The Express.
London, England, 1864-06-21 00:00:00

THE CONFERENCE.

Mr. DISRAELI—I wish to inquire of her Majesty's
government whether it is prepared to give us an explanation
with reference to some subjects in connexion with the Con-
ference. I wish to ask whether her Majesty's government
esa inform the house anything respecting • statement,
believed to be perfectly authentic, that the Prussian minis-
ter, at the hut meeting of the Conference, is ►lleged to bays
stated that in case the German porta are blockaded the Ger-
man powers will no Icepr consider themselves bound by the
Convention of Paris respecting privateers. I wish to know.
air, in the second place, whether. in men of the Conference
breakieg up its proceedings on Wednesday next, we are to
understand that hostilities will commence on the 26th.
And thirdly. I wish to know whether, if the Conference
concludes, under any circumstances, its business next Wed-
nesday, we may understand from her Majesty's government
that the protocols will be pieced immediately on the table of
the bones.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I would
suggest to the right hoe. gentleman that he should put
these questions, which are of considerable importance, on
the paper for to-morrow. (" Oh.")
Mr. DISRAELI—I do not consider that these are quan-
tities it is at all meomeary to place on the paper. (Oppo-
sition cheers.) I am perfectly justified, in the present state
of affairs, in asking them of her Majesty's government
without any formal notice. (Cheers.)
Mr. B. OSBORNE—Although I feel the inconvenience
of provoking discussion at this moment, whim I recollect
the mode in which we drifted into war with Runts, sad
feeling the unitary of this occasion, and the very
ous precipice on which the country steeds—
hear)— I feel booed to take the oppor-
By of asking some member of the government, if
the noble hnl is not in his place, what significance le to he
attached to certain words uttered in another place, to the
effect that her Majesty's Beet is fully prepared for any ser-
vice it may he called upon to render. Those words are so
significant—the peace of this country being, in my opinion,
imperilled of this moment—that elthough this may he an
inconvenient occasioe, at least I take the first opportunity
in the interest. of peace to silk her Majesty's govern-
ment what significance is to be placed on those
words--whether it is one of those idle threat.
—(cheers)—which have lately been too mach used
in another place—(hear, hear)—or whether it is a bona
fide intention to commit that suicidal act of plunging this
country into war with Germany. Hon. gentlemen may not
mee frith me is thinking this a suicidal act, but they will
agree that if this country a to be plunged into war we
should have deficits and certain ioformation,that we should
not drift day by day isle a state of thieve which may in-
volve this country in a war the end of which no man can
see. +Cheers.) I therefore hope the house will support
me in this demand, and insist on some answer as to what ia
the significance of those terms used in another place.
(Cheers 1
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I was not
aware that the adjournment of the house had been moved.
I ant sorry that any inconvenience should arise to the right
Lon. gentleman, or to others, from the eircomstsocee in
which we stied ; but no information hes been given to me,
or, as for as I know, to soy member of the government, of
the questions put by the right hon. gentleman up to the
moment they were asked. I must confer it does appear to
me that it would be greatly for the convenience and edran.
=of the house if notice of such questions were siren
ire they were addressed to the government. (Loud
cheers.) At any rate it so halves. that these question.
have been put is the absence of my noble friend.
I hare Mid no oonstnneitation with him, and it rests with
him an the representative of the government in important
matters of this kind to answer such questions. I should
have altogether departed from my duty if I had answered
them in any ether manner than I did *newer them, namely,
that notion should be rives for to-morrow,
Mr. FITZGERALD—I must admit that it is for
the convenience of the house some notice should be
given of important questions put to the government ;
bat there are time. of emergency, and posi-
tions of serious difficulty, which I think perfectly
justify hon. mintlemen sitting on this side of the home in
insisting,. far se they can.ori having a definite sneerer from
the government as to their intentioos in a crisis such as
this, and, sir, it in not se if every member of the govern-
ment at the present time was sot fully in possession of the
eiscamstances of the clam Sony member of the cabinet

must be ewers of what pared es Saturday. There is 004
one member sitting on the Treasury Beach who is sot
able to give an answer to my right hoc. friend, and I
trust the house will insist on having that answer. (Chun
sod laughter.)
Mr. D' GRIFFITH—It appear* that on this serious
question her Majesty's govarnmeat is not in a position to
give an answer. They are here without their head.
(Laughter.) They are a ours entirely deprived of that which
would give them any vitality. (Hear, hear.) The eight hon.
geetleman must be aware that he is speaking for a divided
government on this subject. Not one of them will deny
that assertion. (" Bear, hear," and laughter.) I apprehend,
at the eaao time, that all our information is derived from
the ordinary public means, and that whilst they give us in-
formation coming from abroad of what transpires here, they
also inform us of the divided 'tete of the government.
I hops the words referred to by the hon. member
for Lukeard (h. B. Osborne) will have the vitality and
force attributed to them. (Hear, hear.) I trust they are
words of power, and that ere long we shall have • govern-
ment which will intimate to despotic powers that we have a
mind of our own in Eogland, and are not prepared to see
the great influence of this country in abeyance on a subject
in which we have taken so great a part, and our recom-
mendations throw* back in our faces with insult sad con-
tumely. It is certain that If we put forth our right arm—
' the naval strength of this country—in a manner suited to
the dignity of the nation, we should soon see the objects
which the conference was convened for satisfactorily
settled. (Hear, hear.)
Lord J. MANNERS—The observations which have fallen
from the bon. masher for Lakeard mast, I think, have
shows her Majesty's government that the interest ex-
premed by my right hon. friend in the question he put
is not confined to this side of the house. (Cheers.) lan
sure that when these few observations are reed to-morrow,
the country will feel, and probably will express ite deep
sense ot the position in which the House of Commons
by the refusal of information the part of her
placed
ty's government on this subject, which excites the
country from one end to the other. (Cheers.) The
Chancellor of the Exchequer has said that in the absence of
the noble lord at the head of the government and in the ab-
sence of notice of an intention to ask this question, it is
impossible for him or any other member of her Majesty's
government to reply to these questions. I think, Sir,
however, that on the eye of such all important and momen-
tous events. if it be true that there is no member of the
government competent or willing to reply to (imams of
this importance *roost the noble lord himself, it is then
the duty of that noble lord to he here in his place. (Cheers
from the opposition, which were taken up by the members
on tie ministerial side of the house on Lord Pa/mentos
here entering from behind the Speaker's chair, ad were con-
tinued for a laminates.) I now rejoice to see the noble
lord, and I trust that having taken his seat he will be able
and willing to give that ieformation which has hitherto been
asked in vain. Probably the noble lord will be informed
by one of his colleagues who sits near him what the inform-
ation is that has been asked for.

it; G. GREY—Repeat lb. quirtions.
Lord .1. MANNERS—The firm questions, whether her
Majesty's government can give the house information
respecting the declaration alleged to have beer made at the
conference on Saturday lest by the representative of
Prussia—that in the event of the blockade of the German
ports being in their opinion inefficiently carried out,
Prussia would depart from the stipulntions contained in
the treaty of Paris. Secondly, whether in the opinion of
her Majesty's government, if the conference should
terminate its labours uefavourably on Wednesday,
the resumption of hostilities on Monday nest
may be expected. And thirdly, whether, in the
event of the conference terminating out Wednesday lay under
any circumstances, the protocols of the operatioes of the
coatrooms will be immediately placed on the table of the
house. (Cheers.)
Mr. OSBORNE—Perhape the noble lord at the head of
the government will also explain the significance of the
word used in another place by the noble lord at the head
of the Foreign-office. that "the fleet use prepared to go
anywhere—whether that is to be taken in a warlike senile?
Lord PALMERSTON—My bon. friend has asked a quali-
ties—whether the British fleet is in a condition to do any-
thing which might be required of it? (Cries of "No, no.")
Mr. OSBORNE—The question was whether the fleet was
prepared to go to the Baltic. (Cheers.)
Lord PALMERSTON—WeII, the Baltic or anywhere
else. My noble friend in the other Iron answered in the
words of the late Doke of Wellington, that the fleet wee
reedy to go anywhere. (Oh, oh.) I think that the British
fleet is perfectly capable of performing any service. (Oh, ob.)
I don't by that mow to isdicate any particular service, but
I say generally that. whatever contingency may happen,
I ani persuaded the British fleet is fully equal to
it. (Oh, oh.) With regard to the questions of the
right honourable gentleman, repeated by the noble
lord, I would rather decline answering by stating
that which might have weed at the conference held on
Saturday or any other day. There was an agreement that
what passed at the coatroom should not be made public.
(Laughter.) Many reports have got out of what pissed at
the conference, yet I am sure the booms will we that a breach
of confidence, whoever may have committed it, is a very
different thing from a statement made by • minister of Use
crown in this house, which might give rise to discussions
which certainly ought to be avoided. (Hear, hear.) Well,
the next question was whether hostilities would be re-
sumed on Monday, in the event of the conference
terminating unfavourably. I can only my how
the matter steeds at the present time. The suspension
of hostilities expires on Sunday, and if there is no other
agreement made before that time—if the belligerent parties
have not agreed to some arraugement calculated to restore
peace, or have not come to any understanding as to bounda-
ries—if the suspension be not renewed, of course the state
of hostility would recommence when the suspension expires.
With regard to the third question, whenever the negotia-
tions are over, no doubt it will be the duty of her Majesty's
government to lay the proceedings of the conference before
parliament, and they will do so without say unnecessary
delay—perhaps only with the delay of a day or two.
Mr. BRlGHT—Perhaps the noble lord is not able to give
us any assurance at present that the armistice is prolonged ,
or will be so, but it is quite obvious that, necessarily, there
' must be great interest in the question throughout the country.
(Hear, hear.) I don't think that boo. gentlemee opposite
have a greater desire for peace than her Majesty's govern-
ment, bet the country has a groat interest in knowing all
the noble lord can fairly tell them. I have never asked a
question before oo the subject, and I don't intend to ask
any now. Though there may be a good guess of
what has been done, clearly it is not the duty
of her Majesty's ministers to divulge that which
their representatives at the Conference bays pledged
themselves to keep secret. But the noble lord will get on
more easily is the house if be will tell us all be con, and I
should be moot happy if be could tall us anything which
would show that peace is likely to come out of the Begot's-
Hess which have now been going on for scene weeks past.
(Hear, bear.)
Lord PALMERSTON—There is great anxiety and great
interest is the country for the preservation of peace, and I
am quite aware that this bones must feel a strong desire to
know everything that can be prorly commusicated with
regard to the negotiation gorngbn. I very much roast
that my conga^ is tied. I can only repeat the aseuraime
that her Majesty's government are labouring immorally to
bring the belligerent parties to en agreement, and if we fail
in doing so, I think sad trust we shall be able to show that
it has not been our fault. (Cheers.)

THE EXPRESS, , TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 21, 1864.

THE GAOLS BILL.
Bic G. OBEY moved the second reeding of the Gaols
Bill, the object of which was to carry out a portion of
the recommeodatioca of the Lords' committee which re•

ported on the seslojelt of prisms discipline Int year.
Amonpt those recommendation were these—that the
discipline, diet, and labour established la prisons eboeld in
future be uniform, and that the separate system should be
=footed es far as was practicable. Some siisapprehei
he observed, prevailed with regard to the fourth clause. It
was believed that that clause would give extraordinary
powera to the Home Secretary, and ',sable him to appoint
catholic *lmolai= in pole against the wish of the
county and local magistracy. He denied that the clause
would have such an effect ; but if it were thought by the
bonze that it would, be should be ready to omit it from the
bill. Its real object was to empower the Home Secretary
to amend the prison rules at any period of the year, instead
of in the month of September only, as at present.
Mr. ADDEB.LEY wee of opinion that no legislation to
amend the present law relating to pole Gould be satisfactory
that did not include some definition of hard labour sod •
schedule of rules far gads, and which did not provide for
all gaols being gradually adapted to In separate @yet= and
for a uniform and classified treatmest of all pr loners. After
the statement of the Home Secretary, that be bad no
objection to withdraw the fourth clause, he would not
' oppose the bill in its present step.
Mr. NEWDEGATE moved, a■ an amendment, that the
bill be read &snood time on that day three months, oo
the pound that It violated the principle of local self-
goverement, and failed to provide any adequate security or
impossibility to guard application,ibuioc
and render it an
instrument effective for The hon. gentleman ad-
mitted that it was desire • that • measure for the regula-
tion of gaols should pass, but he contended that the defini-
tion of the rules should not be left with the Home-office,
but should be laid down and enacted by parliament
or the Home Seerstary might, an his own responsibility,
appoint Roman catholic chaplains in prisons without cos-
sultuig the justices, who would then be left to incur the
odium of levyieg • tax for the expeditors.
Mr. BARROW seconded the ameodmest, resting his op-
position to the measure mainly upon its centralising ten-
dency.
Sir J. PAKINGTON remarked that Mr. Newdepte's
objectless were directed chiefly against the fourth clause of
the bill, which Sir G. Gray bad offered to withdraw.
After the report of the Inds committee, be thought Sir
George would have neglected hie duty if he had not directed
his attention to this subject. The present question was not
as to the details of the bill, but its principle, and be should
vote for the seooad reading. With regard to hard labour,
be thought it would be • peat advantage if it could be
defined.

toad when tie pendant was given to men wise were neither
taxpayers nor elected by taxpayer'. (Hew, hear.) He had
himself, acting es a magistrate, found greet difficulty in
carrying out permissive legislation in the saes of the police
acts sad others, wheal he was called upon to impose • tax
eon person. wbo had no voice te Its imposition ea them-
selves. In these cams of so-called parmesan logialatice,
the house had trensferred its responsibility to 1)0111i0•61 of
the crown—(hear, hear)—putting them into • situa-
tion of the greatest diffioulty. This waa • matter
of principle. if this really was • beneficial
measure, why should not the house, who were
responsible to their owe repreeestatives. take the
matter into its own hands, instead of delegating it to per-
sons who were sot represented by the taxpayers? (Hen.
beer. )
Mr. LOCKE said the whole system masa permiesin eye-
tan as to the mode in which the oommimiosers chose to
appoint the collecton. The object of the bill was that
large *umbers of persons should adopt the bill or not just
as they pleaaed. Now, with regard to Southwark, the
inhabitants were differently obi:uninspired from those of
Liverpool, and they did not think they would have any suck
option, as they would be swamped by the surrounding dis-
tricts. ("Divide, divide.")
Mr. H. LEWIS felt bound in duty to his °matins':its to
contend that the metropolis ought to be excluded from this
bill.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said that the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer justified this manure, because the collectors in the
rural districts were poor. He admitted the fact, bat if
several of the parishes were brought under one collection
that juirtificatkin for the bill would be removed. ("Divide
divide.")

Mr. WHALLEY opposed the bill, principally on the
ponied that it enabled the Secretary of State to give in-
creased facilities for the weer of Roman catholic priests to
prisoners.
Mr. hi AGUIRE replied to some remarks by Mr. Hairdo.
gate and Mr. Whalley on the subject of Ranee catholic
prison chaplains and their minietratioca.
Mr. WALTER observed that it had been said of Reading
Gaol that there was no work at all there. That was not
exactly the we. He gave a short description of the system
in that gaol, which wee the first model prison in the country.
He agreed with Sir G. Grey that it would not be wise to
lay down any strict dellaitioo of "hard labour." These
questions ought, in his opinion, to be left to the magistrates
in the tint instance, subject to an appeal to the Home Se-
cretary, which meant an ultimate review by the house.
The treatment of prisoaers was not a question of local
saltgovernment ; it was an imperial question.
After a few remarks by Mr. Milford, Mr. Hibbert, and
Mr. S. Estcoart, and a brief reply by Sir G. Grey, who
stated his readiness to withdraw the 4th clause of the bill,
the smendment was negatived on a division by 116 to 49,
and the bill was then reed a second time.

The house then divided—
For the third reading
132-4
The= accordingly lost.
The announcement of the numbers was received with
loud cheers from the oppositioc benches.
RAILWAYS CONSTRUCTION (FACILITIES) BILL.
The house then went into committee on this bill, the
several &mass of which were adopted.
RAILWAY TRAVELLING (IRELAND) /311,L.

On the order for the mooted reading.
Sir C. O'LOOll LEN said that as an amendment for the
rejection of the bill would be proposed, be would shortly
state its objects. He wished to ware to the public the
right of travelling upon Sundays, sad also toga:lore to third-
clue passengers those rights which they ought to have, in
being enabled to travel at lower rates of fares. The bill
referred particularly to the Limerick and Waterford Rail-
way Company, whose railwaenow traversed a large district of
the country, and which, by • mutation passed by the dine-
ton last November, had beenclosed upon Sundays. He would
propose that the railways should run trains upon Sundays,
and that they should run a train each way for the benefit of
third-clue passengers at low fares. The objection to the
bill was that trains did not pay on Sundays, bat with that
the house had nothing to do. There was a real necessity for
this measure. for the closing of these railways on Sundays
affected the comforts of large classes of the people.
Mr. BLAKE moved that the bill be read a second time
that day three months.
On a division there appeared :
For the second reeding 2l
Against it 4O-19
COMMON LAW PROCEDURE (IRELAND) ACT (1853)