The Sun.
London, England, 1864-02-26 00:00:00

THE SEIZURE OF RAMS IN THE MERSEY.

The Earl of DERBY again referred to the question he
had put to the noble earl on a former occasion respecting
the seizure of the steam rams in the Mersey, the produc-
tion of which papers he had stated would be injurious to the
public service. Since then, the matter had been discussed
in another place, and the greater portion of the correspon-
dence had been promised to be produced. He should like
to know whether the noble earl was still of opinion the the
production of those papers would be prejudicial to the pub-
lic service, and if not, he should like to know what had
caused the revolution is his opinion.
Earl RUSSELL said the noble earl had somewhat mis-
represented his reply. The answer he had given was, the
law officers of the Crown considered the production of those
papers would result in incomplete discussions of the legal
point at issue, and thus prejudice the result of the cause before
the courts of law. The reason that had led him to make that
observation was that the law officers of the Crown had
given it as their opinion that the papers should be produced.
He gave that answer when he was asked to lay the papers
on the table of the house. Since the law officers had stated
in the other house that there would be no objection to give the
majority of the papers asked for, he (Earl Russell) had no
objection as far as he was concerned that the papers should
be given to Parliament. In accordance with the promise
he had given the noble earl on a former occasion, that he
would look over the correspondence, he now begged to lay
on the table the papers he had selected.
A short discussion then ensued, in which the Earl of
Derby, Lord Chelmsford, Earl Granville, and the Earl of
Carnarvon took place, at the termination of which the sub-
ject dropped.
THE AFFAIRS OF DENMARK.

'the Earl of MALMESBURY asked that further and
more recent information with regard to the state of Den-
mark should be published. The noble earl said that numer-
ous statements were daily appearing in the public papers,
which were doubtless in many respects unreliable. They
were obliged to collect information from garbled statements
made in the German and French newspapers and pamphlets,
as they were not provided with reliable information.

Earl RUSSELL said a great deal of the correspondence
asked for by the noble earl had been published that
morning.

THE CASE OF CAPTAIN WHYTE.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE asked whether the
arbitrators in Captain Melville Whyte's case, against the
Government of Peru, had given, or were likely soon to give,
a decision in that matter

Earl RUSSELL said that one of the senators of Hamburg
had the papers before him, with a view of making his report
to the senate of Hamburg. to whom the matter had been
referred. He would see if he could not take steps to expe-
dite their decision.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—Last Evening.
The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

On the motion for the second reading of the Archway and
Kentish Town Junction Road Bill,
Mr. COX moved as an amendment that the bill be read a
second time that day six months. He said that all
the tolls surrounding the neighbourhood had been
abolished. The sum realized by the proposed toll-
bar was only £2OO a year, the expenses were £lO5
a year, which did not include the lighting and
repairing of the road, both of which were defrayol by the
parish of St. Pancras.
Lord FE RMOY seconded the motion in accordance with

the wishes of his constituency, and said that the attempt to
procure an extension of the powers of this trust was what
was now familiarly known as an attempt to run the blockade.
(Laughter.)
Sir W. JOLLIFFE opposed the bill.
Mr. WATLINGTON hoped that the house would allow
this bill to go into committee.
Viscount ENFIELD said that although his name was
on the back of the bill ha had endorsed it without a know-
ledge of its contents. He had had an opportunity of
perusing them since then, and he could not support the
second reading of the bill. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. LEWIS opposed the bill.
Mr. MASSE Y considered that under the circumstances
the'promoters of the bill would be only throwing good money
after bad, and that consequently the motion should be re-
jected.
The motion was negatived without a division.
PETITIONS.

Several petitions were presented for the repeal of the
duty on malt, for the abolition of the duty on fire insur-
ances, Scc,
TENURE AND INIFROVEMENT OF LAND
(IREL AND).

On the motion of Mr. DARBY GRIFFITH, several returns
in connection with this subject were ordered.

NEW WRIT.

On the motion of Mr. BRAND a writ was ordered to
issue for the election of a knight of the shire for Hertford,
in the room of Mr. Puller, deceased.

OFFICERS OF THE INDIAN ARMY.

In reply to Captain JERYIS,
Sir C. WOOD said there were certain difficulties in re-
ference to this subject, but it was under consideration.