The Sun.
London, England, 1855-03-03 00:00:00

and the other from the Fingue—to the eff.4;t
E:nperor of Russia died in the course of th'n
This announcement was received
tion.

ciliinitt
.- wa n,r, -,
dstt
fi44,4, 1;F ;)
NATIONAL EDUCATIO.L. 1,, g. ,!1:,;,.. %. .* .3'
. k . '
iig It/
Mr. DUNDAS inquired whether the'l97o;verna,
.4.,''
intended to further the bill introduced by --0-4.?*.,4- ..r:`;,;,,z/
Russell, on the subject of National Educakiori,-- Nii.,,,.;i-
-whether they intended to postpone any furtherroce S
ing in regard to it until the return of the noble lord ?
Sir G. GREY said that the further proceeding with the
bill had been postponed is accordance with a suggestion
from the noble earl himself until after Easter.
IRISH BUSINESS.
On the motion that the house at its rising do adjourn .
until Monday.
Mr. NAPIER called the attention of the house to the
legislation for Ireland, and the state in which the Irish
business stood, by which great injustice was done to
Ireland and the Irish representatives in the house. He
complained of great neglect and delay in reference to
the progress of measures through the house.
Lord PALIVERSTON said he was not at all sur-
prised at the anxiety disp'ayed by the hon. gentleman
on the subject ; but he thought the hon. gentleman did
the house great injustice in charging it with neglect in
this matter, considering the amount of time bestowed on
Irish business last session. He did not begrudge the
time which had been so occupied, and he was sure there
was no hon. gentleman in that house who.would feel
disposed to treat any measures for the welfare of the
interests of Ireland with indifference. (Hear, hear.) An
to the Jurors' Bill, he could appeal to the candour of
the hon. gentleman whether he attributed the circum-
stances attending the delay in the progress of that
bill to any fault on the part of the house. He hoped
the Lon. gentleman would not consider the Government at
all presumptuous invoting for a postponement of important
Irish business until an Under-Secretary of State for
Ireland, and responsible law officers of the Crown had
been appointed. (Hear, hear.) Hitherto any delay bad
arisen from causes over which the Goveinment bad no
control.

Mr. WHITESIDE said his hon. friend never charged
the Government with wilfully neglecting Irish business ;
he had only complained of the state of doubt in which
every bill before that house connected with Ireland at
present stood. Under these circumstances he (Mr.
Whiteside) thought his hon. friend was quite right in
calling upon the Government to explain its intentions.
Sergeant SHEE, who excited some amusement by
speaking from the Ministerial side of the house, de-
fended the conduct he had taken in reference to the
Landlord and Tenant Bill, which had been adverted to
by the noble lord at the head of the Government in the
course of his reply. He assured the noble lord.
that he and several of his honourable friends
had determined not to support the Government
unless it would set these Irish questions at rest ; and the
noble lord well knew that no Government could succeed
or have a strong foundation which was not supported by
Irish members..

Mr. F. FRENCH said his complaint was not as to
the way in which Irish business was treated by being
brought forward at a late period in the evening, but the
unintelligible nature of the business when it did come
on. Look; for instance, at the Militia Bill. He trusted
his noble friend would take this matter into his con-
sideration.
Colonel DUNNE also complained of the confused
state of Irish business.

The motion before the house was then put and
carried.

NEWSPAPER STAMP REPEAL.

In reply to Mr. T. DITNCOMBE,
Mr. WILSON stated that it was not the intention of
the Government to proceed with the second reading of
this bill until Monday.
ARMY BEFORE SEBASTOPOL COMMITTEE.

Mr. ROEBUCK said he had to perform a,disagreeable
duty in asking the house to make this committee a
secret one, because much misconception bad arisen in
regard to it. The committee had unanimously come to
the conclusion that the committee ought to be secret,
but were divided as to the means of accomplishing this
end. One way was by excluding the public and admit-
ting hon. members of this house—and another was by
excluding the public, and asking hon. gentlemen to be
kind enough not to insist on their privilege. Under
these circumstances, the committee had determined
to appeal to the house to make the com-
mittee secret in the fullest sense. In making
this request the committee asked the house to have
confidence in them in executing the responsible
trust confided to them. The committee felt this diffi-
culty—if the proceedings were thrown open they would
be published daily, and accusations would go forth to the
world. But there was a still greater reason in the minds
of the committee which he was only at liberty to shadow
Youth. We were at present in alliance with a great
Power,l:and to maintain an amicable understanding be-
tween the two countries he premised was the paramount
desire of the house. Therefore they had felt that if public
there would not be that opportunity afforded to witnesses
of speaking their minds without fear and reserve, which
was absolutely necessary to the efficiency of the inquiry.
He felt himself unable to repress his sense of the respon-
sibility which the committee had undertaken—(hear)—
but at the same thine if the house would have confidence
in their discretion, he trusted it would consent to the
committee being secret. He would therefore conclude
by moving that the committee be made secret. (Hear.)
Lord SEYMOUR wished to state the reason why he
had himself objected to the committee being made secret.
At present the house was precisely in the same position
in regard to the inquiry as it was before the committee
was appointed, for they had transacted no business, and
bad examined no witness. The common course of
committees was to be thrown open, and he should have
been glad if this one could have been made the same.
But there were obvious difficulties in the way of such an
arrangement. In the first place, the room would be
inconveniently crowded by the impulse of curiosity.
Then there might be difficulties as to the
manner in which evidence or portions of evidence was
accepted or rejected. But the house was sacrificing a
great deal of counterbalancing advantage, on the other
hand, by making the committee secret. Ho considered
the attempt to make this committee secret was a very
foolish one. The hon. gentleman said all the members
considered the committee ought to be secret. Such was,
in fact, not the case. It was presumed that if members
came in they would betray what they heard; if he (Lord
Seymour) could not trust hon. members, how could he
' trust the members of the committee. (Cheers.) He did
not think excluding members of the house would do any
good. With regard to the press matters would naturally
ooze out ;• but, if anything appeared in the press, they
would all naturally feel humiliated from the fear of
being suspected of supplying the information. There-
fc,re, he did not see the policy of excluding the prev.
He would only say, if the house determined upon
making the committee secret, let them take all the re-
sponsibility ; for his part, he did not see that any ad-
vantage could accrue from it.
Mr. J. W. PATTEN said that the difficulties which had
been discovered by the committee at its first meeting wore
foreseen by some gentlemen, and the committee opposed
by them on that account, at the time that its appointment
was first moved. It was a dilemma from which they could
not escape, and which had been referred to by the noble
lord (Lord Seymour), that the public policy of this coun-
try might require one course, and absolute justice to the
individuals implicated in the inquiry might require a com-
pletely contrary one. (Hear, hear.) Take, for instance,
the case of the Duke of Newcastle. In any inquiry, even
into the despatch of a transport, the conduct of that noble
noble duke must be more or less involved.. Questions
might be put to him, in reply to which he might think it
necessary to his defence to make certain statements, and
if the committee were secret, it would then be for its mem-
bers to decide whether they would report to the house, or
would suppress the statements which the noble lord had
thought necessary to his defence. He would not say a
word against the members of the committee, but he found
that of the nine who had supported this application, for
secrecy, five had voted for this censure upon the late Go-
vernment. These gentlemen, who bad already censured
his conduct, would bo those who would have to decide
upon the publication or non-publication of statements
affecting the character of the noble duke; and be would
ask the house whether they would form such a tribunal as
would, according to the constitution of this country, be
accepted under other circumstances? This was a difficulty
which was foreseen by members of that house before the
committee was appointed, and ho would say, as one of a
small minority, that he never was present at any debate
in which the arguments were so entirely on one side as
they were in that upon the appointment of this committee.
The arguments against its appointment had never been
answered. Whatever course the house might take he would
always, when it was in a difficulty, do his best to extricate
it, although it would be at the sacrifice of his private opi-
nion. It was now a question of the greatestimportance what
they were to do with the committee. His object in iisinghad
been to -eoint out the difficulties which beset the commit-
tee, and which were of enormous magnitude, and he now
left the consideration of those difficulties to the house.
Sir J. PAKINGTON said as he had the honour of being
a member of this 'committee he wished to state his views
on the subject now before the house. The hon. gentleman
opposite (Mr. W. Patton) stated that the appointment of
the committee must ba considered as an attack on the
Duke of Newcastle.
Mr. PATTEN (interrupting) admitted he said in the first
instance that the committee must be considered as an attack
on the Duke of Newcastle, but hceafterwards correctedthat
expression, and said it was an attack upon the Govern-
ment. (Hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON resumed He had certainly under,
stood the hon. gentleman to say the committee must be
considered as an attack on the Duke of Newcastle ; and he
had fuither understood him to say that that was the only
reason for his addressing the house. He (SirJ. Pakington),
for himself, disclaimed any intention to attack any indivi-
dual iu acting as a member of the committee. (Hear.) He
thought the speech of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Patten) was
a speech which was not addressed to the question now before
the house, but entirely to the propriety of tho original
vote of that house in deciding to appoint a committee of
inquiry into this matter. Again, what had the noble lord
the member for Totnes (Lord Seymour) told the house?
or enda
nnyo nothing
linoewt,oaldndthtehmat tthhaist
athpeplicertiomniitystaesonloiattfloduitstv.
secret which the house had before them. Ho (Sir J. Baking.
ton) thought the papers submitted to the house proved that
statement was quite superfluous. The committee could
have discovered nothing new because tney had not com-
menced their inquiry. The first step the committee had
to take was to consider their mode of proceeding, andwhen
they began to consider their mode of proceeding they were
all, he thought, deeplyconscious of the responsibility under
which they had to discharge their duty. It was in the
full consideration of that responsibility that they came to
the decision, which he might say was unanimous, that the
public ought to bo excluded from their proceedings. The
question, in fact, now before the house was, whether the
House of Commons did or did not adhere to the opinion it
expressed by so large a majority that they ought to have
this inquiry by a committee, and that if they had that
committee it ought to be a complete and searching inquiry.
(Hear.) The opinion of a majority of that committee was
that they could not do their duty to the public, and that
they could rot make it a searching iuquiry or a satisfactory
investigation, which would enable them to report to the
house in such a manner as the house and the country had