lord G. SOMERSET said, that as it was likely that the clause would be much discussed, he should propose that the Committee be adjourned for the present, that the Chairman report progress, and ask leave to sit again on Tuesday, at 12 o'clock. The House then resumed, the Chairman reported progress, atil the order of the day having been read for the Committee on the COMPANIES CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION (SCOT LAND) BILL, The SPEAKER again left the chair. The LORD ADVOCATE stated briefly to the Committee that be had, during the progress of the English Bill, assimi lated the enactments of this Bill, as nnich as he thought the circumstances would admit, to the clauses, as amended, in that (the English) Bill. The Bill then went through Committee ; and the House adiourned at ten minutes to Four until Five o'clock. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Five o'clock. A mtsserger from the Court of Bankruptcy brought up the usual returns. Mr. Stanstield, Mr. Duncan, and other Members presented petitions relating to private Bills, of which the designations were not heard in the gallery. Mr. BARNARD presented a petition from the parish of Greenwich, against the Fisher-lane Improvement Bill. SUGAR DUTIES. Lord SANI)ON presented a petition from the suf:ar refiners of Liverpool, complaining of the bards; ip they would undergo if the Government plan for the reduction of the sugar duties should be carried into effect, in con sequence of the large stock of sugar which they had on hand, and praying the house to give them relief. They also prayed that no duty might be imposed upon molasses. and that a high duty might be imposed upon foreign and colonial refined sugar. They also prayed that ground Manilla sugar might be considered as muscovado sugar, and that no duty might be imposed on sugar refined in this country. PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. Poulett Serope, Lord Francis Egerton, Mr. Bro therton, Wood, and Mr. Collett, presented several petitions on private Bills. LAW :)F SETTLEMENT. Mr. MILES presented a petition from . Somerset against the poor-law clause in the law of settlement; and also two petitions from places in the same county, complaming of the awful extent of intemperance on the Sabbatl ....lay. Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from Birming ham, signed by several thousands of the inhabitants of that town, against any increase in the navy. He also begged to present two petitions from the same town, complainig of the manner in which passengers and goods were treated on the Great Western Railway. Sir C. NAPIER presented a petition from Murylebone against the window tax. Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Durham against the duty on post-horses. Mr. R. PA! MER presented a petition, signed by 150 farmers of Bucks, against the malt duty. POST. OFFICE ESPIONAGE. . Mr. \YAK I.EY presented a petition from the inha bitants of Finsbury, agreed to at a public meeting. The petitioners stated " That they learned with mortification and disgust that there exists at the General Post-office a secret spy system, under which letters are broken open, their seals counterfeited, and post-marks falsely imposed, in order to deceive the persons to whom such letters are directed, and to whom they are afterwards forwarded, while the information thus obtained has, in some cases, been used to promote the despotic interests of foreign Governments—that this meeting strongly denounces the existence of such disgraceful transactions, and refusing to be satisfied with the Report of the Committee published at the close of last session, deem it essentially necessary for the honour of this country, and also for public satisfltetion and security, that a strict, searching, and open inquiry should be instituted into all the eir cum stances referred to it: certain petitions presented to Par liatnent on this subject, in order that by such inquiry the manner in which such illegal and unconstitu:ional prac tices have been carried on, may be clearl y exposed and brought to public shame." They also state" that they had read with indignation, the statement made by our repre sentative in his place in Parliament, that his correspond t•nee had 13, en clandestinely intercepted and secretly opened, under Government authority, at the Post-office. That, in the opinion of this meeting, the only excuse for the excercise of such power towards Mr. Duncombe, would be that the Government had good reason to deem him capable of conduct which, if true, would, in our opinion, render him totally unfit to continue the representative of a free and independ.eat constituency ; that we therefore feel it due to ourselves, as well as to Mr. Duncombe, to &mild from - the House of Commons such an inves . tigation into the proceedings toward him as shall either justify the implied suspicions of the Government, or fully establish the innocence of our long-tried and faithful repreentative."—(Ele ,, r, hear.) THE i'MUFF. An Hos: MEMBER, on the Cons,:rvative Benches, asked whether it was the intention of the Government to give up the duty on straw plait and plaited straw? S:r ROBERT PEEL said. there were several descrip tions of straw manufacture, which went under the name of " straw-plait"—there was the straw, or grass, for plait ing ; then there was plaiting-straw and straw-plait. lie proposed to take the duty off that particular kind of plait made of chips, and of straw or grass ; but from the manufactured articles, commonly called " straw-plait," the duty would not be removed. CERTIFICATES OF SEAMEN. Mr. 111.TY1 - ;isijedtOTut - a question to the Se cretary of the Admiralty. In the course of last session an Act had been passed requiring all British seamen to register themselves at the port from which they sailed, and each received a certificate of registration. No sailor would be received on board a vessel without this certificate, and the captain who so received him would become liable to a penalty. There had been a considerable body of foreign seamen brought to this country. As the Bill of laA year made no provision for the re gistering of those seamen, they were thrown out of employ. meat. Many of them had been twelve, thirteen, and fourteen years in the coasting trade, and they were men of the most orderly conduct, and esteemed amongst the best in the trade. Those men, having settled, married, and domiciled in this country, were unable to obtain employment, in con sequence of not being registered, and their condition excited very great commisseration. The question which he wished to put to the Hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Admiralty was, whether the Government intended to propose any measure for their relief ? Mr. CORRY said there was no doubt that foreigners had been for years employed in the coasting trade con trary to the navigation laws, and the stringent operation of the Act of last year had prevented them from being employed. But they could get rid f the disqualification by tasting the oath of allegiance, which would only cost Ls., and would entitle them to register. BANKING IN SCOTLAND. In answer to a question from an HON. MEMBER, Sir H. PEEL said that he was in communication with several persons connected with banking in Scot land, and he thought he should not be prepared to bring in a Bill upon the subject, or to state the intentions of the Government, until after Easter. MIXED MARRIAGES IN IRELAND. Mr. ROSS wished to put a question to the Riv,ht Hon. Gentleman the Secretary fur Ireland on the sub ject of mixed marriages in that country. The Roman Catholic clergy had been long subject to penalties for marrying Presbytetians t Roman Catholics, and these penalties had been reduced from time to time. The consequence of this state of things must be obvious to every one, and the question he wished to ask was this—that as it was impossible for twitters '0 remain as they were, he wished to know which of the only two cour , es open to the Goverment it intended to take ? Would it reimpose the old penalties on Catholic cler gymen celebrating such marriages, or would is make the solemnization of mixed marriages by the Catholic clergy legal. e ---- `, ........-----7 , Sir I'. FREMANTLE said the law on this g o ne; , n remained in precisely the same state as before theeetatet lug a the Marriage Act of last session ; it°, i' ‘ , / Ov whstever were imposed by that Act. He conk' u ,:ifee which of the alternatives mentioned by the lee' ber the Government was prepared to pursue. . Ni s Mr. ROSS then gave notice that on an earlf,eo should move for leave to bring in a Bill o n the so) AME . er" Mr. BRIGHT G presented LAWS petitions, not' signed by farmers and landholders to fp m ci Sussex, Alnwick, in Northumberland, lor western side of the Severn, Gloucesters ~., Ruislip, in Middlesex, all praying for ti lc e - 0 * tion of the game-laws. The lion. Member thae'O the motion which he had given notic e of briag;tel this evening was a motion for the aPP e rt ejor., of a Select Committee to inquire into the or bey, the game-laws ; and in bringing this motion House, he acknowledged that he was fully sensreget, importance and difficulty of this question. El e : r ie il ° ,; extremely that it could not have 911 the W i at g de, House from his advocacy which it might h t dist 1,0 other hands. He regretted extreme* ? e v e ,: Hon. Gentleman of longer standing in that P 010 not taken this question up; he might have hee'eleg impart to it a degree of weight and authority eel, was unable to give it. But he was so cohltrae):, the importance of this question, and of t r ioet r y site , of some alteration in the laws respecting 0 if i,i , he considered he should be neglecting his bring ~eti had hesitated fur a longer period to "• Oe ' question under the notice of the House' nsil A C° 4 04 observed that, for several years past , , /a loe f ; I able portion of the convictions which had aye 1 at petty sessions, more especially in the 85. IV' Gam e counties were for offences against the ar e! J (Hear, hear)—and thousands of the P? 0,01 ,7 the population had been fined and l o t hat for such offences. It frequently happened t ?, e ligeet lent outrages, and ferocious encounter s too nAeste,o tween gamekeepers and poachers, ending f r ` s n ' e esilly; the infliction of serious injuries, and not unfv e 2 t i le istre e death. He found also that the last sentence of ' ve te T e e been frequently put into operation on unfea l e P i t " victuals whose calamities had been brought Itosto through the laws for the preservation of gem e ' las ses ° t it cause he had a deep sympathy for the poorest c ' ace fad people, and because he had a deep rev ere gierit i° 4 l sacredness of human life, that he asked the t e ref";, / the House to the motion which he was about o f P e and he felt certain that no considerable nut:0°0%10o, hers would refuse to accede to such an in tbi 6 eo asked. Looking hack to former legislation ° n o pee f ) ject, he felt justified in making this ' P e ers e as there bad been frequent instances of late ) eme lo th o appointment of Committees to consider the Jo of es In the years 1816 and 1823, Select Conitm tb i e sebj 0 House had beer. appointed to inquire int o wee °'/b/ and in 182 e, there had been a Select Com m , ° pep( House of Lords appointed for the same Ploia7 Committee of 1816 appeared to have been g e ss ° l et the immediate object of obtaining such evi deil eslifi ci , induce the Legislature to abolish the e c l oo ele et then existing, which was the possession of " 0 , d e l, portion of landed property, and of throWlo4lsol tight of killing game to all persons who sb°oect aids, a Government certificate. In 1823 the °Jo ol Committee was to obtain such evidence I " . ' ss le o el duce the Government to legalize thee's/I°4o : of t it game, and in 1828 the Select Committee 0009. Lords was appointed for the same obje ct ' re il l ° immediate objects of these Committees r ed V he had stated, no one who ha ti fa il l° 0 0V ; evidence adduced before them, could Tee l iO / convinced of the fact that the / /i ce e i ,,,,Af 0 , 0 of their appointment had been the previt e . o tii'er i ing, and the frequent recurrence of tu c '' ` e ber a lte s " eoa est t encounters between gamekeepers and • lo ses i s they had of late years so deeply to d` house , i to In the year 1816 a Committee of & l e t / eel ei ':(te e , pointed to inquire into this subject , a " •ete e 'f 9 that if a more extended permission a 0 0 14 0 1 4 parties to kill game, a certain e lf ' s ple to ! d sons would he interested in th b e elie ce lio p 1 1 0 rd of game, and therefore poachers. it was 0 0 0 / sh ° have keen put an end to ; but that reem' e s s OV d O f . 1 S-prf bee ,- i not been followed up. Then, again, il l esa e ei ett the year 1828, when similar inquiries fee' filet into ; if the Legislature consented to leg t a bi e, o , l : e or e t game by the owners of the land, and 9 00 10 2 markets, it was supposed that the P e t 0 0 '0 eOO thus driven out. In order to carry m i "neoefr i etiritti numbers of poulterers from Leade n to tbei:o, 0 / summoned to attend ; and in answer 00,0 0 0 putt° them they seemed to be in favour ° et otiis t e s o i an t ° ore(' one or two oft hese, more sagacious to to f t o h o that the plan would not have the elfe ° , he 0 4 ° 40 the poachers, and for this reason, that the eie f lr eo game could not support and watch the g a lt th e o el, and therefore could not affbrd to stebe ber 0;01,, cheap as the poachers, wino, exeel 3 •, opliletir they ran in killing the game, were at n ; fbg ," 0 ' A O; and thus, by underselling the landowne'nee t", tet° be even greeter than before ; ?,. 1 1 , 1 0,0 proved that those poulterers were rig"'eee. ' o r te mendation of the Committee in this r e e s „P r ot h "will' failed ; the law had since been much a" d - coel e e el e se c i, evil still existed —(Hear, hear.) He b 010 3 t t it"' night, net for the urose of making S to l oili c oo respect to the presents tate of the laa t he e letel or to suggest a r e medy for the evils L ' t he i s W I He did nut think that any Member of in k til r voli" now prepared to do so ; but he did Te er r e edi s e '') mitt+ e of Inquiry ought to be grante t e a ofe o ble f fro f ;l quire into the whole subject fairly h er t o e ft , , k,,, Oil report the result to that House, in oru F ,, - Doe,e eve e e" come to a wise and sound udgmen t e e ; Pie r er His of was to cause an inquiry in - #0.40 11 3 ' . n e 0 . O I ,e se arise from the preservation of w here 1-tbess- echoer k et the kingdom, and particularly f, used • hvi farmers, as appeared by the newspeP e ' ele', l 'el , I t a remedy would be prepared by hg 1 ,./' e gy e e those farmers, and those men ' f ,f "DO of ilf cultivation of the soil.—(Cries (iseoldeberyot He was aware that some ()ejections 1 gew o h oe e a this course, still considering how Mneeiaft'btbetoetif House were landed proprietors, a nd h e a l ,' e v to admitted, a strong and sincere syntiPtt.e'etion .4 th ,0 cultivated the land, he th , ught n o mice I'o%llo - tertieined against that part of the 5 " ibeviell . 4 1 would be willing to exaMine e e r_ a , by !,,,j it. He would give the House s°lll ool . ll' te cel. ti of the damage done to the to o? v al e o d Some few weeks ago he was in e•b° ° ol ,e conversing with a farmer, frotri o ott c ello j the following facts :—This Pev s°l ia ilie e erileo had seventy-eight acres of 13 , P a tionf o isi he that, according to a fair va i ",bo ) r e, it ''' done was not less than 204/ in I , 0 3 % brestlt' ". Oh, oh.") The particulars were l o oliolia'eele tli; in his hand, and the person front ", 0 01,, Ole s i r ov 6ii tenant of a Member of one of the W u ': se' 00 ite / e9 he stated that he was ready to come u o r i ber Oa Of t , the Committee were granted. A n f ar ate l th e erle: 4 , same neighbourhood was that of a girebd • e llo o rs acres of land. He would be willing My be to 10 0 4 l o the parties privately to any Mernb er do so lel(' e n,,, e ti o to do so; but, of course, he could no t _ e one (100,,Pete Dept mission to that effect. This tanner he . be ladly b eef,, , which ran alongside the demesne of n ' e ge el oo f t o I t tb, stated that the annual damage in that c e eeeP e A°, ; 1 ',1 ° ,, 50/. ; and he said that he would as ae ° tie S O iOV 1 0 1),,0 game which were destroying his 0 9 11%4 foL eel beee 9 ;,l hares, having the consent of the lam' over te" sl l e , ' t efl o i gamekeeper, who was lying in cover n ate ultr i l e e!tebe 0 ( 1 who it was that took the game from, „ had a t, „erlt b oo pay 50s. fine, and 10s, costs, not havtllg er thlt 1, 0 14 4 , ir t , took out a licence, and for six m onths a it. t h il6 r ) ;;01' of 50 rabbits and 23 hares per 03°n L a ug- t pe sr tr ~ by the half gross at once.--(.00 tbe te , t oet? , j up all the traps in the ,_'„ t o ere bad the 9i 0 having bought up all the traps t"' , tie n os le d e t t eter• 1 eGr he to ' Birmingham for others.—( Lau ,. g ,. 0 . 9 cstn iha t ~ert e 9 traps set at once, but the gamen e t j: 'said gibe , $ 11,;, e t , stole the traps.—(Laughter. " •At Or, e re " 4 woe . / turnips, which were turned up lei r e ° ,'''they - e • e g O e 'i l li .„ 0 the morning ; but during the tngt"' the yor e ov' to ir I the rabbits. He said the hares d id eat 00/etethe,oieeetoos) and in the spring the young s hoots ~ _lol u ?l , ,e os _ sOt . , f and the thrashing machine did not : a doee ta tvelete, and what did come out was poor , l e l l , b r e istl.d 03 0 , 1 ,01 0 ,1 0 4 deteriorated the general produce 0 1 • f i e O h t he 7 0 ,08 P o t two or three shillings per quartl . :, , t hroug h { the ) 0 01; 0 0 „) paths or runs of nine inches in widt h , hear ts . 0 to„,eo tr) of the fields. The hares bit out tue_ ear itY_ l ti beeP oi e t ilr e which prevented it from coming to ;3001• P od be r , el, O tt i in five years damage to the am°undtestroYed; Wa le d liit e ) farm notwithstanding the game be twee n e rg.; to # ra l things created great ill-feelin4 ato keel! bl ig 0 ,, to e) owners, and between farmers and g inse lees i .' he e ea. 0,0 t ri tit ude of cases the farmers felt th% man y 01 8 $05 11, 0 00 0 1 1 gamekeeper. This farmer went M_l . He 0 ! 0 ote_ al tie l ,iki thi, stage he would not enter int° oo 6 o ed . t . at Wo e rii that this state of things was not: ten s t / L :rliagjosi l 7 11 , 1 very respectable farmer, and ,_,, frijol . , h i, s_ _,J 0 ~e 4 House, wrote to him (Mr. BrigmL , au:i dio t ; $ 0 , r . : ,15,1 j rent about eighty - five Scotch aerr ast ye ar: ' to ts!!! oL . 7 worth was destroyed by game. a _t es wel e orep a/ 09, of five acres, nearly three e c e ` had "teemed of This year it was worse a ,,f, t hree ist_, o f el l acres destroyed , He "; c h a rge be rei osie n; 01 }',. to value the turnips in ortot e arrY .1,. ova e e r fr e t t/A loss, and then he was oblige_ their eons lia titr aa ,v, into a secure place toprevent. 'T a s erelar be e; t e ll , P, furnish them with statements oi . mere sbeexr expressed their etrhseiirnwtyil_,siienec:selie:::avioafalie ii4o:friciii give their evidence. 'De net t ne w ow _ a ewe tae'( tiei from the county of Chester.i. _, a par ., j o ter. tb el from the St.chpart eialv . e n r v‘ ise h r ich he :tea lblt o l l d 4 pathy with the objects i ~_..„ i t s t , ,, e co e .be y _ , 9 01) headed " Hares and Rabotts which were b wasred to o n injurious from r o e o u l a? s t e . t n o s t had t i e obn s f e yr tu M h e : e sx pr pc : i r : ta t e ws e d e : ! e b ste : " O sc f r a r Ft its , 4 : o, r ee oy °l ,1 and public sympathy these animals. 1 30 0 rsli b b ar ee pe d destroyed ,sreallyay ," that a sufferin g a f n e 1 and mrialed faro quit ,pii i t '°u l !-35e ,, ir e o f tn ar P e % ign re t ;el tenants were 01 ? Ige t receiving a ° J i .oent / eel e t ) of the game. with°u the far ms " P bee )use a o° •JV, There were some of e f nd for theinr ~ „ T oe tenants could not ue ou __ wee not . s on to 0. 4 ~ T hi s s ysteo. run with game. from a farmer near Clare,rinthan the .bieb P „es , i , ) but was spread over several.. sTubffeAll,:oileitooftlaatire'ettrbiedree,lo;fidt#o7? by the game was the employers and in t _laws. yin pr ?cl at t o n ve re . o*/; operation of th! e theg rheteautereb4l e l o n y t e I P , i Il ilt e a- o rt e ht c - bealfreofoi: , / ga h.ch it a pp . ear, i cou ptx, o ov liej writer attributed S u ff o lk paper, in w i ~. _„0 in that _ a rts _,, tit , victions, at the late 3; e nr: r.) e s o% d r 01 1 5 4 (0 O i l garne-laws•—( Hears; of a i n t ed h e , farmers g u p t h a t t titib ' i e f vi, a rb i t e b b b e l i ti l ti d ai la e 4 l e o : oo ,l e is ii o nli A ni in those parishes the that l ef is,), 7 that u h r s d v itse i tr i game they Another farmer in the ..2, b eer )e _ t_ e 0330 e, p i,, was a fact. that most strictly enforce t t e b o e u re _ t „, we e r t e ate so d be e.... „( 00 ) loss by the game vva.sictonice ln to dest of , far, gr. 13 0 0 0 ,4 1 to take out a game I the ;; i :) c i t b ead t h ol t) 0 0 1 That farts' ( M r ' eieh? el l l ' e e fro n a Sussex newspaper. _ which once iv aivide is" ii ward,(sir Bright)of elashhaald's " 1- 1•" i a ° 1 -t rn be , r S cuasseee' ' : l on e Or i s h Ir. il i• ences with his landlord ito no h e career -11 „.,,,eot.2_, ese oi l . je 4 enter; but this led to t „ h e s tatfei o le rape I published. Mr. Hay a te n i a ti ;d 35 0 7 0 ,r„ Y psi into two parts, them of D u a cres Y . 0 3 r d _...sge the latter a portion 074 , 4 se re ~ _ . ii, 53 bushele--(H e—r, whereas on the bad.r sid h e e , 2o ' ....4la d bla might It.deerer:eldin'°tlbv