The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-24 00:00:00

T E

SUN

t and, he was bound to say, of the last also, 'in reference
to this most important question, was not at all influenced
by the information to which he had referred. It the
Hon. Gentleman thought that the contending claims
between Turkey and Egypt had only for their foun-
dation a conspiracy of discarded workmen from Egypt,
he could easily understand from what sources the Lion.
Gentleman obtained information of that description; but
those claims were founded on existing treaties, on the
interpretation of those treaties, on the laws of the
country, and on traditionary interests of the utmost im-
portance. It was impossible for the Government to ac-
cede to the motion, which, it adopted, would lead to the
production of a variety of information referring to ne
gotiations now pending. The attention of the Govern
ment of this country was of course directed to the settle-
ment of the mutual relations that should subsist between
Turkey and Egypt, with a due coevititien of the great
importance to the interests of this country, arid or the
world generally, that those relations should be estab-
lished on a proper and legitimate basis. Ho felt it his
duty, therefore, to oppose the motion of the Bon. Gen-
tlemen, and he dial so on the intelligible and wimple
ground that the transactions to which he referred were
in an imperfect state, and that it would have a most in-
jurious effect on the public service if those papers were
produced.
Lord J. RUSSELL entirely agreed with the Right
Hon. Gentleman that this was a subject of the higheBt
importance and delicacy, and thought ho was quite right
in opposing this motion. Ho thought the Hon. Gentle-
man who made this motion was mistaken as regarded
the guarantqe of England. This country was a party to
the settlement of Egypt as an hereditary pashalic in the
family of Mehemet Ali, bat by no means guaranteed the
conditions on which the relations between the Sultan and
the Pasha should subsist. The interference of this
country was a matter of the utmost delicacy. We were
on the most friendly terms with the Sultan arid with the
Pasha of Egypt, and we might therefore not only give
counsel generally, but might even advise the Sultan to
allow the Pasha the power of inflicting capital punish-
ment, without reference to Constaidinople, if we thought
proper to do so; but, at the same time, such inter-
ference could only be received as the counsel of a friend,
and only by being couched in the most conciliatory
terms could such advice be well received. He could not
but think that the production of these documents would
tend to prevent the success of the object in view, and
that it would be better to leave the matter in the hands
of the Executive. No man was better fitted than our
Ambassador at Constantinople to manage such affairs,
and if instructions were given to him by the Government
at home they would be faitufully executed by that distin-
guished person,—(Hear.)
Mr. HUME said that in 1839 we dispatched to Egypt
50 sail-of-the-line to conquer the Pestle and to place
Egypt under the Sultan, wi h the guarantee of England
and France that certain powers snould be continued to
the Pasha. There were documents in which it appeared
that the Sultan, while he was speaking in the fairest and
most fl uttering manner, was preparing troops to over
whelm Egypt, but England stepped in at the risk of the
peace of Europe and carried by force of arms success to
the Sultan, on the condition that certain rights should
be secured to the Pasha. He regrettel to find that there
appeared to be an intention to destroy the treaty so
guaranteed; but, as the Right Hen. Gentleman said the
production of these documents would be injurious to the
public service, he trusted his Hon. Friend would with-
draw bis motion for the present.
Mr. MILNES did not believe that the Noble Lord the
late Foreign Secretary would ever consent to the inter-
pretation of the treaty, that England was to guarantee
the independence of Egypt—(Hear, hear)—that it would
necessarily enforce the meintenence of it; but he be•
lieved the Noble Lord and the public sense of diplo-
macy in England agreed that the parties to that ar-
rangement were morally bound by every means
in their power to support the Pasha of Egypt
in just and independent authority.—Hear, hear.)
At the same time, he must say it was hardly
fair to look upon this question without considering
in some degree that the edict lately put forth by the
Sultan was a very great advance in the civilization of
that part of the world. Since that edict had been pro-
mulgaied, not only had the Christian people living under
the dominion of the Stilt ei been treated in a totally
different manner from that in which they tv.re before
treated, but the principles of good government had been
established to a great extent. If the Pacha of Egt pt
could so put his case to the Court of Constantinople as
to make it appear that he would only allow capital
punishment to follow on a jus: trial and fair conviction,
he did not believe that the Sultan would deny to the
Pacha the power which her Gracious Majesty committed
to the hands of the governors of our own colonies. With
regard to the question of railroads, he could not conceive
that the Suit mit could ever have seriously contemplated
the prevention of such a gnat improvement in what
might still be considered his own dominions. He be-
lieved that the present Pacha had the real welfare of
Egypt at heart, and would try to improve his country by
solid and practical reforms; aud, it the questions between
him and the Porto were left to the mediation of Sir S.
Canning and Mr. Murray, he (Mr. Manes) believed that
they would be satisfactorily arranged.
Mr. ANDERSON, in reply, said, that after the ob-
servations of his Right Honourable Friend, he could not
think of pressing this motion. As to the delicacy of the
question, however, he must say that no such delicacy was
shown in 1839, when the Pacha had the Sultan prostrate
at his feet. The Hon. Gentleman who had last spoken
bad referred to the mediation of Sir S. Canning and Mr.
Murray, but there was a general opinion that they did
not pull well together, though in his (Mr. Anderson's)
opinion, Mr. Murray was pulling the right way. The
railroad that was wanted in Egypt was the railroad be-
tween Cairo and Suez—the other was entirely for the
internal improvement of Egypt; but the ruche could not
make either of these railroads unless he had the permis-
sion of the Porte to do it. He believed that never had
there been a Pacha of Egypt who had effected so much
practical good for his country as the present. He had
remitted taxation to the amount of 1,500,0001. sterling,
and had relieved the people from the bondage they were
in by allowing them to go to any part of the country
they pleated. With respect also to capital punishments
in Egypt, he found that during the three years preced-
ing the reign of the present Pacha, the number was six-
teen per annum, while during the three years afterwards
it was only seven.
The motion was then withdrawn.
THE TOW N OF ENNIS.
The O'GORMAN MAHON then rose for the pur-
pose of calling the attention of the House to the subject
matter of the petition presented from the town commis-
sioners of Ennis. The Hon. Gentlenetn said that the
gentlemen from whom the petition emanated were com-
paratively personally disinterested, and that their eno•
We in addressing that House was to obtain, hrough its
medium, protection from the deep wrong inflicted on the
poor of the town of Ennis. The river Fergus ran
through the town, taking its source about eight or nine
miles above it. A loan was obtained by the proprietors
in he neighbourhood of the town for the Board of
Works to effect the drainage of the lands near the river;
but, instead of commencing an outlet to facilitate the
exit of the water, at the instigation of the gentlemen
mimed in the petition, they deepened the river near its
source, and thus, by collecting all the water superabun-
dant on the adjacent lands, created a facility for inun-
dating the town of Eunis.—(A laugh.) 'Under these
circusustancee, the petitioners prayed the House to
insist on the Commissioners of the Board of Works
completing the work they had undertaken. He had,
year after year, impressed this matter on the late Go-
vernment, year,
believed that the Right Hon. Baronet near
him had, at last, been disposed to meet the wishes of the
people of Ennis to a certain extent. What he asked
from the Chancellor of the Exchequer was a loan, to be
advanced on the security of the tolls of the town of
Ennis, an arrangement to which he had no doubt that
the owner of those tolls (Colonel Wyndham) would
assent. The Hen. Gentleman concluded by moving
that the Board of Works in Ireland be direc,ed forth-
with to proceed with the completion of the drainage
above the town of Ennis.
Sir C. WOOD said, that he lied on former occasions
pointed out to his Hon. Friend that, before any thing
could be done practically in the matter, it would be
necessary to have a Bill passed under which local Com-
missioners could be appointed tor administering any
loan that the Government might make for the desired
purposes.
The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCIIEQUER said he
had only had an opportunity that day of reading the
petition enforced by the Hon. Gentleman opposite, but
it appeared from the petition itself that the fault of the
non-progress of the works rested not with the Board of
Works, but with the proprietors of the locality, who had
refused that second assent which was required by the
Arterial Drainage Act. The Hon. Gentleman should
Repeal, therefore, rather to those proprietors than to the
Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Sir L. O'BRIEN said, that the reason why the pro-
prietors had refused their second assent was, that the
Board of
Works bad expended the
futile first grant allowed
them to
for the improvementtiattt of the Fergus in a manner so en-
tirelyproprietors saw it would not remu-
aeratehad arisen under the
NapIER advance their money.
his attention to the
observed, that the greatest confu;ion
Drainage Act. He had been de-
votingvsaurbiject, and he hoped before
intelligible measurelament
satisfactionted.—
the meeting of the new
executed,—(gear.)
whtoichhawvoeulpdre.pared
some simple and in
Right
and
d at the state-
these works to be satistactorily
Learned Attor-
ney GROGAN expressed his
system that had b
eentL3:7ued
enable
(Hear.)
had been inflicted upon
nineeyntj
General,ust m made
rbuy
ntdheer
of late great hardship
landed proprietors. In almost every case the ostimertiesdh
expense of these works had been greatly exceeded,.
in some cages the amount tied been nearly trebled. and
The O'GORMAN MAHON briefly replied. Until
that evening he had never heard a word about the mode
of settling the question by bringing in a Bill, but „w
that that course had been sugge.ted he looked upon his
object as accomplished.. and intimated his intentiou of
intiodueing a Bill at es cern, a period as possible.
Tlati motion was tnen withdrawn.
BORNEO.
Mr. HUME moved an address for a copy of a letter
from Mr. Robert Burns to Viscount Palmerston, dated
Singapore, the 28th day of June, 1851, with its en-
closures, complaining of the obstructions and discou-
ragements he had received to his commercial affairs in
Borneo at the hands of her Majesty's Commissioner
and Consul-General to the Sultan and independent
chiefs of Borneo, while prosecuting his lawful commer-
cial proceedings in that country; together with a copy
of any answer thereto. Ile believed his Hon, Friend
near him (Mr. Drummond) was anxious to take that op-
portunity of renewing an old debate with reference to
Sir J. Brooke, but he begged to assure his Hon. Friend
that his r'retent motion bed no reference to that ques-
Wee, but V."Eiti itiOrt ly
There would
of n 0 ,11-
e
reimiewninDgßtfulemomldodNebilatesailiderweahf;Lijh.
already preduced. ci temple teetto3 for
lion. Friend's putting repeated •ilotices on
re objected to was his
the paper

LON DON,

which were not literally true, and implied censures, on
the merit of which the House had no means of forming
a judgment. For instance, the Hon. Gentleman set
down in his notice that Mr. Burns was " prosecuting
his lawful commercial proceedings," whereas, in point
of fact, he was propogating mischief at the instance of
the society which was assisting the Hon. Gentleman
near him. It unfortunately happened when that gen-
tleman, Mr. Burns, fell into the hands of these Bor-
nean pirates, and lost his ship and his head in conse-
quence, that he also lost a portion of his journal,
which showed pretty clearly the nature of the " com-
mercial proceedings" in which he had been engaged. He
had not the slightest abjection to enter on this debate
whenever his Hon. Friend chose to bring it on, but
he did object to the repeated insinuations which these
repeated notices of motion bore upon the face of them.
It certainly was surprising that the Hon. Gentleman,
who Was esteemed as a man of general benevolence and
kindness, should be- possessed of this monomania, that
there was nothing so delightful as blackening the cha-
rect-r in Oist House of.orie of the moat deserving public
a rvtsnts that the country ever bad.
Mr. HUME deriicd that he hid any other object in
view than to obtain legitimate information, and he
asked the House whether there was one word of insinua-
tion or reflection upon the character of any man in the
notice which he bact moved for?
The motion was then iigreed to.
Mr. kIENLEY obtained leave and brought in a Bill
to enebh? her Majesty to carry into effect arrangements
made with foreign powers for the apprehension of sea
men whu desert from their ships, which was read a first
time.
On the motion of Mr. FRE WEN, a Bill was brought
in and rend a first time, to promote the building of
churches in benefices,that have no church, and to pre-
vent the union of hem-flees above a certain value.
MANCHESTER AND SALFORD EDUCATION

SCHEME.
Mr. M. GII3SON moved that the folldwing Gentle-
men be nominated a Select Committee on Manchester
and Silford Education:—Mr. Milner Gibson, Mr.
William Miles, Viscount Melgund, Mr. Monsell, Mr.
Bright, Marquis of Blandford, Lord John Russel', Mr.
Gladstone. Mr. Heald, Mr. Cobden, Mr. Cardwell, Mr
Fox, Mr. Tier Seymer, Mr. Brotherton, and Mr. Child.
Mr. PETO objected to the composition of the Com-
mittee as proposed, upon the ground that certain parties
who took a great interest in the question of education,
and who ought to be represented upon it, were not re-
presented at all. He might briefly state that there were
tour great parties who took a deep interest in this ques-
tion. First, there were those who conceived it to be the
office of the Church to educate the people. Next, there
were those who relied entirely upon the voluntary sys-
tem. The third were those who took it to be the duty
of the State to inculcate secular education; and, fourthly,
there were those who combined all instruction, and would
give a mixed secular and religious education to the
people. On the part of those who advocated the volun-
tary principle he begged to assure the House that that
party had been i❑ earnest—that they had done the work
committed to them to the best of their ability, and that
the country was greatly indebted to them for what they
had accomplished.—(Hear, hear.) He would not further
detain the House than to express his dissent from the
appointment of the Committee as at present proposed,
and to give notice of his intention on a future occasion
to move the addition of new names.

Mr. M. GIBSON admitted the justice of the claim
that those to whom his Hon. Friend referred should
be fairly represented upon the Committee. Perhaps,
however his Hon. Friend was not acquainted with the
views of some of the members of the Committee. He
had submitted to the Government the name of one gen-
tleman who, he hoped, would have been acceptable to
those who were in favoitr of a voluntary system of
education ; but that name had been objected to,
and the, name of Mr. Heald had been substituted for it.
He should not object to the appointment of his Hon.
Frit, nd in the place of Mr. Heald, or, if the Committee
should be increased in number to beyond fifteen, he
should not object to the addition of one`or two gentle-
men holding the views which his Hon. Friend had in-
dicated. He suggested that the Committee should be
allowed to pass now, and that his Hon. Friend should
give notice of his intention to move some additional
names.

Mr. HEYWORTH thought it very desirable that the
friends of the voluntary system should be represented
on the Committee.

Mr. W ALPOLE, who was but imperfectly heard, was
understood to represent that there was not a single
Member of the Government upon the Committee, and to
suggest that the nomination should, for the present, be
pus! poned.
Mr. HINDLEY concurred in recommending that the
appointment should be postponed ; and this course was
ultimately adopted.
Oo the motion of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL for
IRELAND, the following members were added to the
Select Committee on Outrages (Ireland) : Mr.
O'Flaherty, Mr. Scully, Mr. W. Goold, and the Solici-
tor-General for Ireland.
On the motion of Mr. G. A. HAMILTON, on the
part of Lord R. Grosvenor, the following Members were
added to the Select Committee on Ventilation and. Light-
ing tho House :—Mr. Stephensob, Mr. Locke, and Mr.
Henry Fitzroy.
The Report on Supply was then brought up and re-
ceived.

The Indemnity Bill, as amended, was considered, and
ordered to be read a third time on Thursday.
The Copyright Amendment Bill was ordered to be
recommitted on Friday next.
ST. ALBANS DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.

The Report on this Bill having been brought up,
Mr. BELL said he did not mean to oppose the recep-
tion of the report. He thought he had done as much
as could be expected from him under the circumstances.
He only wished to say that he hoped the crusade against
S'. Albans would not terminate with the disfranchise-
ment of that borough, because, if it did, instead of
being of service, the measure would only excite dissatis-
faction in the minds of the public. But if her Majesty's
Ministers would take advantage of the information
which they had received through the St. Albans Com-
missioners, and would, before the dissolution of Par-
liament, brieg in a Bill which should 'more effectually
check corruption than any Act that had hitherto been
passed, he felt certain that it would give great satis-
faction to the public, and would deserve the respect and
support of every honest man in the kingdom.—(Hear,
hear.)
Mr. WALPOLE said that the Noble Lord who was
lately at the head of the Government
was, in point of
fact, to move the second reading of his Corrupt Prac-
tices at Elections Bill to-morrow (Wednesday), which
Bill was founded, almost word for word, upon the St.
Albans Disfranchisement Bill, and he begged to say
that it was the intention of the Government to support
the Bill, and endeavour to pass it. <Hear. hear.)
Mr. HUNIE hoped the Government was sincere in
their declaration that they intended to support a measure
for the effectual suppression of bribery. For himself, he
did not believe that it could be altogether put an end to;
but he thought the best means that could be adopted for
that purpose was the introduction of the ballot—(Hear,
hear)—and he intended, therefore, to test the sincerity
of Hon. Members on the subject by proposing a motion
to that effect.

The report on the St. Albans Disfranchisement Bill
was then received.

The Consolidated Fund (8,000,0000 Bill was read a
third time and passed.

Tho all to Consolidate and Enlarge the Acts relat-
ing to the Appointment and Pay of Parish Constables
was brought in and read a first time.

The Ifouse adjourned at Half-past Eight o'clock.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

(From the Votes awi Proeeelimos of the [louse of Common.

TUESDAY. MARCH 23.
SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE MINING DISTRICT
WATER COJLPANY BILL.

Order for Second Reading read; notion made, and Ques-
tion proposed, " That the Bill be now read a second time :"
Amendment proposed, to leave out the word " now," and
at the end of the Question to add the words " upon this day
six months :" Question put, " That the word 'now' stand
part of the Question." The Muse divided :

MINORITY—AYES, 75.
Anderson, Arthur Fordyce. A. D. Milligan. Robevt
Anson, General Forster, M. Mundy, William
Armstrong, It. B. Fox, W. J. Ogle, S. C.
Baring, Henry B. French, F. Patten, J. W.
Baring, Sir Francis Geach, Charles Pendarves, E. W.
Bass, M. T. Glyn, G. C. Pilkingten, James
Bell, Jacob Greene, Thomas Beholedeld, William
Berkeley, C. L. G. Harris, Richard Seymour, Lord
Bright, John Henry, Alexander Smith, John B.
Brotherton, J. Heywood, James Strutt, E.
Brown, W. Hume, Joseph Tennent, R. J.
Childers, J. W. Hutchins, E. J. Thicknesse, R. A.
Clay, James Jackson, William Thompson, Colonel
Cobden, Richard' Johnstone, James Thompson,.George
Colebrooke, Sir T. Jolliffe, Sir W. G. Trelawny, J. S.
Copelandillderman Kershaw, James Vivian, J. H.
Cowan, Charles Langston, J. H. , Walmsley, SJ.
Davie, Sir LL Lemon, Sir C. Wawn, J. T.
Dawes, Edward Littleton, E. R. Willcox, Brodie
Drummond, Home Lockhart, A. E. Williams, John
Duncombe, T. Long, W. Wilson, Matthew
Ellis, John Lushington, C. Wrightson, W. B.
Elliot, J. E. Mackie, John Wyvill, Marmaduke
Evans, Sir De Lacy M'Cullagh, W. T. rELLEan
Ferrer, James M`Gregor, John Thornely, Thomas
Matheson, Colonel Villiers,
_Charles
Foley, J. H.

MAJORITY—NOES, 89.
Adderley, C. B. nb. ii. • Miles, P. W. S.
Frewe , E
Miles, R. M.
Archdall, Captain , A. E. Fuller,
Viscount Molesworth,Sir W.
Arkwright, George
Galway,
Mullings, J. R.
Bailey, Joseph Freestun Colonel.: Maunsell, T. P.
Gaskell, J. M.
Nugent, Sir Percy
Baillie, H. J.
Baird James Gooch, E. S.
O'Connor, Feargus
Bankes, G. , Goulburn, Henry
Perfect, Robert
Barron, Sir H. Pigott, Francis
Barrow , W. H. Hall, Sir B.
Powlett, Lord W.
Bateson, T. Hamilton, Lord C.
Pugh, David
Bramston, T. W. Hastie, Archibald -
Renton, John C.
Fridges, Sir B. Hayes, Sir E.
Brisco M.
Ricardo, Osman
,
Burghley, Lord GHwenylne,y, I Ijo
.wwel.
Herbert, H. A. Kushout, Captain
Carew, w. P. Ilildyard, lt. C. Scott, F.
Chaplin. W. J.Scully, Francis
Charteris. Francis Hill, Lord E. Sidney, Alderman
Christopher, Smythe, George
CharlesT. B.
Clerk sir G. ' Hope; Sir J. Spooner, Rickard
Clive, H. B. Howard, P. H. Stafford, Augustus
Cocks, T. S. Hudson, G. Stanley, Edward
Codrington, Sir W. Inglis, Sir R. H. Start, 11. G.
Conolly, Thomas Keogh, William Sullivan, Michael
Duckworth, Sir J. Knox, Colonel .
it.
A.
Hiliini,dlYieayrd,
Thompson, Alderman
Duncombe, 0. Lennox, Lord A. Vesey, Thomas
Duncuft, John Lygon, General Wall, C. B.
Dunne, Colonel Mackenzie, W. F. Wynn, H. W.
Du Pre, C. G. Mahon, Lord
Edwards, Henry Manners, Lord C.
Forbes, William Manners, Lord G.
Fox, S. W. L. Masterman, John

TELLERS.
Best, John
Knight, F. W.

The following significant notice appears in the
London Gazette of last evening. We trust that we may re-
gard it as an earnest of a future and continual vigilance,
checking the advances, or attempts to advance, made by,
the emissaries of Messrs. Wiseman Swift, and. Co. : " Lord
Chamberlain's. office; March 23.—Notice is hereby given,
that the preQntation to the Queen at the Levee, on Tours-
day, the 26th of February last, of the Very Rev. Monsignore
Searle, is cancelled, that title having been assumed without
the required authority."—ffera/d.

, if