The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-07-02 00:00:00

~_ d

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-TIIESDAY,

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the wo
at five o'clock.

The Grand Juries Bill passed through committee.
The report of amendments on the Sleeping Statutes
ill, was received and adopted.
The Registration of Votes (Scotland) Bill, was read a
cond time.

e Stock-in-Trade Exemption Bill, and the Survey
eat Britain, passed through committee.

IRISH REPRESENTATIVE PEERS

On the motion of the Earl of DONOUGUNDRE, a select
committee was appointed to make enquiry respecting the
expenses incurred by Irish peers in proving their right
to vote for representative peers.
The House rose eta quarter past six o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TIIESDAY

The Sr.

KKR took the chair at twelve o'clock, but it
st before sufficient members were present

Was a quarter
to make a twu
The Lo d 9
considered-an

amendments to the Leeds Water Bill were
i agreed to.

Shiivon

sahilities Removal Bill was read a third

favnur
Mr. (

D 2 presented a petition from Margate in
'restameltary Jurisdiction Bill.
tN presented a petition from the Company of
in Dublin against the Medical Profession
ore the House.

PRISONS (IRELAND) BILL,

On the nr,l
Mr

er for going into committee on this bill,
__CAIITNEY objected to the bill, on the ground
that it took the power over prisons out of the hands of
the visiting magistrates and placed it in the hands of the
lord lieutenant, or rather in the hands of the inspector of
prisons for the time being. He trusted the Government
Would not persist in maintaining that centralising prin-
ciple which the bill contained.

Mr. HOUSMAN explained that the bill contained no new
principle, its object being merely to assimilate the prac-
tice of Ireland to that of England.
Colonel FRENCH looked with dissatisfaction and dis-
trust upon the bill, but he would not oppose the House
going into committee upon it.
After some remarks from Colonel DUNNE, the House
went into committee on the bill.

Clauses 1,2, and 3 were agreed to, after some discus-
sion.

On
clause 4,

Colonel DUNNE moved an amendment, the object of
which was to give the Lord Lieutenant a veto on any
bye laws, but depriving him of the power to alter
or substitute bye laws for those agreed to by the
magistrates.

Sir G. Gear opposed the amendment, the object of
the clause being only to give the Irish executive the
same power as was exercised by the Secretary of State in
England.

After some discussion the committee divided, and the
numbers were—

For the amendment
Against it

Majority

Clause 4 was then agreed to, as were the remaining
clauses of the bill, with some verbal amendments, and the
House resumed,
The Dublin Metropolitan Police Bill, and the Juries
(Ireland) Bill were withdrawn.
The Courts of Common Law (Ireland) Bill, and the
Deeds (Scotland) Bill went through committee.
At the evening sitting,

CUSTOM OFPICERS AT LIVERPOOL

In reply to Mr. J. C. Ewart,

Mr. WILSON stated that • the result of the enquiry
instituted in the customs department of Liverpool, had
been, as he anticipated that it would be, an entire
revision of the service of that port, and an improvement
of the condition of the lower grade of officers, and he
hoped now, that those officers would be satisfied with
the rules and regulations laid down for the service.

POSTPONEMENT OF MOTION

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the post-
ponement of the notices of motion, until after the
adjourned debate on Mr. Moor's motion, relating to
enlistment in the United States.

Mr. NAPIER complained of the proceedings, by which
he again lost an opportunity for bringing on his motion
on the subject of the appointment of a separate depart-
ment fur the administration of justice, and stated his
willingness then to take the decision of the House upon
it without discussion.
Sir G. GREY declined to accede to such an arrange-
ment.

In answer to Mr. Oliviera,
Lord PALMERSTON repeated the -statement' made by
him on a former occasion—that it would be unusual to
extend the rewards for the defence of Kars to Lieut.-
Cols. Lake and Teesdale.

Mr. COWAN asked whether the Government proposed
to take any further measures for the prevention of
housebreaking, in consequence of the great increase of
that crime in certain parts of Scotland.
The LOUD ADVOCATE, in reply, said he had not received
rorination of the circumstances referred to of the
housebreaking in Scotland, except through

any in

-- the public papers,

THE ADJOURNED DEBATE

The notices of motion were then postponed, and the
debate on the motion for going into supply was resumed
by

Mr. M. Grasoa, who commenced by asserting the rights
Of members to discuss papers that had been laid on the
table. The right hon. gentleman stated, as his opinion,
that the despatches of Lord Clarendon to the United
States were of an insulting nature, and calculated to create
irritation and ill-feeling in America, and, as an illustra-
tion of this, referred to the answer of Lord Clarendon to
Mr. Buchanan, when he asked for information as to the
object of the British Government in sending reinforce-
ments to their forces in America. The reasons stated by
Lord Clarendon were, that it was believed that a con-
spiracy was being organised to promote insurrection in
Ireland, and that ships were building in ports of the
United States for the Russian service. He (Mr. Gibson)
denied the truth of both of these statements, and in
reference to the former observed that such an allegation was
an insult to the people of Ireland. The right hon. member
then proceeded to narrate the circumstances of the case,
denouncing the conduct of Mr. Crampton and the Eng-
lish ministers, and calling upon the House to support the
resolutions under discussion, in order to show to the
people of the United States, that the people of this
country did not back the Government in the violation of
the neutrality laws.
Mr. BAXTER defended the Government, contending that
if there was any blame, it must attach to Mr. Crampton,
who, however, if he had erred, had done so through over-
zeal in the service of his country, and not intentionally.
Mr. PEACOCKS attacked Mr. Crampton, arguing that
his dismissal, while Mr. Dallas was retained, was an
admission by the Government of his guilt.
Mr. SPOONSR refrained from entering upon the merits
of the question, but stated his intention to vote for the
previous question, by supporting the motion of going into
committee of supply.
Mr. GLADSTONE declined to draw a distinction between
the responsibility of Mr. Crampton and the responsibility
of her Majesty's government. The charge brought against
Mr. Crampton was that he had, contrary to instructions,
concealed his operations from the American government,
and upon that ground alone was the American government
justified in throwing the responsibility solely upon Mr.
Crampton. But he (Mr. Gladstone) could find no des-
patch of Lord Clarendon's recommending Mr. Crampton
to act openly, and if no such recommendations had
been made, an act of great injustice had been
committed. While disapproving of the conduct of
the government he could not support the resolution
of the member of Mayo, though had it been brought
forward as a substantive motion and met by a direct
negative he could not have withheld his vote from
it. But in this case, as the motion had not been
brought forward by a party prepared to take the respon-
sibilitV of displacing the present Ministry, he would avail
himself of the opportunity afforded to him of evading a
direct vote by supporting the motion for going into com-
mittee of supe,
papers right hon. gentleman proceeded
to refer to the presented to Parliament on the
subject, contending therefrom that there had been a
violation of
money having b the
eenMunicipal Laws of the United States,
paid by the agents of Mr. Crampton
for the travelling expecses of those who were anxious to
enlist. lie considered the evidence thrnisbed by the
blue book conclusive and smashing, and he should not
have flinched from the motion censuring the Government,
lla4 it come before the House.
The sommoe-GENEttet. vindicated the Government,
lend reed to the
thatf Mr. Gladstone, referring
be the despatches to show the American Government
Were satisfied that there was no intention on the part of
the British Government to Violate either the municipal
law? or the sovereign rights of the
Crampton was demanded upon the
United States, and
that the recall of Mr. Cram
ground of indiscretion, adding that the evidence upon
which the charge of indiscretion was
_founded was alto
The hon. -
gether unworthy of the case,

and learned
to the "„,••

to show t that there had been no Wfx,action
anicipal law of the :United States, or
the

ARINGTON concurred in the views stated by
and expressed an opinion that a depot

ie United States, ni;`,7 which means the
tbve been carried on without giving

american Government.
Lord PA lalitliSTON persisted in the denial that any
violation or the law of the -United States had taken
place, by the authorised agent of the British Government,
and justified the retention of Mr. Dallas, notwithstanding
the dismissal of Mr. Crampton. He accepted the motion