The Sun.
London, England, 1864-07-02 00:00:00

EPPING FOREST.

Mr COX moved a resolution that her Majesty's Govern-
ment should at once take the necessary steps to carry into
effect the recommendation of the Select Committee on Royal
Forests (Essex; in Session 1863,—" To obtain the sanction
of Parliament for the enclosure of the remaining portion of
the forest, to ascertain the rights of the parties interested,
and to make provision for securing an adequate portion of
the forest for purposes of health and recreation, from time
immemorial enjoyed by the inhabitants of the neighbour.
hood and the metropolis.'

The SPEAK ER ruled that the motion could not be put.
Mr PEEL replied to the speech of Mr. Cox, justifying
the course taken by the Government with reference to the
recommendations of the select committee, observing that
the Government would have no objection to the adoption
of a resolution similar in effect to the aforegoing—and he
stated a proposition made by the Treasury to the Metropo-
litan Board of Works for carrying out the suggestion of
the Committee.

EARL RUSSELL AND THE CONFERENCE.
Lord BURGHLEY now repeated the question which he
had asked in an earlier part of the evening.
Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, there is no inconsistency in
the assurance of my noble friend and the course which he
took. This statement is not absolutely correct. It is very
easy to substitute one word for another, and so to alter the
meaning. My noble friend did not say he would make no
proposal. What he stated was that if the Danes would agree
to the line of the Schlei he would not himself propose any
other line, or support any other line if it was proposed by
any other Power —and to that engagement he adhered. But
when at last it was found that the Danes would not consent
to any other line north of the Schlei, and that the Germans
would not consent to any line south of Apenrade, it then
became necessary either to give up the whole thing in de-
spair, or to make the proposal which, in concert with the
other neutral Powers, my noble friend made—not for
another line, but that an arbiter should be appointed to
whom should be referred the question pending between the
pallies. That t.rhiter might have determined on the line of
the Sohlei or the line of Apenrade, or he might have deter-
mined on some other line ; but, unless my noble friend hsd
been prepared to abd:cate his functions, it was impossible
for him to say that he would not propose any other new
line, I
map take advantage of this question to explain
another misuoderstanding which has arisen. My noble
friend stated in another pl..ce the other day that hencefor-
ward no trust could be reposed in the German Powers. That
statement has hurt the feelings of the persona concerned,
and has been interpreted in a way
not intended by my noble
friend. He by no means intended to say
that any assertion
and any declaration of the German Powers was not trust•
worthy, inasmuch as it was not given truthfully or wi:h a
sincare intention; but what he meant, as the context of his
statement eleary shows, was that the German Powers have
upon more than one occasion been driven from their origi-
nal intention by a pressure which they were unable to re-
sist, and that therefore you couid not be sure that any in-
tention, however sincerely and truthfully stated at the time,
was one that the German Powers would be able to main-
tain against the pressure which might be brought to bear

against them. That was my noble friend's meaning, and
he, like myself, is very sorry that words spoken should
have been interpreted in a different sense, and should have
given pain to parties for whom my noble friend and the
Government are naturally disposed to show the greatest
possible consideration and respect. (Hear, hear.)
Mr NE WDEGATE asked whether be was to under-
stand that the line of the Schlei and the Dannewerke was
the line proposed by Lord Russell and supported by the
neutral Powers.

Lord PALMERSTON—Yes ; that appears from the
Protocols.

SUPPLY.
The house then went into committee of supply, and
agreed to the votes in Class 7 of the civil service estimates.

THAMES EMBANKMENT.
In a committee of the whole house on the Thames Em-
bankment and Metropolis Improvement (Loans) Bill,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
resolutions, authorizing the Commissioners of the Treasury
to guarantee the repayment of any money that may be
borrowed under the Thames Embankment and Metropolis
Improvement Acts, with the interest thereon, and to cause
advances to be made out of the Consolidated Fund of such
sums as may be ne'oessary for the repayment of such prin-
cipal and interest; and that the Commissioners for the
Reduction the National Debt be authorised to advance
the motley which the Metropolitan Board of Works is
autb.orized to raise. He explained the object and effect of
tle resolutions.

I IA discussion followed, in which Lord R. Montagu, Lord
J. Manners, Mr T. Miller, Mr Kinnaild, and Mr Alderman
Salemons took part.
The resolutions were ultimately agreed to.

. ..
The Factory Acts Extension Bill, the Enclosure (No 2)
Bill, and the Railways (Ireland) Acts Amendment Bill
were read the third time and passed.
The Cranbourne-street Bill passed the committee.
The report of the committee of supply was brought up
and agreed to.

On the order for the second reading of the Indemnity
Bill,

Mr HADFIELD moved, as an amendment, for a select
committee to consider and report whether a complete and
effectual indemnity can be given by Parliament for all
omissions to the present time ; and whether the time has
not arrived to repeal so many of the requirements as are
useless and no longer required for the present times.
Mr PEEL did not believe that the oaths and declarations
to which the bill referred were any security, but the bill
went in the same direction as Mr Hadfield desired to go.
He bhould have no objection, he said, to the appointment
of a select committee, but not in connexion with this bill.

Ultimately the amendment was withdrawn, and the bil
was read a second time. •

The Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) Bill
passed the committee, with amendments.

TESTS ABOLITION (OXFORD) BILL,

On the order of the day, for the third reading of this bill,

Str W. HEATHCOTE moved as an amendment that the
bill be read a third time that day three months. In doing so
he reminded hon. members that the amendments which they
expected had not been made, and on that ground he claimed
their support against the third reo.diog of the bill. He
hoped the hon. gentleman who had introduced this bill
would be induced to withdraw it, and to provide a bill next
session in a more modified form.

No hon. member rising to continue the discussion, the
SPEAKER, put the question, and the house Givided—
For the amendment
Against
Majority against —lo
The announcement of the numbers was received with
loud cheers on. the Ministerial side of the house.

On the motion that the bill be read a third time,

Lord R. CECIL rose and said the house had come to a
division rather more rapidly than was expected, in conse-
quence of the remarkable policy which was pursued by her
Majesty'e Government. (Opposition cheers.) The house
would remember that her Majesty's Government was in a
condition of some embarrassment, in consequence of the
course which this bill had taken. (Cheers.) When the bill
was passing the second reading, the right hon. gentleman
the secretary of Sate for the Home Department—who he
saw had returned to the house—(laughter)—had given the
house to understand that he would, representing the Go-
vernment, propose an amendment on the third reading ; but
now he would not give an opinion, either one way or the
other,but walked out of the house. He thought that an opi-
nion ought to be given on this bill by a responsible Minis-
ter. The noble lord went on to say that what the Govern-
ment appeared to understand by a discriminating resistance
was making a promise when a par:y struggle was not in
prospect, and not keeping it when that struggle was immi-
nent. (Conservative cheers).

Sir G. G.ttEY defended the course he had taken by
saying that the opinion ha had expressed on the bill was
his own individual opinion, and not that of the Govern-
ment. He had done his best to induce the hon. member
who introduced the bill to agree to amendments which
would place Oxford on the same footing as Cambridge, and
would have made the bill a great improvement cn the ex-
isting law, Not having succeeded, he thought he had only
taken the course which had became him in abstaining from
recording his vote.

Lord J. MANNERS said that if the right hon. gen-
tleman had spoken only in his individual capacity, the
house had not been favoured with the opinion of the Go-
vernment on this most important bill. Such a state of
things was very little creditable to her Majesty's Govern-
menc.

Sir M. FARQUHAR expressed his astonishment at
the course which had been pursued by the hon. member for
Oxford.

Mr NEATE, amid continued cries of "Divide," gave
some explanations which were inaudible in the gallery.
Mr COLLINS, who spoke amid great uproar and loud
cries of "Divide," and for the purpose of gaining time,
opposed the third reading.
The house divided—

For the third reading
Against it
The equality of the numbers on the division caused loud
cheers and laughter:

The SPEAKER, having declared the numbers, said—
After the course of voting which has occurred this evening,
the house will not be surprised that I should desire to give
the house another opportunity of taking another vote on the
motion that this bill do now pass; and, in order to do that,
I give my vote with the " ayes."

The right hon. gentleman then put the question that the
bill do pass, when there appeared—
Ayes l7l
Noes
Majority
The result was hailed with deafening cheers on the Oppo-
sition benches; and the bill was thrown out,