The Sun.
London, England, 1864-05-14 00:00:00

rican frontier, than they had done by means of these
cruisers. He regarded the question of refusing hospitality
to those ships as the most important one that could now
engage the attention of that hens,. The honourable
gentleman then referred to the Alabama, the tleorgia, and
other vessels, which had been built in English ports, and
equipped and manned from English ports, and showed that
they could not be considered vessels of war; for they never
attacked a vessel of war. and were not armed for war, but
were fitted out solely for preying upon American commerce.
Let them condole!' ghat reprisals would be made upon them
if this country was ever again to go to war. If they be
lieved American nature to be human nature, they should
expect the American people would in their almost number-
less creeks and lakes fit out a swarm of cruisers to prey
upon English commerce, which they could do both in the
Atlantic and Pacific. It was thought that the Conference
of Paris had put an end to pirates; but it turned out to be
a stupendous hoax. Last year, when it was thought that
France and England would make war upon Russia on ac-
count of Poland, the long-headed statesmen at St. Peters-
burg sent the Russian fleet to America, well knowing that
the Russian crews would be put on board the swiftest
vessels for the purpose of destroying English commerce.
(Hear, hear.) Ho had also noticed in the German papers
frequent references to the vulnerability of England, on ac-
count of the law established by herself in this respect. There
would be Alabamas in abundance sent out to burn or cap-
ture English merchant vessels. The way to build an Ala-
bama was to build a vessel neither for war nor for freight,
but a vessel that could run off from everything and catch
everything. It might be said that this country had vessels
of war to catch those pirates. But nothing was more diffi•
cult than to find a vessel on the ocean once she got out of
sight ; but even if such vessel should be found in a port,
nothing could be done, by reason of the practice which Eng-
land herself now sanctioned. He therefore thought the best
reparation that could be made for the havoc committed upon
American commerce was to deny hospitality to those cruisers
which had been clandestinely built and equipped in Bri-
tish pmts. (Hear, hear.)
Lord R. CECIL said a fallacy underlay the entire
speech of the honourable member for Rochdale, He be-
lieved that if a war broke out now they would be required
to protect their commerce from swarms of privateers in every
quarter of the ocean. Let them not imagine that they would
offer one iota of :protection to their mercantile marine in
future wars by driving the Georgia from their ports. Much
had been said about precedents, but once nations were en-
gaged in war they paid very little regard to what the coun-
try might have done 10 or 15 years before. It seemed to
him that the proposed mode of dealing with international
law was more dishonest and more immoral than any pro-
posal which ho had heard submitted to Parliament in his
time. The hon. member had spoken much of the losses
endured by the Federals, and of the bitter feeling which
they must entertain against those who had been the cause
of them. But had there been no losses nor sufferings on
the other side ? It was said the Federals had put to death
200,000 Confederates; and in the course of the year 1862
muskets and rifles to the value of £564,500, and 12,000,000
of percussion caps, were forwarded from this country to the
Northern States. And the fact could not be ignored that
the mercantile house which was mainly instrumental in
conveying that assistance to the Federals was the house of
Baring and Co. Did they suppose that no feelings of bitter-
ness wauld arise in the breasts of the Southerners when
they learned that all that havoc had been caused to, them
through munitions of war conveyed from this country? In
his opinion England would have as much permanent cause
of regret at the alienation from her of the feelings of the
people living to the south of the Potomac as of those who
occupied the northern territory. Too much praise could not
be given to the speech of the Attorney-General; it had
exhausted the law.

Mr. SHAW LEFEVRE had listened with great regret to
the speech of the Attorney-General, and could not help
feeling that if the learned gentleman had paid adequate
attention to the history of America he must have come to
a very different conclusion. When, during the war of
the last century, French privateers crowded the American
ports, the American Government did not say that they
had no municipal law bearing upon the subject, but they
at once dismissed the French vessels from their ports,
That was a precedent for them to act upon, and there-
fore he hoped the Government would seriously entertain
the suggestion of the hon. member for Huntingdon.
Lord R, MONTAGU said that, although the hon. mem-
ber for Rochdale had shown them conclusively that the
trade of the Northern States had been seriously damaged,
he had not shown that it was by the fault of England that
that commerce had been reduced.
Mr. Alderman ROSE believed the country would endorse
the definition of the law of neutrality as laid down by the
Attorney General, and carried out by the Administration.
He denied that the opinions of the hon. members for Roch-
dale and Bradford were shared by the people at large; and
after remarking upon the maladministration in the military
and civil departments of the Federal Government, he con-
cluded by expressing his belief that this country must
shortly recognise the South, and by so doing promote the
peace of the world.
Tho subject then dropped.
The motion for adjournment was then agreed to.
THE MALT TAX.

On the motion for going into committee of supply,

Mr. MORRITT rose to move that in any future modifi-
cation of the indirect taxation of the country the excise upon
malt would require the consideration of the house. He
remarked that the delay which had occurred since he first
intimated his intention of bringing this question beforo the
house improved his position. The only thing he regretted
was the extremely crowded state of the house. (Laughter.)

At this time the number of members in the house did not
exceed twenty-four. The remark of the hon. gentleman
having drawn the attention of the Speaker to the fact, the
latter proceeded to count, and, there not being forty mem-
bers present,
The house stood adjourned to next Thursday.