The Sun.
London, England, 1864-05-27 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF LORDS—Last Evening,

- _
The LORD CH. LNCELLOB. to ,k his seat on the woolsack
It five o'clock.
THE DANO-GERMAN WAR.

The Earl of ELLEN BOROUH begged to put the ques-
tion to the noble earl the Secretary for Foreign Affairs of
which he had given notice. As the Conference would
meet again on the 28th he should like to know
how far the engagements entered into ea the 9th by the
Prussians in Jutland had been fulfilled. If they had not
been observed to the letter he must say they could have but
little faith in those that might be made fotsthe future. The
Prussians and Austrians had agreed that they would not
interfere with the commerce, that they would not interfere
with the intercourse with the country they occupied,
that they would not levy any fresh war ccntri-
butione, and that they would pay for everything
they required. If he had not been greatly misinformed
hardly one of the engagements had been fully carried out.
The commerce had been interfered with, the telegraphs
removed, and the rations for the army demanded, but not
delivered on the 12th were ordered to be sent in imme-
diately on pain of the defaulters being put upon bread and
water. In some cases payment had been made
for articles supplied, but not in money, instead
of which receipts were given which were of
no marketable value. There appeared to be an impression
amongst the German Powers that, do what we might, we
should not lift our arm to stop their wrongdoing. The noble
earl then proceeded to make some strong comments upon
the foreign policy of the Government, and concluded by
asking his question.
Earl RUSSELL said when the noble earl gave his
notice to put the question relative to the position of
affairs in Jutland, he did not tell him that he intended
to make an attack on the policy of the Government, and
also that he intended to touch upon the question of Poland.
He could not but think that it would have been but
fair that he should have intimated his intention
of taking the course he had done. The question he had
told hint he should put was regarding the manner in
which the armistice had been observed by the Prussians
in Jutland. The Danish Government had intimated its
intention of collecting the whole of the facts connected
with the matter, and as soon as that had been accomplished
it would make a statement on the subject. That he
considered to be the best course, and it would be bettter
to wait for that statement rather than to rely upon
statements from private parties appearing in the newspa-
pers. The King of Prussia had sent to Marshal Wrangel
the terms of the armistice, and he had also directed
him to pay for all supplies that might be
required after the 12th. That was the statement
received from our ambassador at Berlin, and although
the commands of the King might have been in
the hands of Marshal Wrangel, it was most likely
that many of the officers in command in the more distant
parts had not received the same command. He believed it
was true that payments had been made for rations in receipt
..,Atace of money, but the better course would be to wait
"'MEI the statement he had before al:nded to was forth-
coming. The noble earl then defended the foreign policy
of the Government, and said whilst we were bound
to defend our honour whenever and wherever it might be
attacked, their lordships must remember that this country
was not alone responsible for the maintenance of the
balance of power in Europe. The noble earl had referred
to a topic which he might well have spared. He had re-
ferred to the advice which her Majesty's Ministers had given
to her Majesty. All that he (Earl Russell) could say on
that subject, and he said it with truth, was, however much
her Majesty might have her private affections, connected as
she had been by marriage with a German Prince, and by
the marriage of her daughter with another German Prince,
still that her Majesty's great object had been to maintain
intact the honour, reputation, and interests of the country.
And however much her Majesty might desire that every
step, whether on the subject of Germany and Denmark, or
on any other, should be carefully weighed by her advisers,
there was no question on which, when her advisers had de-
liberated and given advice, that advice had not been followed
by her Majesty. If the interests of the country had been
deserted—if any stain had been inflicted on its honour—if
we had not tulfi3ed our duty to Europe—it was upon the
heads of her Majesty's Ministers, and them alone, that cen-
sure should fall. Be that censure as heavy as it might,
they must bear it. They could not transfer any portion of
it to the Sovereign, nor did he desire to do co. For his own
part he was willing to take his share in the responsibility of
the policy which had been pursued by her Majesty's lie •
vernment. (Hear, hear.)
Lord BROUGHAM. commented strongly upon the con-
duct of the Germans in Jutland.
Earl GREY reviewed the conduct of the Government in
regard to Poland, and censured Earl Russell for having
addressed to Russia scolding despatches like an impotent
old woman. (Laughter and cheers.)
The subject then dropped.
SCOTTISH EPISCOPAL CLERGY DISABILITIES
REMOVAL BILL.
The bill was read a second time.
Other bills were advanced a stage, and their lordships
then adjourned.

HOUSE OP COMMONS—Last Evening,
The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock.
E IV MEMBER.
Mr. J. J. POWELL, the newly appointed recorder for
Wolverhampton, took the oaths and his scat on hi 9 re-
election for Gloucester.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were read a third time and passed:—
Aylesbury and Buckingham Railway—Bria,ol Port and
Channel Docks--Henley•in-Arden Railway— London,
Chatham, and Dover Railway (`o. 3) (Steamboats)—Lon-
donderry and Lough Swilly Railway ; and Pstersfi• ld and

Bishops Waltham Railway.
SPICES FROM AFRICA.
Sir J. HAY gave notice that, on the arrival of the next
mail from Africa, he would put certain questions relative

to this subject.
CONSULS AND VICE•CONSULS.
Sir IL STRACEY gave notice that he would move for
returns relative to the numbers, salaries, &c., of British

consuls and vice-consuls at foreign ports.
TROOPS IN CANADA..
Sir F. SMITE asked the Under Secretary of State for

War, whether there was any truth in the report that it was
intended to diminish the strength of her Majesty's Forces
now serving in Canada, by withdrawing two battalions of

Guards now serving there ?
The Marquis of HARTINGTON said it was intended to
withdraw three battalions from Canada, including two bat-
talions of the Guards, in consequence of the expense incurred
in providing for the accoramodation of the troops.
IMPRISONMENT OF THE BRITISH ENVOY AT

BIiOO'TAN.

Mr W, EGERTON asked the Secretary of State for
India whether any information had been received of the
imprisonment of the British envoy to Bhootan ; slid, if so,
what steps had been taken to procare the release of Mr
Ei3n ?

Sir C. WOOD said he had received only a private letter
on this subject.

THE lONIAN* ISLANDS.

Mr. SMOLLETT asked the Secretary of State for the
Colonies when the British protectorate of the lonian Re-
public would absolutely cease ; and, whether or not the pte-
sent Lord fligh Commissioner, Sir Henry Storks,
had published an act, dated the 22d April, 1861,
introducing into the Seven Islands a purely demo-
cratic Constitution lased upon universal suffrage, the
right of voting being conferred upon every inhabitant above
the age of 21 years, persons under examination for felony
and others previously convicted being alone excepted ; if so,
whether the action of Sir H. Storks in this matter had been
sanctioned by the Colonial-dace, and whether the arrange-
ment made was considered by her Majos;y's Government
to be calcUlated to consolidate the Greek kingdom,
likely to promote the political security of the Kingand was
of the
Hellenes.
Mr. CARD WELL said that the 2d of next month was
the day appointed for the transfer of the authority of the
Queen over the lonian Islands to the King of the Hellenes.
Sir H. Storks made no such proclamation as
been preparing that alluded
to, and he believed the report that he had
some lists for the use of the governing power of the islands.
DESPATCHES FROM THE AMERICAN MINIS-
TER AT PEKIN, Sco.
Mr. J. ;B. SMITH asked the Under Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs, whether the co m rauni cations made by the
American Minister, Mr. Burlingham, at Pekin, in a de.
spatch to Mr. Seward, the Secretary of State at Washing.
ton, and dated the 20th June, 1863, respecting the
joint policy to be pursued in China by the Ministers
of England, Russia, France, and America, is substan-
tially in accord with a despatch addressed to Earl Russell,
and a copy of which Sir Frederick Bruce gave to the
American Minister : and whether a reply has been given
to Sir Frederick Bruce's despatch, and in what sense.
Mr LAYARD said that considerable misapprehenion
prevtiled on the subject in reference to what were called
" suppressed despatches?, He was not aware which was
the despatch alluded to by Mr Burlingham. A despatch
had been received at the Foreign-office from Sir F. Smith,
in the principle of which the Government concurred. It
would not be desirable to lay the whole document on the
table, as it referred to the policy of other countries, and did
not relate to the present subject, but he would have no ob-
jections to supply extracts, if required.
THE DESPATCH OF M. BISMARK.
In reply to Mr. B. COCHRANE,
Mr. LAYARD said with respect to the despatch from M.
Bismark of the 15th inst., he would be prepared to make a
statement to-morrow, but at present he was not in a posi-
tion to do so.
UNION ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE ACT
AMENDMENT BILL. _ _

Mr HENLEiex;:mseda hope that this important
bill, which stood low on the orders for to-night, would not
le. brought on at a late hour.
Sir G. GREY said in the absence of hi:, hon. friend who
had charge of the bill he might say that the measure would
not be brought torward at an inconvenient hour.
An HON E3fBER—N of 1 .'Ol (A I. h•)

' V

EV77,W TN TTYDP, PARK

THE V ), U
Sr M. W. RIDLEY ma

rue inqu

course that would be pursued in regard to enabling the public
to witness the review of the volunteers in Hyde-park next

Baturday.
Mr COWPER said that Government was anxious to
afford every facility to the public to witness the spectacle,
and tickets would be sent to members of the house and
other gentlemen, but no person would be admitted without
such ticket.
THE ALLEGED LETTERS OF MR. JEFFERSON

DAVIS AND LORD J. RUSSELL.
Mr. J. HANKEY drew attention to the two documents
which had appeared in two of the daily papers, and asked
for some information relative to the same.
Mr. LAYARD said he believed these letters were a hoax,
and not a very ingenious one. (A laugh.)

POLAND.
On the motion for going into committee of supply,
Mr. HENNESSY moved the following resolutions :
—l. That the negotiations of her Majesty's Government
respecting Poland have not terminated in a satisfactory
manner. 2. That it appears from the papers laid before
Parliament that the conditions on which the British
Government agreed to acknowledge the dominion of
Russia in Poland have not been fulfilled by Russia. 3.
That this house is of opinion that her Majesty's Government
is no longer bound to recognise the sovereignty of Russia
in Poland. The hon. and learned member commenced by
alluding to the opinion that prevailed in quarters entitled to
great respect as to the connection that subsisted between the
present affairs of Poland and Denmark, and he repeated the
charge made against the Government, namely, that the
present unfortunate condition of Poland was attributable to
the policy they had pursued. He then reviewed the early
condition of Poland, the high literary and social position
she occupied centuries back amongst the principal powers
of Europe, and dwelt on the religious freedom that pre-
vailed in that country from an early period. He went in de-
tail into the different despatches which had emanated frotu
the Foreign-office, when disturbances broke out in Poland;
he contended that the necessary information as to the de-
spatches between this country and other foreign states re-
lative to the affairs of Poland had not been supplied to the
house. He had seen in the papers an account of ladies
having been thrown into prison for no other offence than
that they had assisted the sick and wounded Poles. The
noble viscount was to blame for a good deal of what had
happened in Poland. Poland had a chance since 1831, when
the noble lord was in office, and he had not done so much
for Poland as he ought, and as he could. It had often
struck him (Mr. Hennessy) that that was owing to the dis-
regard which the noble lord had sometimes shown for public
laws. In his maiden speech, delivered in that house on the
3d of February, 1808, the noble lord laid down a principle
of policy which he has followed more or less throughout his
whole career. He said, " There are times when the law of
nations must be ,breketn" Now, he (Mr. Hennessy) main-
tained that the law of nations must be upheld. After re-
ferring to the declaration made by Earl Russell at Blair-
gowrie, to the effect that Russia had forfeited her dominion
over Poland. eight days before that declaration was made
the noble earl had consulted the French Government on the
subject, and they were of opinion that it ought to be made.
Subsequently Earl Russell embodied that declaration in a
despatch, dated 20th October, 1863, which was forwarded
to St. Petersburg. When, however, Lord Napier privately
communicated its contents to Prince Gortschakoff, that
Minister observed that it was a very grave matter, for her
Majesty's Government to declare that Russia had forfeited
her sovereignty in Poland. Then Count Bismark, who re-
ceived early information of the nature of the despatch, wrote
to the British Government and threatened to make it a
casus belli if the despatch were delivered to Prince Gortcha-
koff. The French Government, however, pursued a very
different course. M. Drouyn de Lhuys wrote a store de.
spatch to French Minister at St. Petersburg, s'Ating that
the French Government were entirely in feccord with the
declaration contained in Earl Russell's e.espatch. What was
done by Earl Russell ? After two deys delay that despatch,
which bore his signature, marl had the approval of his
Sovereign and the sanction of the Cabinet, was recalled.
(Opposition cheers.) rim last sentence, and the only one
of any importance, veas then struck out, and the despatch
was communicated to the Russian Government. The value
of the declaraeion made at Blairgowrie could hardly be
overrated, .And he thought the house might at least ask, as
it had been publicly made to the Queen's subjects by our
Foreign Minister, that that declaration might be communi-
cated to Russia by her Majesty's Government, The revo-
lutionary and Conservative parties on the continent, and
the Emperor of the French, entertained the same feelings
with regard to Poland ; and in Poland itself every man of
intelligence, of education, or of property—every man who
was moved by moral du' y and religious zeal every man who
deserved to be a citizen—was in favour of the independence
of leis country. The sympathy evinced in this country on
behalf of the struggling Poles was shown in a most touch-.
ing and affecting manner the other day at a fete for the sick
and wounded Poles. In conclusion, he hoped the Govern-
ment would remember the opinions expressed by the wisest
of politicians and the most powerful rulers of men. Edmund
Burke, Talleyrand, and Lord Castlereagh had all declared
the independence of Poland to be inevitable, and Napoleon I
recorded that the independence of Poland was ',saential to
Europe, and was a certainty in the future, Prince Louis
\
Napoleon some years ago declared that Poland was the
sister of France, and the Emperor Napoleon 111, had re-
published that sentiment in his exile, and not many months
since, speaking from his throne, had reiterated the rights of
Poland. Those rights were -written in the public law and
in its practical effect where supported by an enlightened and
universal popular will, so long he should never despair of
Poland. (Loud cheers.)
Lord PA L M.E.:cf,STON said—Although there is much in
the speech of .no hon. gentleman with which I entirely and
cot dially tegree, I cannot concur in the conclusion at
which he. has arrived, and I certainly shall vote for going
into committee of supply instead of agreeing with his
amendment. I shall net follow the hon. member through
the historical details of the earlier period of the Polish na-
tion. I agree entirely with him in the condemnation which
he has pronounced of tnat great European crime, the parti-
tion of Poland. I entirely concur with him—it is needless
to say so—in the censure and condemnation which he has
passed on the conduct ot Russia throughout the whole of
her relations in connection with Poland. (Hear.) I might
indeed remark of that part of the speech of the hon. gentle-
man, but reversing the sentiment, Quis vituperaverit Her-
culem ?—who has palliated, justified, or excused the con-
duct of Russia towards Poland ? But that is not the ques-
tion which the house is this evening called upon to decide.
The hon, member condemned the conduct of her Majesty's
Government in respect of its recent transactions with regard
to Poland. I do not revert to those former periods, be-
cause they really have nothing to du with the issue at pre-
sent before us. But though the hon. member in his reso-
lution says the efforts which her Majesty's Government
have made in favour of Poland have not been successful,
yet I am at a loss to understand from him what we have
not done, and what we ought to have done. He says it is
our fault that we have not been more successful with respect
to Poland. Bat I appeal to the memory of the hon. member
himself to say whether, in the whole course of last year,
when he was enjoining upon us to exert the influemee of
Geeat Britain in favour of Poland—whether he did not re-
peatedly say that he did not ask for war—tttat he did not
ask for the display of arms—but that he -wanted diplomatic
assistance; and especially he said it was his wish that the
influence ot England should be 'exerted to obtain from all
the principal Powers of Europe a concurrence of opinion as
to the violation of her engagements under the treaty of 1815,
Well, we did all the hon. gentleman asked us to do. We
did go to the utmost extent in length of diplomatic men
tion. We did succeed in getting most of the leading Powers
to concur with us in representing at St. Petersburg the
manner in which Russia had failed to perform her engage-
ments under the treaty of 1815, and we exhorted her to
perform those engagements, and to deal differently with the
Polish nation. What was the next step, then, that we had
to take ? Why, there were only two things to lie done.
Either to cease representations, which, however respectable
and powerful the quarter from which they came, had not
been attended with success; or to do that which the right
hon. member for Bucks upon a former occasion described as
an act of insanity—to go to war with Russia. Well, sir,
we were not insane ; we did not at any moment of time
contemplate going to war for the sake of Poland. (Hear,
hear.) My noble friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs
has stated that more than once in his place in Parliament.
There are many reasons why it would have been an act of
madness to have done so, The hon,
gentleman says that
upon one occasion we declined the CA-operation of Austria
and France in favour of Poland. "Why, sir, he afterwards
mentioned with condemnation the conduct which Au, tria is
now pursuing with respect to the Poles in Gallicia ; and is
' it likely that Austria, having Gallicia, and Prussia, having
Posen, both of which are fragments of the Polish nation,
would have concurred in an attack upon Russia to compel
her to perform her engagements under the treaty of 1815 ?
Why, air, it would have been impossible. Well, then,
as to France. For many years the French Legislature
passed annually resolutions somewhat similar to that
which the hon. member now proposes to the House of
Commons. But at last the French Legislature felt that
they were placing themselves in an undignified position
by passing resolutions which were not followed up by
practical acts on the part of the executive Government,
and they abstained from doing so. (Hear, hear.) If the
hon. gentleman asks me whether, in my opinion, Russia
has not forfeited that right to Poland which she obtained
under ther es 'pr g
"Treaty
n• ot Vienna, because she has not fulfilled
thecor
responding engagements of that treaty, I should
rorn
be very much disposed to agree with him. (Cheers.) But
1 say it would be undignified in this house formally to pro-
nounce that opinion unless it was prepared to follow it up
by an address to the Crown, to give effect to the declaration
of forfeiture, If we were prepared to go to war to-morrow,
and follow up that sentence of forfeiture by execution—if
we were prepared, either singly or in conjunction with any
other power, to go to Poland, and say to Russia, Not only
have you forfeited your rights, but we mean to rescue Poland
from you—in that case I could understand the propriety of
coming to such a decision as this, But to pronounce such
a decision, without being prepared to act up to it, would be
not only placing as in an undignified, but oven in a
ridiculous position, (Hear, hear) Bat has this country a
right snap), .o deal with the question? Dees Russia posse"
13 . ' " ' Pl' ' '-tn. f t,,ity h,•twto n ner and Ens
'3 N'' ':,, t, by wnico
: ~.- j `.`," a, ~w ~, o• k,,v,•;.4 to Itti..ia, .‘$ o•

signed not only by England, but by France, Spain,
Portugal, and Sweden. England by herself, therefore, has
no right to dispute the treaty; and a declaration of Eng-
land alone would not be valid as putting an end to the rights
of Russia. Bat the hon. member says the Poles are most
anxious that this house should pronounce such an opinion.
I can only say that if that is the case the Poles are very
shortsighted. What happened after the insurrection cf
'3l-'32 P That insurrection was suppressed by the arms of
Russia—it was suppressed with the passive co-operation
of Prussia. We remonstrated with the Russian Govern-
ment for abolishing the constitution which the Emperor
Alexander had granted. What was the Emperor's reply ?
He said, You have no right now to appeal to the Treaty
of Vienna; I don't hold Poland by virtue of the treaty of
Vienna—l hold Poland by the sword. It revolted, but
I have subdued it, and, therefore, it is mine by the
right of conquest, and you have no more right to talk to
me about my treatment of Poland than of any other por-
tion of my empire. Well, we gained a considerable step
in our recent negotiations with Russia; because, in defer.
ence to the collective opinion of Europe, the Russian Go-
vernment admitted that they do hold Poland by virtue of
the Treaty of Vienna, and that they are bound by the stipu-
lations of that treaty. They said, however, they could not
fulfil those obligations as long as the insurrection was going
on, but that when order and tranquillity were restored they
would do what they were bound to do. Now, surely that
is a much better condition for the Poles to be in than if we
were now to unsay that which we have hitherto said, and
to throw them back upon the declaration of 1832. I say,
in the well-understood interest of the Poles, such a declara-
tion as that would be as injurious as anything this house
could do with respect to the Polish question. I therefore
hope the house, notwithstanding the eloquent statement of
the hon. gentleman—notwithstanding his statement regard-
ing the wrongs which Poland has had to endure at all times
—the cruelties practised upon her, and especially of late, by
agents of the Russian Government—will not be led away
by its feelings to act in a manner which reason forbids them
to act in, and will not take away from the Poles the only
remaining diplomatic protection which the Treaty of Vienna
gives them, and deprive them of that shelter, trifling as it
may be. The hon. member has stated very truly that the
Poles have manifested a decree of national feeling, and an
attachment to their native country, a power of endurance,
and a courage and an enterprise, almost unexampled in his-
tory. Bat the more you admire the Poles, the less you
ought to concur in these resolutions. The more you think
the Poles deserve the sympathy of Europe, the less you
ought to deprive them of that diplomatic and political protec-
tion which the Treaty oc Vienna still affords them,and which,
at some future period, we are entitled to expect the Russian
Government will acknowledge. The hon.member alluded to
two instances in corroboration of his proposal. One was the
dcalaration made towardsltussia that we did not ackonwledge
her sovereignty in Circassia ; the other thatwe did not acknow-
ledge the sovereignty of Turkey in Greece. I do not think,
with regard to these instances, that the one is encouraging,
or the other applicable. What is the state of Circassia now ?
Has that declaration saved Circassia from conquest by
Russia? Do we not know that hundreds of thousands of
its inhabitants have been expelled from their Country, and
are seeking a refuge from Turkey, exposed to every possible
misery ? Do we not know that the actual dominion of
Russia in Circassia has been establisheci by the success of
Russian arms? Well, is the P
in Poland ? Ido not thio'- otme consequence to follow
that example is at all encourag-
ing. With regard '.,43 the other instance—that of Greece—
if Poland w-. 5 as accessible to England and France as
Greece 'was to England and Russia, why, then the argu-
7-ent of the hon. member would be of force, and a declara-
tion of forfeiture might be easily followed by execution.
But the position of Poland is utterly different from that of
Greece, and therefore that example has no bearing upon the
conclusion to which the hon. member invites us. There-
fore I entreat the house, in regard to its own dignity and
character, and in the well-understood interest of the Poles,
of whose cause the hon. member has b. en so able and so
consistent an advocate, to pass to the motion for committee
of supply, and not to agree to the amendment.
Mr. G. DUFF, who was impatiently listened to, depre-
cated the acceptance of such a motion, for the sake of the
Poles themselves.
Sir F. GOLD SMID said the argument of the noble lord
at the head of the Government had been a thousand times
refuted by the cruelties practised upon the Poles by the
Russian Government.
Mr. SCULLY had learned privately that there was to be
no division on this important motion, but as no one was
more ready than the noble lord at the head of the Govern-
ment to admit that the negotiations of her Majesty's
Government on behalf of Poland had not been satisfactory,
he should vote for the motion.
Mr S. FITZGERALD said the speech of the noble lord
(Lord Palmerston) had been in some respects satisfactory,
but in other respects it deserved the notice of the house
His hon friend (M r Hennessy) had made certain statements
and referred to certain documents, as to which the noble
lord, addle acing .bat house, had preserved the most studied
silence. (Hear, hear.) Ore of the statements made by his
hon friend was that a question was put to the noble lord in
1861 as to whether any correspondence had passed between
the French and Austrian Governments and her Majesty'
Government with reference to the kingdom of Poland, and
that the noble lord in his place distinctly stated in the face
of the Commons of England that there was no such corre-
spendence. Now his hon friend the member for King's
County had referred to despatches when they passed.
Lord PALMERSTON—French despatches,
Mr FITZGERAL f t—French despatches s
Lord PALMERSTON—Addressed to the French Am-
bassador, not to us.
Mr FITZGERALD took exception to some of the state-
ments of Lord Palmerston, and denied that the Government
had done all that could have been done, insisting that they
had paralysed the action of France and Austria.
Atter tome explanatory remarks by Mr LAYARD, the
resolutions were negatived.
Mr AUGUSTUS SMITH moved that the Miscellaneous
Civil Service Estimates, Class 2, be referred to a select com-
mittee to examine the same in reference to the past expen-
diture for the civil services, and to report to the house any
reductions, better arrangement, or other particulars which
in their opinion deserve the attention of the house when the
said estimates are under their consideration.
The moti.ne was seconded by Sir J. SHELLEY, but the
SPEAKER ruled that, after the result of the last motion,
this question should not be put.
Atter a tew remarks and explanations by Mr F. Peel in
reply to Mr Smith, and an objection urged by Mr W. Wil-
liams to voting money an account.
Mr FERRIND put a question regarding superannuations
in the dockyards, which was answered by Lord C. PAGET.
The house then went into a committee of supply, when
Lord C. PAGET entered into a very long and detailed
explanation of the several heads of the Supplementary Navy
Estimate, embracing the proposals of the Government for
increasing the active pay, and a scheme of improving the
retired alowancea of various grades of officers of the Royal
Navy, in consequence of the report and recommendations
of the Select Committee of last year. He ended by moving
the first vote of £55,266.
After a protracted discussion, this and the other votes
were agreed to and ordered to be reported.
The report on the Bank Acts was brought up and agreed
to, and a bill was ordered to be brought in.
On the report of the Union Assessment Committee Act
Amendment Bill, certain new clauses were added,
The Highways Act Amendment Bill was read a second
time, after a short discussion, and ordered to be referred to
a Select Committee.
The Vacating of Seats (House of Commons) and
the Army Prize (Shares of Deceased) Bill passed the Com-
mittee.
Other bills were forwarded, and the motions on the paper
having been disposed of, the house adjourned at 25 minutes
past 1 o'clock.