The Sun.
London, England, 1864-05-28 00:00:00

THE EXACTIONS IN JUTLAND.

Mr. D. GRIFFITH asked the First Lcrd of the ",:rea-
sury, whether ho was not aware that the Prussia :s do not
pay for the supplies they exact in Jutland in money, but
only by acknowledgments of the amow.,ts in question,
which amounts they intended to rec/;.on up against the
Danish Government on a future oc,asion, under the pre-
tence of claims for the expenses of the war, or other de-
Ash Government would allow
mends ; and, whether the Bri
such a departure from one of the leading conditions of the
armistice to which they are partied?

Lord PALMERSTON said that from the latest accounts
it appeared that, provisions would in future be supplied to
the Prussian troops in Schleswig-Holstein by contract, and
that the value of the levies made in Jutland would be re-
stored. triear, hear.)
TIM ALLEGED MILITARY VICTORIES IN
AMERICA.

Mr. HA.LIBITRTO-N—dre-wa-ttention to the startling
communications made as to the military events in America
this month recorded in the newspapers, and asked if the
Government possessed any official information confirmatory
of these.

Lord PALMERSTON said he could not state anything
positively in reference to those accounts.

ARMY PRIZES.

into cone -euttes of supply,
On the order for going
Eir S. NORTHCOTE moved that an humble address be
resented to her Ilajeste:,, praying that she would be gra-
ciously pleased to rgoceed in the distribution of the Banda
and Kirwee bo, tp, upon the principle of actual capture,
as recomm-Judeci in the report of the Royal Commission on
army l'rize; and, should there be any dispute as to the
troops entitled upon that principle to share in the distribu-
tion, to refer the question to some competent tribunal. He
said this was a motion which had reference to the whole
question of sermy prizes, the distribution of which he con-
• tended was in a most unsatisfactory position. The report of
the commission alluded to justified the complaints that
'were made, and an evil was shown which required
full redress. It was evident that the subject
was one that, at all events, required a full and
impartial inquiry. He drew attention to what
had occurred in regard to what had been effected by Gen.
Whitlock, whose feats in the district to which his motion
referred were performed without assistance, and yet his
troops were allowed only a portion of the prize money to
which their valour entitled them. (Hear, hear.)
There was no doubt of the fact he had stated, for it was
well known that Sir Hugh Rose, who participated in the
p ize money in the opera:ion of General Whitlock, was
r
actually proceeeing in a direction opposite to that of those
operations. He admitted the great merits of Sir Hugh
Rese, and in anything ho said ho did not, in the slightest
degree, wish to disparage an officer of such ability. The hon.
baronet having entered into other details to show the in_
jus'..!ce of constructive right of prize money as compared to
actual right, appealed to the house not to be dazzled by
splendid feats, bat really to look to there who had earned
the prize money.
Lord PALMERSTON thought the Government and
tho house were indebted to the honourable baronet for
having moved the appointment of a commission last year,
the necessity for which no doubt existed. He had
come to the conclusis a that it was desirable that this sub-
ject should be referred to the Hieh Court of Admiralty,
which he coceidercd a more Ili-A:az; tribunal for dealing
with the question then this house. He thought there
was some confusion in regard to the terms constructive cap-

tore, and actual capture, which, by being dealt with in too
stext a sense, led to erroneous practical conclusions.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE expressed his consent o the sub-
j act being referred to the High Court of Admiralty.

REGISTERING TITLES TO LAND IN IRELAND.

Mr. SCULLY moved that an humble address be pre-
sented to her Majesty, praying that she would be gra-
ciously pleased to issue a commission to inquire and re-
port as to the best system for registering titles to land in
Ireland, and to frame a measure for that purpose ; also to
consider and report as to the creation of transferable deben.
tures upon land in Ireland.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND said
there was no controversy whatever about the principle
enunciated by Mr. Scully, and the advantage of carrying
out his views for freedom of trade in land by means of a
free and cheap system of transfer would be one of the
greatest boons to Ireland. For affecting this object the
Landed Estates Courts afforded peculiar facilities, but it
was necessary to see that the principle was carried out
safely, cautiously, and without injury to the interests of the
country, and that the machinery of the court was sufficient
far the purpose without introducing a new and expensive
machinery. He thought, however, it was quite possible
to frame a measure that would be satisfactory to the house
and the country, and that it would be more becoming and
accordant with precedent and principle that a measure
affecting such large interests and involving such great con-
sequences to the community should be brought in upon
the responsibility of the Government. Having regard to
all the circumstances of the case he was prepared to state
that the matter was now under the consideration of the
executive, and that a measure was in preparation which he
trusted would be worthy the consideration of the house,
and which it was his intention to introduce before the end
of the present or at the beginning of the next session.
After some remarks from Mr. MONSELL, Mr. SASSARI),
and other members, the motion was withdrawn.
Mr. LONGFIELD called attention to the purchase by
the Law rife Assurance Company of large estates in Mayo
and Galway, and the results attending their acquisition
and management of the property. The evictions on the
estates, the hon. member said, were numerous; no encou-
ragement was given to the tenants, and the possession of the
estates by the company was, he believed, a curse to that part
of the country. They had evaded the statute under which
they were acting, and he contended that the Legislature
ought to deal with them, and that the Crown ought, in its
discretion, to seize on the whole of the land and confiscate
it, as having been acquired contrary to the provisions of the
law.

Lord J. BROWNE defended the company for having in-
terposed, during the famine years, at the sale of the pro
perty in the Encumbered Estates Court. The sale having
been promoted, not by them, but the second encumbrance,
the land would not have realised more than one-fourth of
their claim upon it, and since it had come into their hands
it had been managed as well as, nay, better than, the pro-
perty of any other absentee landlords.
Mr. MURRAY (on 3 of the directors of the Law Life
Assurance Company) said that the company bad never
heard any complaints of their management, and assured the
house that their efforts had been sedulously directed to make
the tenants prosperous and contented, Moreover, if any
landed gentleman in Ireland would come forward and pur-
chase the estates, the company would be happy to sell them
upon the valuation of any respectable land valuer.

Mr. GREGORY observed that he had received several
letters from owners of property in both Mayo and Galway,
confirming to its full extent the statement made by Mr.
Lougfield.

Sir B, PEEL deprecated the discussion as calculated to
create unjust and angry feelings against the Law Life As-
surance Company, who held the estates against their own
will in consequence of advances made by them to a man who
had been unable to repay them. At first he was disposed to
agree in the opinions expressed:by Mr Gregory, but upon a
full and fair investigation of the whole case, he honestly
believed that the company had not otherwise administered
the property than in a manner conducive to the interests of
the tenants.

Sir T. BURKE was of opinion that the company had
well managed the property, though owing to the miserable
condition in which it was when it first came into their hands
some evictions had undoubtedly been enforced.
Mr MAGUIRE remarked that the tenants were afraid to
improve their holdings lest their rents should be raised or
themselves turned out of their occupations.

After a few words from Mr SCULLY, the motion was

withdrawn.
Mr WHALLEY directed attention to the instructions
issued by the Police Commissioner as to the suppression of
public meetings in the parks, and the power assumed by
subordinate officers of the police force, pursuant to those
instructions, in suppressing a recent meeting at Primrose-
hill, and in doing so indulged in some severe strictures on
the administration of the police and the arbitrary measures
resorted to by Sir Richard Mayne.
Sir G. WIRY said that the parks were the proper'y of
the Crown, and were dedicated to the public use, subject to
certain conditions and restrictions, which were essential to
the object tor which they were handed over to the public.
With regard to the Garibaldian meeting lately suppressed
at Primrose-hill, ho regretted that the police had exceeded
, their duty on the occasion, and the inspector who interfered
had since been reprimanded.
The house then went into committee of supply proforma.
The Public and Refreshment Houses (Metropolis) Bill
was read a second time.

The Union Assessment Committee Act Amendment Bill,
the Army (Prize of Deceased) Bill, and the Chain Cables
and Anchors Bill were read a third time and passed.
Leave was givon to bring in several bills, and the other
business on the piper having been disposed of, the house
adjourned at 10 minutes to 1 o'clock.