The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-12 00:00:00

JUNE 12, 1852.

ported it with all the fervour, zeal, perspicuity, and elo-
quence with which their Lordships had been so long
familiar; but how was he mat? The first argument
with which he was met was that the property in ques:ion
had not been confiscated as property of a British subject
under the decree to which his had adverted—an argu-
ment which he (Lard Lyndhurst) had already disposed
of. Another argument with which the Noble Lord was
met was that the cession had not been proved by any
deed. Now, in France there was no distinction
whatever between writings and deeds, as in this
country. That law was peculiar to this country.
The surrender was made according to the law of
the country where it took place which was quite suffi-
cient. But the third reason urged against the motion
was of a still more singular character, viz., that it
would cast a slur on the credit of the Commission and
the Privy Council, if they granted the inquiry. How-
ever, those arguments, assisted by others at the nature
of which he would not hint, prevailed on the House,
and the motion, though supported by all the vigour and
manly eloquence of Sir J. Graham, was lost. A Noble
and Learned Lord opposite, who was then a Member
of the House of Commons (Lord Truro, we believe),
next undertook to bring the question before the House
of Commons, but he was put off from day to day by va-
rious causes, until the dissolution of Parliament, with-
out being able to effect his purpose, and, not having a seat
in the new Parliament, he ceased to be in a condition to
fulfil his engagement. Mr. Hill, the then Member for
Hull, next brought the question before the House, and had
made some progress in his statement, when the House
was counted out, and he was unable to bring it forward
again during the session. He renewed it, however, in a
subsequent session, and, in a House of nearly 200 Mem-
bers, not only obtained a hearing, but carried his motion
for a Committee. The case was argued before a Com-
mittee, day after day, by counsel on both sides; and the
inquiry had been nearly brought to a close, when an
objection was made on the part of the opponents of the
claim, that the documents produced had not been au-
thenticated by any British Minister or agent. The
session being then nearly at a close, the objection put a
stop to the inquiry; but the Committee, in their report
to the House, strongly urged the necessity of re-appoint-
ing the Committee in the next session. Parliament was
again dissolved, and Mr. Hill not being again returned
to the House, it became necessary to find some other
Member to move for the re-appointment of the Commit-
tee; but such was the general alarm at the nature and
complexity of the case, that it was necessary to go about
knocking from door to door to find some Member to un-
dertake it. At last Mr. Warburton moved fur the re-
appointment of the Committee; and, singular to say, was
met by the argument, on the part of an officer of the
Crown, that the Baron de Bode, who, for 20 years, had
been persevering and active in every possible way to have
his case heard and decided, had slept upon his case—an
argument which he maintained was, under all the cir-
cumstances, nothing less than a piece of cruel mockery
and insult.—(Bear.) Mr. Warburton's motion having
been lost, the Baron next applied for a mandamus, calling
upon the Treasury to apply the money for the purpose
for which it had been received. The mandamus was re-
fused, on the ground that the Lords of the Treasury held
the money as the servants of the Crown, and it was asked
how could a mandamus, which was an order of the Crown,
command the Crown to apply the money in any par-
ticular way. The counsel for the claimant then ap-
plied for a petition of right, supplicating her Majesty to
do justice; and—would their Lordships believe it—this
application was resisted on the ground that the money
was not in the hands of the Crown, but in the hands of
the Lords of the Treasury. At length, however, Lord
Cottenham, then Lord Chancellor, appointed four mem-
bers of the bar, and highly qualified, for the duty, to
examine into the matter. These gentlemen summoned
a jury of fourteen, twelve being necessary for a verdict,
and that jury pronounced an unanimous verdict, finding
all the facts which were asserted in the petition of right
to be true.—(Hear, hear.) The Attorney-General had
notice to attend this inquiry, and might have attended
it if he had thought proper, but he did not do so. Al-
though, however, he did not choose to attend the inquiry,
he did that which by law ho was of course perfectly en-
titled to do—he traversed the finding, and pleaded the
Statute of Limitations, which was fatal to the
claim. (Hear, hear.) The next step was a
trial at bar, where the four Judges presided with a
special jury, and the result was to confirm the former
finding in every particular. All the facts which he
had stated, then, had been proved by the concurrent
verdict of two juries ; but the Baron did not obtain
judgment in consequence of a clause in the Act which
had been passed for the purpose of carrying out the
convention, which rendered it necessary that the claim
should first have been established by the adjudication of
the Commissioners. An appeal was next made to the
House of Lords, and the House of Lords confirmed that
decision. If he were to be asked where the money was
to come from to satisfy these claims, his answer was that
it was either in the hands of the Lords of the Treasury,
or that it had been applied to some public service. Ii
the latter were the case the public, having reaped the
benefit of it, were bound to restore the money.—(Hear,
hear.) But he did not go so far as that. He asked
simply for a Committee to inquire into this case, and if
the Committee should confirm the statement which he
had made ho should appeal to her Majesty's Govern-
ment to afford redress. He pressed this case in common
honesty and common fairness, not for the sake of the
claimant alone, but for the character, honour, and dig-
nity of this great country.—(Hear, hear).
The Earl of DERBY said, that seldom, even in his
Noble and Learned Friend's earlier days, had it been
his pleasure to listen to details of great complication and
importance delivered with so complete a command of all
the circumstances of the case, unassisted, as their Lord-
ships had seen, by reference to a single note, as the
statement which they had just heard from his Noble and
Learned Friend—(Hear, hear)—and seldom, he ventured
to say, had the cause—he would not say of justice, be-
cause that would be to some extent prejudging the case
—bat the cause of humanity and national honour, been
placed before them in language more eloquent and en-
forced by arguments more cogent than those which his
Noble and Learned Friend had with so much ability
employed.—(Hear, hear.) He was sure that to every-
one, on whichever side of the House he sat, it would be
equally gratifying to perceive that his Noble Friend's
mental faculties, at all events, were unimpaired after
his many years of public life, while his nice sense of
what was due to the honour, justice, and dignity of the
country was maintained with as much strength and sin-
cerity as in earlier days.—(Hear, hear.) He (the Earl
of Derby) was far from wishing to enter into a discus-
sion of the merits of this case. Twenty-four years ago he
had brought forward the wrongs, as he then conceived
them to be, of the father of the present petitioner, and he
thought now there could be but one opinion, after such
a statement as they had just heard, proceeding from such
an authority as his Noble and Learned Friend, evincing
so clearly the conviction on his own mind of the sub-
stantial justice of the case which he had brought before
them, that it was their bounden duty not to refuse to
submit to the test of an inquiry the facts of the case.—
(Hear, hear.) Undoubtedly there must be great diffi-
culties in the way of such an inquiry, and it must extend
to a period which would render it doubtful whether any
Committee that they might appoint could bring their
labours to a conclusion in the present session. Still, if
his Noble Friend pressed for a Committee in the present
session, he should offer no opposition to such a motion.
There would no doubt be objections raised in the other
House of Parliament to any vote of money. At the
same time he would say, that if the report of the Com-
mittee should substantiate the justice and equity of the
claim, neither the lapse of time, nor technicalities, nor
the inconvenience of being called on to pay a sum, how-
ever large, ought to prevent this country, satisfying the
demands of justice.—(Hear, hear.) However large,
therefore, the sum which might be awarded, and how-
ever unpleasing to the Chancellor of the Exchequer sucht
a thing might be, if the Committee should come o a
clear and undoubted opinion upon the incontrovertibleh
facts before them, that this gentleman had in honour,
equity,
liability
equity, and morality,
a claim upon this country,
Parlia-
ment would not refuse to acknowledge the and
to respond to it.—(Hear.)
Earl
the
'reweidthwtithe mth eeriNohlewEerl
claim
RofEtYh
ed
Bi darnoont raiese
Btoodeex press
han y
he was unacquainted; but agreed hifetahgere were a valid claim on
who had just spoken, that
sumthe
aqtaiettyakaencimji
gushtticueeo, of
itth:ocnoldunbteryth,
the
dutyoweveorf large
the
o the
r
Housei ofPartgaemaerntheta.) He could n
to provide meanstheoth
oeflpmeeting
that c o,tro
enter-
taining very serious doubts, however—he might say
more than doubts—whether the appointment of a Com-
mittee of that House was the proper mode of arrivine
at a decision upon this important question. He thought
that Parliamentary Committees were, ef all tribunals,
consi-
dered
the least to be trusted when the questie n i
be
and
involved a claim upon the public purse;
least of all, could a claim of this nature, involving
such nice considerations of law, be satisfactorily
investigated by a Committee of their Lordships'
House.—(Hear, hear.) If the claim were to bo brought
before the other House of Parliament, and a vote of
money were to be asked for, it ought to be recommended
by the responsible advisers of the Crown, after they, by
due inquiry, had satisfied themselves that it was a just
one. The speech of the Noble and Learned Lord did
certainly appear to make out a very stron case indeed,
but he could not help thieking that theremust be some-
thing more behind, with which they were not accurately
should wbehiccohnmduacdteedit
a the law,
Committeeo r
osfo some other t he r
House.tr i b u na l
by
yxpeeodmiemnits
stihoantertshe
arinvestiga-
tionned in
go
the Noble Lord now at the head of the Government
quire into
moved the appointment of a Committes)
Twenty-fear competent
rnei
n'ers, than
had
had
this subject. The Noble and Learned(it
that evening brought it forward wasan
keeper of the King's conscience,. be presumed, the
upon the
of that day had Noble and Learned Lord's
then Itzt
twimhoe
made. The Noble
held the great seal,
addleipepeOdsedacatil3dgecided re-
Governmentsistance to the proposition
umsesAdministrations with
Earl
liberality of
d had ever thought it expe-
dient he had bean lis case to
aanedd
yLeeta
nrnotedonLeordofhatoidinetehetrveeg
Par-
liament.—(gear, to recommend He (Earl Grey) did not pre-
bean)
lie.ment.—(Hearanyttneg whatever of the merits of the
fact did, he must say, inspire him
against the claim of which
with constidhea.rtaoble doubt whether there were not some
he was not aware,
reasons,ht to be and by some very well
eteansedds-wfibtehuoditetkhrinennale.—(Heari,nhveesatri.g) It was not his inten-
tionalathe House, when the motion should
to divide but,
be put, he should feel it his duty to say " Not content."
Lord LYNDHURST begged to remind the Noble
Earl that the case had assumed quite a new appearance
since he had held the great seal in consequence of the
two successive verd!cts which had been pronounced
with respect to it.
Earl FI 12 WILLIAM was surprised to find that his
Noble Friend (Earl Grey) had on more than one oc-
casion recently objected to the appointment of Com-
mittees for the consideration of questions like the pre-
sent, which involved neither more nor lees than the

honour and inmesty of the country, and instanced the
case of the Warner invention an one in which his Noble
Friend bad purbued the same course. His Noble Friend
said ba could not help suspecting that there was some
thing behind; but, if that were the case, if there WC
anything concealed which did not meet he eye,
that
.wae the very ground on which they should at we
appoint a Comnaittee.—(Heer, hear.) A largo sum o,i
the amount. given by France still remained, he believE
unappropriated, at all events to the purpose for which 11
was given, and the Committee, if it answered no other
use, would be beneficial in eliciting the precise mode la
which that surplus had been disposed of.
Lord MONTEAGLE said it was many years since be
had looked into the papers in this case, but he had a
tolerably clear recollection of the circumstances CO•l''
fleeted with it. There could be no doubt that a large
sum had been given by France to be distributed among
surely
certain claimants by a tribunal appointed for that pot-
pose by Act of Parliament. It was alleged that LW
portion of this sum which should have been given to tile
Baron de Bode had been appropriated by the Gover
merit for selfishpurposes, so that the Baron had be,to
defrauded of his just rights. In the first instance,
term had been assigned within which all persons purports
ing to have claims were to put in those claims, and
eel
was quite true that in the time of Lord Liverpool, the
being a portion of the amount unexhausted by the satii
faction of the just claims put in within the stipulfi,itta
period, that surplus was applied to the building and f
coration of Buckingham Palace. That was matter os
history and well understood. It did not, however, aPile,
to be equally well unleratcod, though it was equally
matter of fact, that under the Government of Earl GIYI
that surplus, so applied to the building and decoratil
it l
of Buckingham Palace, was required to be returned, and
was accordingly returned in iull by the Treasury,nne
applied in payment of a second list of claims which we:e
allowed to be put in by persons who had been exclu.cle;
front! the former distribution by the limitation of time
originally assigned. He would, in the course of the
evening, move for Treasury accounts which would clearly
show this state of facts, and which would thus disp.roi
at the same time the allegation that the money designeb
for the Baron de Bode had been used by the Biat?„
Government for selfish purposes, and the propositrun;
that there was money available for the purpose of t`'
Baron's claim.

Lord TRURO said that those who had heard
powerful and eloquent, and convincing address of the
Noble Premier, when, in the other House, twenty-Cu";
years ago, he advocated the, even then, manifest cliO:
of the Baron de Bode, could not have imagined the Pet;
bility of any other course on his part than that wl3,'
he had now adopted, however inconvenient in its neu'-0
diate effact on the Exchequer the result of that con°
might be. The only conceivable objection to the art
pointment of a Committee was, that in fact, revert, c,O
justice, there was not a single feature of the Bare%
claim in rational dispute. This was so manifest, eas
to the Noble Earl who had just opposed the motion, ter,
he insisted there must be something behind antegoniitle
to the claim, since there was no patent reason will
„„th a
- claim should not long since have been admitted
acted upon. His Noble Friend might be quite assrbo
that, had there been anything anywhere that coula .0
adduced to invalidate the Baron's claim, it would not 138'0
remained very long in the background. The oppeeta
who could condescend to resort to so miserable an e.:4
sion as an appeal to the Statute of Limitations 0311.„.
indeed, have been at their wit's end for a ellee'ao
(Hear, hear.) As to the statement that there was -
vett
fund out of which this claim could be satisfied, e, t;
in part, the finding of the jury distinctly rebutted to
for the finding of that jury was, that after de
payment of all the claims duly registered withinl'of
time first stipulated, there remained 482,752/. 63. 6uf'o.
the sum given in this respect by the French Go",
,a 1
ment; of this 480,0001. 200,0001. had since beet:lir-6i
to persons whose claims bad been admitted ~
grace, and the residue had been paid into the Bar''
England to the account of the Government. Irooj,
matter of strict justice the first residue of 480,0
ought to have been paid in satisfaction of the Baron 00/.
Bode's claims, his admitted claims; and the 200,0
which had beeu given in other quarters had beeehline
questionably given in the Baron's wrong; bat 'd-Lie
utterly monstrous the proposition that even the riegsleer,
now existing was to be withheld from him!—'d
hear.) When France paid the money it sees the for
of this country to see that it was honestly aPPlie" ft
those in whose behalf the claims had been preferred'ioo
appeared, after the claims were in, a eemmueieliatree
took place between the two Governments as to the rrao
per sum to be set apart to answer future claims- Bod,
Baron de Bode's claim was in at that time;
coo
upon the footing of the claims then in, a oomputatiee
made as to the sum to be set apart. It appeared t° 0
that, according to the statements, the case wag:, t 1 heir
'
incredible in point of strength and truth, and,
nate.
Lordships should find the claim to be just, he eYrame
hended there would be no difficulty in adopting e"
course to redeem the honour of the country.
Lord HATHERTON said that, having been the e
person who brought forward this claim in the 121°139
Commons in 1826 or 1827, he could not allow the el" tthe
to pass without expressing his sense of obligation Woo
Noble Earl for the spirited course he had takenA'wbsi
which he thought the honour of the country, and of
was due to the Crown, demanded. After the verd t to
the jury, it was impossible for their LordshiP,s
tp
ignore the claims of the Baron de Bode, or, at leeiegipa
give him a fair opportunity of satisfying their loos
of the merits of his case.

The motion was then agreed to. emetls
The Metropolitan Buildings Act Further Alll0—
Bill passed through Committee. on
On the Order of the Day for going into Committee
the School Sites Acts Extension Bill, act of
The Bishop of OXFORD explained that the ohr tee
the Bill was only to provide greater facilities fer roc
classes erecting
eof
Billf
the
ehn
e schoolspa s forsed the education of the dill e
community.
The through Committee. 105
SURRENDERntheOrder dOF CRIMINALS (CON v
oWf
fTtHhe
DFRayAtNhCatEth)eßHuleLLs.o C oni°
O
go into
mittee on this Bill,
The Earl of MALMESBURY moved that the eelleu;il
should go into Committee on this Bill, and exPille
some amendments which he had prepared to subln be
the House in Committee. A new convention couleetica
drawn up in 24 hours, if necessary; but the Ft d°
Government would be perfectly satisfied with the am's
ments in the Bill which he proposed to introdne had
Committee. The principal of those e amendments i the
reference to the further security cf the Ebert,' "hold
subject. He proposed that the Secretary of State sad
an until shaped
Enortenieshsumehiswa there wasrrantfort reasonable causehedetention of any 11—eofe
to sugrasyl
his identity to be undoubted; but on no account 5 „of
he be surrendered to the French Government until P's 6.
positive had been given. He then proposed to giv.:3l
ditional protection to political refugees, end to et is
object the French Ambassador had promised that epee
analogous to curs should be passed in France' 00 beof
Noble Earl opposite smiled, but if they did not po
in the honesty of the French Government it have
use to enter into a convention at all. They must at be
some faith in one another. The convention could!'
put in motion until both parties were agreed.
After a few words from the Earl of MINTO, f tae
Lord CAMPBELL suggested the withdrawal eto.il
Bill, and the making of a new convention to be o'lo
by en Act of Parliament. All the existing diffictid ea
might then be got rid of, and such measure frtune
would be satisfactory to all parties. r
Lord BROUGHAM said that, as the desire °botli
parties was to make the Bill satisfactory to hot
countries, he thought the better plan would be t°,,
the different changes propo-sed to be made in r
printed, and its further consideration postponed for
fewThdeayEs'arl of MALMESBURY bad no iibiectiii°llteig
have the Bill printed, if their Lordships would iwe
uogfil ACBoErGRmDi tEt eEe'N said the
tolp,hase sEtharrol
jab
different condition for foreigners to that which
men would be subjected to in this country. Au !..
as
meat was not required but only such a proceedsi.
would justify an arrest in this country; but he
always
be unwilling to diminish the protection which had
existed to foreigners. which
After a few words from the Earl of DERBY'
were imperfectly heard in the gallery,
The LORD CHANCELLOR urged that the 0011,
sea
tion entered into with France should not be lightalthey
aside. The might arrest the man, it was said, bn°,rbarr
must not deliver him up upon a miss en accusatio •
,_":fora
however, was the result or a judicial inquiry not Uavaca
a juge d'instruction, but a court of judges of ao,
ephr cgis
higher order. The mandat d'arret was the warrant
1,
ment were prepared to give their ,o,
to ours; and seem ta
• which we gave
sued by the juge d'instruction.
.Thsehh
subjects bylaw
same security
_
thein form in which it
their sanction to the Bill
the state of the law affuhrodueiddswoiltihttelnetsfEucrutrhietyr tdoera;a7
he thought the House I::
Earl GRaNVILLE Who spo e with back tbe
aasmneneadreldy.(inaudible) gave detail of
k his to tb°
aedbeen taken while he was in office Da
objects ofthis Bill. He was detail
gallery, proposed
twbh
steps which
carrying oa
to say that he attached great weight to the objectl
that had been raised to the Bill. It had been suggerisoe
that the mandat d'arret should be accompanied wittAsw not
sort of general evidence as to the offence. ne ulned
share the apprehensions which some persons entertna3re
as to political refugees coining to this country; eud;fic:d
ought to be taken that such refugees were not iniare—re.
on the pretence of being the object of some other 01 re
He suggested that the Bill should be amended au'
printed. rk
Lord CRANWORTH said he was actuated °DIY
osi
sincere desire to make the Bill effectual. The COD the
of the former treaty, which required such proof 0
f;tre
offence as would warrant the commitment of the P131:9
in this country before he Was given up, bad of c°
ear
rendered it inoperative. How was this to be reaie,e_crea
By requiring something to be transmitted to the D.tiscry
tary of State showing that proceedings had taken FA,.
tirnalte'r.anlcto
haandalabgeeoeuastaoidonthraptrowceeesdhienuglsd bbeefoeerentae;ao,2t:
a mise en accusation, if this were a proceeding whicn_i_lt y
place after an investigation proving that the I.°: ere
would be sufficient; but l'
should be put on trial, it kale;
ought to be something analogous to depositions
diecre°
France. There ought to be some kind ofe„ecre
vested in the Secretary of State.—(Hear, bean)
01,2:0a.
were a positive undertaking in the treaty to giy, :ort kg-
fenders, it might lead to inconvenient results, !l_crotioe
come a casus belli.—(Hear, hear.) The saw°
.11b.its tbe
ought to be given to the French GOVCrnlnenr 9 rod
uestion „
Bill stood, it would be open to many q on a cer
especially whethe.r, when a party was clafi:
him
into custody on political charges. .
into charge, it might not be a scheme
not in realiti
Lord BEAUMONT said the Bill did Government'
vvench
carry out the convention. The -- s "if there De
were only required to give up offeaeer
,h 0 colea"
founddue cause;" but there was j 30031130 114
e;letting

tion similar to that discretionary power with reference
to the Secretiry cf State or the seagiArsao. The TD.::,.--!;°.5-
t^ate was made to act Ministeni•elly ; ho had no cii:•.cre-
Lion; nor had the Secretary of State any pol,;(-r wha?ever
to Stop the proceedings, or prevent the party being de-
liveri-d up.
The Earl MALMESBURY—That is altered now.
Lord BEAUMONT said there could not have been
Y alteration in the convention since it was signed. If
he meant that the clauses of the Bill wore altered, they
Would be of no use unless they carried out the conven-
tion which was recited in the preamble. He hoped the
Bill would pot be proceeded with. There curs a amoral
,wish in the House rather to assist in this objee:t
but, seeing the numerous objections that had arisen, the
bust eourae would ho to have another convention,
embodying the suggestions that had been thrown out.
Too srvonth clause gave the power to offenders, if
charged with political offences, to plead as a defence
their extradition under the treaty; but this did not
go far enough; he ought to be restored to the country
whence ho had been taken, or at all events hive the op-
tion of returning its he chose. Some alteration was ati-
lolutely necessary in the existing convention, which was
full of difficulties. He doubted whether it would be an
"dvantage to have documentary evidence sent over here;
it probably would not be enough to justify a magistrate
In Committing for trial. If it were so, the mise en accu-
sation would be a perfectly satisfactory document.
The Duke of ARGYLL said it appeared to him that
by the terms of the convention, the Secretary of State
Was obliged to deliver up an offender on proof of iden-
tity; but the Bill gave him a discretionary power. The
French Government bad retained that discretion for
themselves in the convention. The Bill purported to
enable the Secretary of State to exercise a discretion
which the convention did not give him. It was most
important that he should have that power, especially as
the number of offences included in the treaty was in-
creased from three to twenty, and included such a charge
Its malversation in office.
Tho Earl of ABERDEEN said the discretion only ap-
plied to one article—article 10—which related to fo-
reigners not Frenchmen. It was most essential that it
should be extended to all. No one could be more sen-
sible than himself of the necessity of an alteration in the
existing law. If the mise en accusation fulfilled the con-
ditions laid down, the existing law might have been en-
forced, and there would have been no necessity for an
alteration.

Lord BROUGHAM said that even if the miss en ac-
cusation were considered tantamount to an indictment,
it would not suffice at present, being a foreign indict-
ment.
The Earl of MALMESBURY suggested that they
should go into Committee now, allow amendments to be
Made, and have the Bill reprinted before Monday.
Lord CAMPBELL said he did not think it proper
that the Secretary of State of England should be re-
stricted, as was done by the Convention, which gave a
discretionary power on the French side, but none on
the English. This power could not be introduced into
the Bill unless it was in the Convention. Re suggested
that the same power should be given on both sides of the
water, and the same obliteetions. Lerd Aberdeen's Con-
vention had proved ineffectual, because it required the
same evidence as was necessary to commit a man under
tno English law. It was now proposed to dispense with
this, but a discretionary power ought to be retained.
The Earl of MINTO considered that the Bill could
not be proceeded with to the end, unless they had another
convention.
The House then went into Committee.
In answer to the Earl of ABERDEEN,
The Earl of DERBY said that one of the amendments
proposed to be inserted in the Bill was, that any further
Convention or stipulation that might be entered into
should be considered for the purposes of the Act as part
of the original convention.
The Earl cf ABERDEEN remarked that the Bill re-
cited the convention and proceeded to carry it out. It
was impossible then to agree to a convention that had not
yet been entered into.
Lord BEAUMONT took the same view of the case.
'll,
e mode of proceeding proposed by the Noble Lord
Wes a very Irish way of legislation.
The Earl of DERBY said the convention had received
the assent of two successive Governments, and had
been entered into with the French Government in a
Most amicable manner. It had received the approval
of the most eminent statesmen and lawyers on both sides
°f tho Channel; but from what he had heard that night
no was afraid that if they had half a dozen new conven-
tions they would all be objected to. He ventured, how-
ever, to say, in spite of the Noble Baron (Lord Beau-
latcnit), that their Lordships had nothing to do with the
convention.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of ABERDEEN insisted that they could not
legislate except on a convention that was already before
em.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the proposed
Proviso was to enable her Majesty to enter into a sup-
Plementary treaty in conformity with the Bill. It
would not in the least interfere with their Lordships'
Powers.
The amendments were then agreed to, and the Bill„
having gone through Committee, was ordered to be re-
Ported on Monday.
The Differential Dues Bill was reported.
The Public Works Bill, and the Industrial and
Provident Societies Bill were read a third time and
passed.
A number of private Bills were then advanced a
stage, and their Lordships adjourned at a Quarter-past
Ten
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 10.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
THE WORKING CLASSES.
, Mr. StIANEY, on the motion that the Speaker do
leave the Chair, on going into Committee of Supply,
moved as an amendment, " That it was expedient that a
Department, Standing Committee, or unpaid Commission,
,sbould be appointed, to consider, suggest, and report from
ti me to time, preventive and remedial measures, to benefit
the social condition of the working classes, and for re-
teving social and other obstacles to their improvement."
. 7 said this subject had nothing to do with party po-
litics, but was deeply interesting to the vast body of the
People whose condition was to be embraced by the pro-
Posed inquiry. The labouring population was divided
, into two clastes—those connected with husbandry, and
those • •
living in large towns and in the manufacturing
districts. The great mass of them had been depressed,
degraded, and neglected for many yeare, and in a great
Measure from the want of proper attention to their con-
dition by the Government and the Legislature. He
thought that if some department or commission bad
been in existence to watch the condition of the working
classes, and to suggest measures to remedy the evils that
surrounded them, there would now have been a vast im-
provement among them, both in a physical and moral
aspect. The Honourable Member referred to the reports
of Commissioners and Select Committees to show the
deplorable state of these two great divisions of the people,
and said he attributed the neglect he had mentioned to
great social changes which had taken place without any
corresponding alterations of the law, so as to give
them fair play in their altered position. So frequent
were political changes, that before a Government had
time to direct its attention to subjects of this nature
it went out of office; and nothing effectual would be done
for the benefit of the people, unless some such perma-
nent body as he suggested was appointed. The exist-
ing state of things produced nothing but discontent, suf-
fering, and disease in the country, and he asked for a
Commission on the ground of economy, justice, and right.
While the comforts of the rich and middle classes had
been vastly augmented, crime had increased three
times faster than the population, and crime now cost
the country upwards of eleven millions annually.
Hitherto the wealthy had adopted the laissez faire sys-
tem in regard to these great grievances; but there ought
to be no longer delay in devising means of amelioration.
Whet ho wanted for the working classes was instruction
to their children, protection to their health, and fair
Play and encouragement in regard to the employment
of their labour.
Lord R. GROSVENOR seconded the motion.
Mr. WALPOLE said he was sure that the sincere
benevolence which had always distinguished the career
of the Hon. Gentleman deserved to be rewarded;
and if he thought the means proposed by the Hon.
Gentleman would be likely to contribute towards
the improvement of tho social condition of the working
classes, he should certainly wish, on the part of the
Government, at once to give his assent to this
motion. With regard to the motion before the
House, he doubt. d whether it would really tend
to the benefit of those for whose benefit it was intended.
He doubted whether more information would be gained
by such a standing commission than was now obtained
by the Committees of both Houses of Parliament. A
commission would consist of one or two persons, who
Would imbibe peculiar ideas and plans on these subjects,
.?,n which their reports would be founded, while a
I:arliamentary Committee would consist of persons who
took varied and different views, and in whose hands
these q i
uestions would be more likely to be considered
in
1/4 their bearings. Moreover, he did not think
t, Gjueti-
ein°4B to lead the people to depend rather on th a-
e—run:lent and Parliament than on their own exertions.
°Q these grounds, therefore,
ho mast give a reluctant
ne hogetive to the motion of the Hon. GentLman, and he
hoped he would not press it to a division.
rai:stmf. SCOBELL supported the appointment of a com
did
-
on, which he thought would do Do harm, if it
no good.
Mr. CARTER thought the appointment of this,com-
mission would prevent the appointment of Select Qom-
eaittees for special purposes connected with this; question'
After a fe w words from Mr. PACKE and Mr. P.
J-lowenn the motion was withdrawn, and the louse

Went into Committee of Supply.
TIIE EXPENSES OF TUE EMBASSY AT CON

STANTINOPLE.‘
The CEtANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
the vote which stood to be taken first was the vote far
0 expenses of repairing the chapel of the British ""Em-
bassy7, at Constantinople. The Government had taken
it
vote into their consideration since yesterday, and
" appeared to them to be one of those which required
considerable inquiry. The enormous expenditure which
had taken place upon the ambassadorial residence
at Constantinople appeared to him on the sur-
face indefensible. It certainly appeared to him
that to spend 85 0001. in ten years was rather too much.
Ile knew it had grown up to a practice, not sufficiently
checked at a distance from this country, to launch out
into heavy expenses of this sort, and without wishing to
lay any biam,, on ,
e.r
th I predecessors, her Majesty's Hi_
nisters wished to take this opportunity of expressing
their dissatisfaction on this head, and therefore, ender
these circumstances, he should not propose to proceed
urther now with this vote,—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. PT. PATTEN glad to hear the
opinions said he was
which had fallen from the Right Hon. Gentle-
man. Having presided as Chairman of the Committee
on Official Salaries, he remembered that the subject of
the expenses of the Embassy at Constantinople had
"trolley pressed themselves on the notice of the Com-