The Express.
London, England, 1864-04-19 00:00:00

THE FTCTMOUS AMERICAN DESPATCH.

Lord R. CECEL asked the Attorney-General whether he
still considered that a eertain alleged report of Mr. Malloy,
the secretary to the Confederate navy. was of a character
entirely unqueetionakile. (Laughter.) He also wished to
know whether he would lay on the table the despatch of
Mr. Seward having reference to that report.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL said the noble lord had
give° him an opportunity of assuring the home that when
he referred to the document on a previous 0001•4012, end
used the word "unquestionable," his meanie, was simply
this—that never having heard at the time a doubt sug-
gested that the document was not what it purported to be,
and knowing that it was treated as such by Mr. Seward, and
sent as such by Mr. Adams to her Majesty's government—
(opposition cheers)—sod being ignorant of the peculiar form
in which such documents are presented to the Confederate
government ; and also not being aware at the time of what
was pointed out in the nouns of the debate as to the rearms
for doubting the genuineness of the document, he under
these circumstances, did in the simplicity of his heart
believe that it was what it ,
purported to be, and it was in
that sense that he spoke of it as unquestionable, " bo-
nnie be supposed the house would be of opinion that if it
had emanated from Mr. Mallory and been presented to the
Confederate Congress, it wauld have been an unquestionable
document. (Laughter.) The letter of Mr. Mallory and
Mr. Adams would be laid on the table.

LAYARD—No the letter of Lord trope.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Yea ; the letter of Lord
Lyons will be laid on the table.

MIL LOWE'S RESIGNATION.-PEPSONAL
EXPLANATION.

Yr. LOWE. who spoke from the fourth bench on the
mioisterial aide of the bowie, (apish:sod that is consequence
of the decision come to on Tuesday but, upon the motion
of Lord R. Cecil, which be took in the light of a dhoti,
charge against himself, that he bad mutilated the reports
of school inspectors by striking out andh portions of them
as were unfavourable to the administratioe of the
educational department, he had felt it his duty to
resign the office of Vice-President of the Council
on Education. The right hon. gentleman complained
that the house had arrival at a decision suddenly sod
in the absence of all evidence, and, alluding to some re-
ports that had beet, circulated among members whilst the
debate was proceeding, and which contained marked pre-
sages, denounced as "hue" the conduct of those subordi.
Dates in the education department who bad betrayed their
trust by furnishing these documents. Those marks, how-
ever, he observed, ought sever to have been made, and
they had not been made by the order or with the
knowledge of Earl Granville or himself, or for the
purpose ,of influencing the inspectors aa to the
passages which they were to omit from their
reports. They were placed there, in fact, in pur-
su►nce of a n.istaiken and erroneous practice which pre-
' veiled until 1862, when be forbade it, and without his
knowledge, by a clerk in the office, wham business it was
merely to read the reports, and call the attention of the
secretory to such passages as be might think worthy of his
notice. All that he had ever done with OA reports when
they were not framed in accordance with the minute of
January, 1861, was to return them to the when, and leave
them to discover for themaelves in what respect their re-
ports militated against the rule and principle laid down for
their guidance by the department.
Lord R. CECIL regretted that the right boo. gentle-
man should have taken the resolution as directed personally
against himself, when in truth it was aimed at a pectins
which he regarded as demerit* of censure. If the right
boo. gentleman had on Tuesday given • similar explans-
! Lion to that of this evening is all probability the motion
would not have been pressed to a division, or if it had
it would have been attended with • very different result.
But instead of that he left the house in perfect ignorance on
the question whether there had ever been any discussioa in
the office with respect to affixing marks to the inspectors•

iaWont PALMERSTON—Sir. nothing can be more
painful than the discussion which has just take' place. If
there is one thing more painful than another to a generous
mind it muss be to see a honourable, able, and upright
man • (hear, beer)—defending himself before an salembly
like this against a coodemustiou which he Con-
sidered to have been passed upon him, but which
he knows to have been unfounded and unjust. (Cheers.)
The noble lord who bas just sat down has stated that if be
had been aware on Tuesday night of what my right hon.
friend has DOW stated the result would have been different.
But let me ask the noble lord whether it did not oocur to
him Wet when one man makes a charge against another, it
might be as well for him to ascertain by full inquiry whe-
ther that charge was or was not well founded (Cheers.)
The noble lord says that as these marks were made upon
reports sent back to inspectors up to the year 1862, he had
I reason to conclude that that practice was still eeetinuni.
But the noble lord had opportunities which are well
known to everybody of ascertaining the real state of things
from those who were concerned in the matter ; end I think
it might have been as well if he had ascertained before
hand whether the practice which he called on the house to
condemn has or has not been continued since the year 1862.
Having taken some part in the matter to which my right
hon. friend referred as he made his statement, I can only
may that nothing could give more pain to must/ and col-
leagues than losing the services of a man so eminently
I qualified to do good service to the public and to his country,
by the extensive range of his knowledge, the logical accuracy
of his mind, the soundness of his judgment, arid his upnght.
sem (Hear.) I say it was a most painful thing to u to
contemplate the lose of his services. (Cheers.) When my
right bon. friend came to me immediately after the debate
on Tuesday to state that after such a vote he could not
with honour to himself continue to hold the office which he
filled, I and my colleagues—all of us—endeavoured to per.
suede him that that view was not a sound one. We said
that it did ootappear to us that the question at issue was
one of veracity on his part, and that the question related
to the practice of a department. We felt that it would
not be beoomingg or Weldable, according to the practice of
parliament, to ask the house to rescind a vote come to after
considerable discussion, but what we intended to do was to
peeper to the house the very thing that the stable lord had ,