The Sun.
London, England, 1864-04-09 00:00:00

THE CONFERENCE.

Sir H. VERNEY asked the First Lord of the Treasury,
whether, at the Coaference about to assemble on the affairs
of Germany and Denmark, the interests of the inhabitants
of the Duchies of Holstein and Schleswig. will be repre-
sented and protected.
Lord PALMERSTON said that the interests of the
Duchies in question would be fully represented at the
coming Conference. In the first place there would be pre-
sent the representatives of their lawful sovereign,
in the next place there would be the representatives of
the two German Powers which took up arms to protect,
as it was understood the interest of the Duchies, and then
there would be the representatives of the German Diet,
who, as might be supposed, wonid also take care of the in-
terests.of the Duchies.
SUB-INSPECTORS OF FACTORIES.

Colonel EDWARDS asked the Secretary of State for the
Home Department whether sub-inspectors of factories must
be at least 25 years of age before being appointed : whether
it was true that the new scale of salary did not give them
any annual increase of pay, but requires thirty years of
service before the scale of £5OO a year is reached, and limits
the recipients of £5OO a year to two sub-inspectors out of
20. And whether it is true that the allowance for personal
expenses when absent from home is only 12s. a night for a
sub-inspector of factories, while the same allowance in other
departments is 155., and in some instances £1 per day; and,
if so, why this allowance to sub-inspectors of factories had
21ot been raised to the average standard.
Sir G. GREY answered in the affirmative, and repeated
the statement he had already made on the subject.
THE GERMAN CONFERENCE.

Mr. HORSMAN gave notice that he would put a ques-
tion to the First Lord of the Treasury to the effect that
whether the result of the Conference having entered into
any engagement which might be binding on this country,
the terms of such engagement should not be submitted to
Parliament for sanction before its adoption.
ST. MARY'S SYDENHAM, BURIAL GROUND.
Mr. NE WDEGAEE, on the motion for going into com-
mittee of supply, moved for a select committee to inquire
into the allegations contained in the petition of Mr. Alfred
S (nee (presented 19th February), relative to the Saint
Mary's, Sydenbam, burial ground, and turther into the
existence, increase, and nature of the Conventual and
Monastic communities, societies, or institutions in England,
Wales, and Scotland. The hon. member entered into a
rather prosy detail of the circumstances connected with this
subject.
Sir G. GREY said it appeared to him that the petition of
Mr. Smee upon which the motion of the hon. member was
founded did not of itself afford a sufficient reason for the
appointment of a committee, and he must express the same
opinion with respect to the correspondence between Mr.
Smee and the Home Office. At the same time he could
sympathise with the feelings of Mr. Smee, when he saw
one with whom he had been brought up on terms of great
intimacy, and which was subsequently cemented by the ties
of marriage, induced to change the religion in which he had
been born, and adopt a creed from which he (Mr. Smee)
consciously dissented. It was, indeed, a matter of sincere
regret to him that the youth of this country should bo so
imperfectly acquainted with the doctrines of their own
Church, that immediately on their passing into the world
they should be exposed to the influence of those gentlemen,
who no doubt were persons of learning, of great powers of
persuasion, and of very attractive manners. Still the hon,
member would hardly recommend the House of Commons
to entertain the idea that any other measures could be taken
for the counteracting of those influences, except as far as
they were able by grounding our young men in the doc-
trines of the Church of England. Having said so much, he
Wight now observe that Mr. Smee seemed to have taken a
I'l'l°a erroneous view of the powers vested in the Secretary
of State. The Acts for the regulation of the burial of the
dead within the metropolis are founded solely upon the
principle of affording protection to:the public health.
The discretion lodged in the Government with respect to
the closing or opening of burial grounds was never in-
tended to be arbitrarily exercised; nor was their ap-
proval to be granted or withheld according to the religious
opinions of the applicants. Mr. Smee, however, thought
otherwise ; and he was also under the impression that in
the present case some undue secret influence was brought to
bear upon the Home Office. He hoped the publication of the
correspondence would remove that impression, while he
must express his regret that Mr. Sales had thought
proper to introduce the name of the late Duke of Norfolk
into the proceedings. Dr. Faber, being at the time the prin-
cipal of the Roman Catholic College at Brompton, made
application to the Home • office to establish a burial-ground
for the use of the college. On receipt of the application the
matter was referred in the usual manner to the inspector,
and, as he took some time before reporting upon the appli-
cation, the late Duke of Norfolk wrote to the Home-office
calling attention to it. That letter, together with Dr.
Faber's original communication, having been forwarded to
the inspector, he reported that, as far as sanitary considera-
tions were concerned, there was not the slightest likelihood
of danger resulting from the establishment of an exclusive
burial-ground for this religious community. That being the
case, upon sanitary grounds, and sanitary grounds alone,
the Home-office granted the application. Last year, upon
31r, Smee'& making a complaint as to certain irregularities
in the management of the burial-ground, the inspector again
reported ; but the report was to the effect that during the
seven years .for which the burial ground had existed only
three interm ants had taken place there, and consequently
that no possible injury could have befallen the inhabitants
thro agh its t otistence. So far, therefore, there was no reason
for t he appoi.atment of a committee. With respect to the in-

scriptions upon the tombstones, that was a matter with re-
spect to which the Government had no right to interfere. If
real names were not inscribed upon the grave o doubt
that might be productive of inconvenience in c,- where it
might be necesQary to establish a title to p erty. Bat
they all knew the inconvenience was m u reater wht n
no names at all were inscribedupon them, there was no
law in this country compelling the erection tombstones.
The hon. member had next referred to the undue influence
which had been brought to bear upon the gentleman al-
luded to by Mr. Smee to induce him to part with his pro-
perty. Well, it might or might not be true that such in-
fluence had been used. If it had been, there were numerous
precedents on record to prove that the law was powerful to
deal with oases of the kind ; and indeed he had been informed
that proceedings were now being taken with respect to this
very will, founded upon the allegations in the petition of
Mr. Smee.
Mr, NEWDEGATE said it had been found that the law
was ineffective to meet the case.
Sir G. GREY said that must be because there was no
undue influence exercised. (Hear, hear.) He must say
that no ground whatever had been made out for the ap-
pointment of the committee—that no good could come from
it ; on the contrary, that it might give rise to discussions
and disputes which had much better be avoided. (Hear,
hear.)
Lord C, HOWARD deprecated religious discussions in
that house, but if they were brought forward they ought to
be accompanied with the same gentlemanly feeling that
prevailed when other questions were brought under the
notice of the house, and which generally pervaded all ranks
of life to some extent. Even before prize fighters com-
menced their pugilistic encounter they shook hands with
some degree of formality. On this occasion a most violent
attack had been made upon the family with which he was
closely related. Yet no intimation was given to him that it
was about to be made. Assertions had been made which
were opposed to the truth, and calumnies had been thrown
out not only against the gentlemen who lived at the Ora-
tory, but by implication on himself, he being a member of
the family to which he had alluded. The attack had come
from theother side of the house, and what he had to say was
in defence; and he therefore hoped the house would permit
him, with as much discretion as he could use, to reply,
though he had no wish to express himself too strongly on the
slanders that had been uttered on the other aide of the house.
The hon. member for North Warwickshire identified him-
self with this petition, and one of the statements was that
the family of the Duke of Norfolk was in close communica-
tion with the members of the order, and assisted them in
their various schemes, and it went on to say that young
men of position and wealth were concealed from their friends
by members of the order. That was intact saying that the
family with which he had the honour of being connected
was engaged with others in conspiracy, in fraud, and in
concealment, He should not further mention this, because
he believed he had many friends—valued friends—amongst
all religious persuasions, and he was sure there was not one
person in the country, unless it was the hon. gentleman,
w,129 would give him or his friends or any one of them
credit fo'l' bearing a part in such disgraceful and unheard-
of proceedings. Then there came another clause in this
petition, in which ii was stated that the heir of the Duke of
Norfolk, and, he thought said, his brother, had been seen
assisting in ecclesiastical garment .! in the public perform-
ance of service there, The hon. member
for North War-
wickshire said he belonged to the University of 1/4?.;ford, he
(Lord E. Howard) belonged to the University of Ca.
bridge, and he was in the habit when he went to the chapel
of the university of being clad in a surplice, and he should
suppose the hon. gentleman had also worn a surplice on
those occasions, and was there anything disgraceful in
that ? And if he wore a surplice why might not other
people in a public church, like the Oratory at Brompton,
do so. He had seen his nephew assisting there, and he
had got a little boy grown up to that age when one's
feelings are bound up so much, to an age when he pro-
; trieed to be the hope of one's family or the prop to
one's declining years, Persons were good enough to
commend his appearance and disposition, and all that,
and he was proud to say that that little boy also assisted
his nephew in the garments on which the hon. gentleman
had made such observations. That little boy died within a
very short period of his assisting at this public service of
their Church,and he could tell the hon. gentleman, so far
from being ashamei of it, it was a great comfort to him that
he had been allowed at the solicitation of his mother, to
pay that small mead of respect to his Maker. He had
passed to a purer and a better world, where there was cer-
tainly no malignity like that to which his family had been
that night exposed ; and he did not believe that little boy
would have a less bright place there because he paid his
mead of respect to his Maker on earth. Nor did he believe
his mother, who was also gone, had a less bright place then e
because it was at her request that he paid that mead of
praise. He had had to sustain the grief of these two losses
within the short space of 20 months, coupled with the loss
of the father of the young duke, a moat excellent man and
the best of brothers. (Hear, hear.) That grief was to be
ripped open by the hon. gentleman, who had as it were
ripped off the lids of the coffins of those who were gone, to
be held up to public execration, because a person such as
Smee chose to allege impossibilities and untruths in a
petition for which the hon. gentleman became sponsor in
that house. Having said this much as personal to himself,
although he was not undertaking the defence of the Oratory,
it was fair that he :hould advert to something that had
dropped from the hon. me2lber for North Warwickshire,
He mentioned the case of a Mr.
Harrison. Now. Mr. Har-
rison was brought to the Oratory by :u elder brother, who
was an officer in the army. He becttfut no doubt, a
convrt under such circumstances, and he returt.:Ad to the
Westminster School the same night, and shortly ii{ter•
wards to his father. Ha was surprised that a gentleman
in the position of a county member should endeavour to
influence a case, by animadversion in that house, which
was before the ordinary tribunals of the country. Whatever
the will was he knew nothing of it; it was in its proper
place, and he had no doubt it would be properly disposed of
by the authorities in whose presence it now stood. As to
the register of deaths, a name on a tombstone was of no
value; but the proof of death was to be found in the register
kept by a proper officer. He now passed from the petition,
to which he need not further allude; but he invited the
attention of his hon. friend whilst he replied to the flagiti-
ous attack which had been made upon him. The hon.
gentleman (Mr. Newdegate) had some scruples of conscience
as to the letter addressed to the Duchess of Norfolk from
Finsbury-circus ; but his scruples only extended to the ad-
dress and not to the contents of the letter, he saying it
should have been addressed to two gentlemen whom he
called guardians, bat who held no such position.

Mr. NE WDEGATE—I said trustees.
Lord C, HOWARD—As to Mr. Hutchinson's money,
the amount of which had been exaggerated, he was a just
and a charitable man, and had a right to dispose of it as he
liked. No one would blame him for devoting his property
to charitable or religions purposes, to which people fre-
quently gave their money and their lives. Well, he must
deny that the duchess had had the smallest share in this
calumny, which had been so improperly brought before the
house, and which he must say in some measure the hon.
gantleroan identified himself. He must have known of
these letters being written.
Mr. NEWDEGATE—I knew not one single thing
about it.

Lord C. HOWARD continued. JIG hoped this would
be a caution to the hon. gentleman in future as to what
company he trusted himself in, and what use might be
sought to be made by others of one who was a member of
one of the largest interests in England. Really, a gentle-
man of his age—(laughter)—they heard of young men
going into the metropolis and being taken advantage of by
persons here and there. This did happen, but the house
would allow him to suggest, in the most friendly way, that
if the hon. gentleman had not been prudent hitherto, he
should in future have some little introduction, and see who
the persons were who sought to father their views upon him
and lead him into practices which he himself would depre-
cate. That paper accused the duchess of the prospective
murder of her daughter by immuring her in a certain con-
vant. That young lady was his niece, and he never saw a
person so anxious to enter into the order, knowing well its
scope and practices, as she was. There were many young
women who like her never cculd be happy in the tumult
and disturbance of the world. The hon. gentleman had
said that they should respect the feelings of others as Pro-
testants. Had the hon. gentleman respected their feelings
as Catholics when he stated that he disapproved of the letter
being addressed to the duchess, but not its contents. That
letter said her grace stood by the grave of his relative in a
sort of ecstacy ; that was not attributing the most praise-
worthy motives to her grace, who seemed to have gone to
the funeral to take part in the ceremony that was being per-
formed on the solemn occasion. And then as to the inorease
in the number of converts; the fact was that in 999 cases
out of 1000 these converts simply consisted of two or three
nuns, who were invited into the neighbourhood to teach a
school which some philanthropic gentleman had founded.
There were those—and probably the hon. gentleman
amongst the number—who accused the Catholics of keep-
ing their poor in ignorance ; and yet they threw every ob-
stacle in the way of their educating them. He apologised
to the house for the statement which he had made ; it had
been most painful to him. If the sorrows whichoppressed
one more than one could describe were to be raked up in this
way before the public one must come to the house and in
one's place defend himself from such attacks. Unfortu-
nately his family had been diminished very considerably of
late, but he was happy that he was spared to defend them
from the calumnies which he had hoped that no member of
this house would have lent himself to. His family could
' wish the hon. member (Mr. Newdegate) no harm; they
would wish; that he might see the error of his ways, and as
he became an older he might become a wiser and a juster
man. Thanking the house most cordially for the reception
they had given him, and convinced that the British public
would know where to bestow its sympathy and its judgment
—a judgment, although it might be misled at times, was in
the main sound and healthy—he left the case with the fullest
confidence in their hands. (Cheers.)
Mr. O'HAGAN said it was perfectly notorious that, in
every probate court in Ireland, as well as in England, cases
were continually occurring on the ground that spiritual in-
fluence had been exercised, and on that ground the verdict

Was sometimes set aside. The hon. and learned gentleman
proceeded to say that Mr. Hutchinson had a fortune of
£30,000, over which he had had entire control during his

life ; that he had so disposed of all but £4,000 or £5,001 in
works of charity ; that he was 40 or 41 at the time of his
death in the Oratory ; and that a* hia death he left this re-
si:ue of his pr party to Father Faber, belie. vier that that
reverend gentleman would use it for purposes after his own
heart. That bequest was now under the consideration of
the Probate Court of England, and it was a monstrous thing
that gentlemen of the highest character and devotion to
their religion should be thus assailed when the very question
upon which they were assailed was before a proper and com-
petent tribunal.
Sir G. BOWYER explained the circumstance of Mr.
Hutchinson's name on his tomb being different to his
baptismal name, by stating that he had changed his name
on being confirmed, which by the law of England he had
the power to do. He pointed out, too, that Mr Hutchinson's
will was not a death-bed will, but made three years before
his death.
Mr. R. LONG said that his hon. friend the member for
North Warwickshire had not the right to reply; but after
the speech of the noble lord opposite, in reply to an attack
upon monastic institutions, and not upon the Howard family,
it was necessary to say, on behalf of his hon. friend, that
nothing was further from his intention than for a single
moment to say anything which could be construed or
twisted, even by the ingenious power of a Roman Catholic
—(cries of oh, and order)—into an attack upon the Howard
family. (Hear, and oh.) His motion had been directed
against institutions, and not against persons, and if any-
thing painful had occurred, no one regretted it more than
the hon, member for North Warwickshire, The noble lord's
speech was a most ingenious perversion of his noble friead's
attack upon monastic institutions. If he (Mr Long) were
a Roman Catholic, he could not, after the statements which
were made with reference to the practices said to be carried
en in monastic and conventual institutions, oppose the
motion for inquiry. The house was entitled to have evidence
of the practices which were carried on in such establish-
ments. They had all received a printed paper which, if not
true, was a libel. It was entitled " Facts on Nuns and
Nunneries," and gave many instances of the maltreatment
of poor unfortunate females who were maltreated and
seduced:(laughter)—he did not mean practically seduced—
(renewed laughter)—into these places, which were prisons.
and not nunneries, where their property was confiscated,
and they were denied to their friends. If those statements
were falsehoods, let the Roman Catholics try the issue, and
disprove them it they could in committee. If the committee
was granted, his hon. friend, and those who acted with him,
would undertake to prove many such cases. _ _ _

Sir P. O'BRIEN expressed the contempt he felt for the
statements of the hon. gentleman who had just sat down,
recommending to him the study of the speeches of his poli-
tical leader, the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire
(Mr Disraeli), in one of which he would find it justly ob.
served that "insolence is not sarcasm, and violence is not
invective,"

Mr. NEWDEGATE rose to offer some explanation, but
was stopped by cries of " Order."
The house then divided, and the numbers were—
For Mr. Newdegate's motion
Against
Majority --33
SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTIONS OF DUBLIN.

Mr. GREGORY called attention, in a speech of much
length and great variety of detail, to the condition of the
scientific institutions of Dublin which are assisted by Go-
vernment aid.

Sir R. PEEL said the Government were prepared to
.eree to the appointment of a select committee to inquire
fully into the character of these institutions.
The discu;_qlon was nevertheless continued by Sir E.
Grogan, Mr. Whit.:4ide, Mr. Vance, Mr, Lefroy, and Mr.
Adderley.
THE NEW BANKRUPTCY ACT.

Mr. MOFFATT called attention to the working of the
new Bankruptcy Act, which he said was so imperfect and
inoperative that it; tended to increase the burdens of the
commercial classes in this country, whose pecuniary bur-
dens were severe, it being calculated that the annual amount
of insolvency was not less than £50,000,000. The number
of bankrupts had increased since the passing of the act in
1861, and the amount realised was comparatively small. As
the act stood it had better, in his opinion, be expunged from
the Statute• book, since it afforded little security to credi-
tors and ample opportunities for fraud.
Mr. MURRAY, approving the principle of the act, con-
curred with Mr. Moffatt in condetoning its operation, which
did not reach dishonest debtors as effectually as the old
law, while the expenses, instead of diminishing, had in-
creased.

The ATTORNEY•GENERAL observed that the act
had succeeded in some of the objects at which it was aimed,
and where it had failed in its working the mercantile com •
munity were sometimes mainly responsible. The Lord
Chancellor, the author of the act, was desirons that the
evils attributed to its working should be inquired inicl, and
the Government were prepared to assent to the appointment
of a select committee for that purpose.

Sir L. PALK called the attention of the Attorney-General
to a rule obtained for a commission to examine the Pasha of
Egypt and other witnesses at Cairo to obtain evidence
against the steam rams detained at Birkenhead, and asked
how long this investigation was likely to take, and the pro-
bable expense of it; whether the trial of the Birkenhead
ironclads would be postponed from May next until this in-
formation was obtained; and why this rule was not applied
for when the vessels wore first detained. He prefaced these
inquiries by remarks upon the proceedings of the Govern-
ment in connexion with the seizure of the rams, insisting
upon the bona fides of Messrs. Laird in the matter, and ac-
cusing the Government of a one-sided neutrality.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was precluded by the
forms of the house from saying more than simply answer-
ing the questions.