The Press.
London, England, 1858-05-01 00:00:00

THE PRESS, MAY 1, 1858.

having that object. As the compensation paid to
proctors by the act was very large, the question of
expense must be considered before applying a
similar law to Ireland.
The Earl of Nillcimow observed that the late
Government had promised that an act of the same
kind would be introduced for Ireland.

Lord CRANWORTH confirmed the statement.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH moved the second
reading of the bill for the suppression of barrel•
organs.
The motion was negatived and the bill thrown

THE " CAOLLARI."

The Earl of MAIMESBURY, in reply to questions
from the Earl of Airlie in reference to the capture of
the Cagliari, who thought her Majesty's Govern-
ment had exhibited great discretion in the matter,
stated that the condemnation of the Cagliari by the
Neapolitan courts was not yet completed; the despatch
of the Marquis D'Azeglio of the 22nd of March had
been answered. He regretted that in consequence of
the explanation given of the error committed by
Mr. Erskine in copying the despatch of the Earl of
Clarendon to Count Cavour, the Sardinian Govern.
ment had drawn the inference that England in.
tended to abandon it. He could not discover that
the English Government had ever made any pro.
mise to co-operate with that of Sardinia in this
question. From the merely English point of view,
their connection with it was extremely slight, con.
sisting only in the accident of two English engineers
being on board the Cagliari. Her Majesty's Go.
vernment had obtained their liberation, the opinion
of the law officers of the Crown being unanimous
that their detention was illegal : the Government
had also demanded from Naples an indemnity for
their imprisonment. The feeling in Sardinia with
regard to the capture of the steamer was very strong
—so strong as to create a risk of war between the
two Italian States. To prevent the occurrence of
hostilities so dangerous to Europe, her Majesty's
Government had offered its good offices to Sardinia
by supporting its endeavour to obtain the restoration
of the Cagliari; and if it failed, he had advised
Count Cavour to have recourse to the mediation of
some friendly power, according to the principle laid
down in the Convention of Paris, before proceeding
to any measures of hostility.

The Earl of CLARENDON remarked that the action
of the Government throughout had been hampered
by legal doubts. He recapitulated all the details of
the case, and stated his conviction that the con-
demnation of the Cagliari was illegal. He heard
with satisfaction that her Majesty's Government had
demanded an indemnity for the two engineers. The
late Government for a long time was in complete
ignorance of the condition in which they were kept.
No access was allowed to them ; and while they were
suffering all the horrors of their imprisonment the
Neapolitan Government formally stated that they
were well treated by special direction of the authori-
ties, and in good health. The men were clearly en-
titled to an indemnity, not only for their cruel, unjust,
and unlawful detention, but for the deception prac-
tised on her Majesty's Government by the Govern-
ment of Naples.
Lord WENELF,YDALE suggested a reference of the
legal questions involved to the Judicial Committee
of the Privy Council.
Lord CAIIPBEII. thought the course would be em-
barrassing if the committee were not unanimous.

After some further discussion the matter dropped.
The Duke of ARGYLL, in moving for the produc•
tion of the report of the Directors, to the general
Court of the East India Company, on the two bills
relating to the Government of India, criticized the
provisions of the bill of the present Government,
condemning the system of election of members of
the Council of India, a system he believed the
Government itself did not approve, as the Earl of
Ellenborough had declared his opposition to it in
1853.