The Sun.
London, England, 1863-03-28 00:00:00

happened ; for it was notorious that Federal officers had

declared that they had received orders from Washington,
to capture particular vessels, and they must do so, when-
ever and wherever they could catch them ; and there could
be no doubt that Commodore Wilkes only acted in accord-
ance with instructions when he captured the Peterhoff. The
hon. member for Birmingham had spoken with considerable
asperity of certain captures in neutral waters, and this was
an additional fact against the United States Government,
that this capture took place in neutral waters, first by the
Alabama, and afterwards by Commodore Wilkes. No doubt
her Majesty's Government would say that, under the cir-
cumstances, she must be left to the decision of the prize
court. He, however, was not disposed to go into the prize
courts of the United States; and where those courts were
above all suspicion, and there was a certainty that the law
would be impartially and justly administered, it was but
little satisfaction to the owners. The hon. gentleman re-
ferred to the delays in the United States prize courts, and
observed that he confessed he had no faith in obtaining jus-
tice from them. He urged that, from the correspondence
that had been laid on the table, it was evident that they
were not in possession of all the information it was in the
power of her Majesty's Government to give them, and that
something which had been kept back had passed between
Earl Russell and Mr. Adams relative to these captui es, and
that a plan had been spoken of by them as emanating from
Mr. Seward, and communicated to Earl Russell, for the

guidance of Federal officers in the captures of British ships,
which the noble lord spoke of as satisfactory. He censured
the Government for withholding the information, and com-
plained that the house had not been treated fairly with re-
gard to the correspondence generally. All they had been
furnished with was the papers relating to the Alabama ; the
despatches between Mr. Mason and Earl Russell; and a
reprint of the information by the United States President to
Congress so far back as December last. There were matters o
great importance of which the house ought to be informed,
viz., the refusal of clearances from New York to Nassau,
and the convention between this country and America with
the view to an adjustment of the claims to neutral rights.
It was evident that something had passed between the two
Governments with regard to raising recruits in this country,

but no information had been given to them on it- It was
also evident that information relative to the ship Peterhoff
had been kept back, and it was curious that in the list of
suspected vessels communicated to Earl Russell, when the
satisfactory arrangement for their capture was communi-
cated to him, were the names of the Springbok, the Adela,
and the Peterhoff, all of whom had been captured ; and to
the last-named ship was attached a note stating that she
was loading for ➢Tatamoras. No doubt her Majesty's Go-

vernment were responsible for the seizure of this vessel. In
the course of last year representations were made to Earl
Russell, either by the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce or
or by a body of Liverpool merchants, that the Federal Go-

vernment had established what was in effect a blockade of
the port of Nassau. Well, Earl Russell replied that Nas-
sau had been made a depot for the reception of contraband
of war, and he, therefore, recommended the Liverpool mer-
chants, as their best defence against capture, that they
should not engage in trade with Nassau. Now that was a
letter conceived in the spirit of insult ; it had nothing to do
with the matter complained of, namely, that the legitimate
trade of these gentlemen had been interfered with. The
noble lord was perfectly aware what was the law on the
subject; nevertheless, he evaded the question. If, how-
ever, the noble lord, instead of lecturing those Liverpool
merchants, had declared to them that all such illegal acts
would be resisted, did any one suppose that the conduct
complained of would have been repeated ? He had no
doubt that they should hear that evening that the Govern-
ment regarded this as a most serious case, and thet they had
acted with respect to it with great energy . He aid not doubt
that they had; for the case was so gross and so grave, that
no Government could maintain itself in office which acted
otherwise ; but it would have been far better to have pre-
vented its occurrence by evincing in the outset the determi-
nation of the Government to uphold British merchants in
the exercise of their legitimate commerce. He hoped that
all the papers bearing upon the general question would be
produced as speedily as possible.
Mr. CRAWFORD was able to give some information
with respect to the cargo of the Peterhoff. The vessel was
advertised to sail in the usual way, with a general cargo,
for the port of Matamoras. She carried a mail, and her ar-
rangements for taking in a supply of coals at the West
Indies were such as to satisfy any one that her intention was
make as speedy a voyage as possible. Her owners had
placed in his hands the " ship's manifest," as well as other
documentary evidence on the subject, which made it quite
plain that the cargo was of a most miscellaneous character,
The Mexican law required that in the case of a cargo sent
to any of the ports of that country, the full particulars of
every package in the ship should be distinctly stated. Well,
he had had an opportunity of perusing the ship's manifest,
and therefore he could state that he was quite satisfied as to
the character of the cargo. But, moreover, he had the full
assurance of gentlemen connected with the ship, who had
waited upon him, that there was nothing whatever of a con-
traband character on board. He might add that there was
a reason which occurred to him to account for the ship
having been stopped, and that was, that the Americas Go-
vernment deeire..i tr. prevent all interference with the very
oatoneivo trade just now carried on between the port of New
York and Matamoras.
Mr. GRIFFITH asked whether her Majesty's Govern •
menthad received any information of the passage of Rus-
sian troops through Prussian territory in order to attack
the Polish insurgents, and whether it was true, as was
stated, that a British subject had been seriously injured
by the Russian troops while pursuing his lawful avoca-
tions in Poland. This person, whose name was Ludwig
Finkeston, and who was furnished with a passport signed
by Earl Russell on the 27th March, 1862, had been seized
while travelling in a carriage, had 25 to 26 bayonet
wounds inflicted on him, and had been robbed of 5,000 or
6,000 roubles (L 1,000), and then taken on to Cracow in a
very much injured state.
Mr. LAYARD rose to answer the question put by the
hon. member for Horsham, and to reply to two or three ob-
servations he had made which required contradiction. As
regarded the Peterhoff, the facts which he had mentioned,
and which had been submitted to the Government, were the
ex parte statements of the owners of the vessel. Of course
he did not mean to call in question the accuracy of those
facts; but he thought the house would agree with him
when he stated that her Majesty's Government could take
no immediate action on statements of such a nature. The
facts as stated by the owners had been submitted without a
moment's delay to the law officers of the Crown. When
their opinion was known, such representations would be
made to the Government of the United States as seemed
desirable. The hon. gentleman said that her Majesty's
Government had shown no energy in the matter. Now, as
this case had only been brought to their attention two days
since, he should like to know from the hon. member what
more could have been done than had already been done. The
hon. member talked about an arrangement made between

her Majesty's Government and the Government of the
United States regarding the proceedings of the American
cruisers in stopping English vessels. He had stated that
Earl Russell had admitted a list of suspected vessels, cone
ceding, as it were, the right of the United States to stop
those vessels. The hon. member was labouring under an
entire delusion as regarded this arrangement. He (Mr.
Layard) had never heard of any such arrangement what-
ever. The hon. member had quoted certain papers laid be-
fore the United States Legislature, which had been reprinted
by her Majesty's Government, in which allusion was made
to certain arrangements made by the United States as re-
garded their own cruisers. It was perfectly true that her
Majesty's Government had strongly objected to the pro-
ceedings of the cruisers of the United States, and, as, a
consequence of these objections and protests, the United
States Government had issued orders to their cruisers,
, which orders Earl Russell had considered more satisfactory
than they had been previously. With regard to the list of
suspected vessels that had come in an enclosure from Mr.
Adams, they did not commit her Majesty's Government,
who had nothing whatever to do with the matter. He dis-
tinctly denied that any such arrangement had been made by
her Majesty's Government and the Government of the
United States as the hon. member had alluded to. With
respect to the question put by the hon. member for Devizes
(Mr. Griffith), he must say it related to one of the most
disgraceful and cowardly outrages he had ever heard of.
It appeared that Mr. Finkeston find a lady wanted to cross
the frontier to go into Cracow, and got his passport pro-
perly vised. They fell in with some Russian troops convey-
ing Polish prisoners, who took them into custody. They
were kept all night, and the next day, on being sent on,
some insurgents came in sight. Some firing took place,
upon which the Russians immediately killed the whole of
the Polish prisoners at the cart wheel, bayonetted the lady,
and left Mr. Finkeston for dead on the ground. Whether
the lady was killed is not known ; but Mr. Finkeston, being
found by some of Langiewicz's party not dead, was sent on
to an hotel, There was some doubt about this gentleman
being an English subject ; but Lord Bloomfield had sent a
person to take down his statement, and make further in-
quiries, and, if it were correct, no doubt compensation would
be obtained. (Hear.)

do not understand that the house has reCOmmended any
other sort of action. (Hear, hear.) We. are also in cOri.T3-
pondenee with other Governments who ate parties to the
Treaty of Vienna, for the purpose of ascertaining whether
they will bo disposed to support the views which we have
offered. (Hear, hear.) It would be inexpedient for me to go
into detailed explanations of the particular communications
which have been made; but I hope that after Easter mat-
ters will be in such a state that we shall be able to lay on
the table papers showing what has passed. I trust that
whatever may have taken place up to that time will be
deemed satisfactory to the house. Now, sir, turning to the
much more important and practical question raised by my
hon. friend the member for Bradford, I cannot but express
my regret at the tone of his remarks, and still more at the
tone of the hon. member for Birmingham. There is no con-
cealing the fact, and there is no use in disguising it, that
whenever any political party, whether in or out of office in
the United States, finds itself in difficulties, it raises a cry
against England—(hear, hear)—as a means of creating
what in American language is called "political capital."
That is a practice, of course, which we must deplore.
(Hear, hear.) As long as it is confined to their internal
affairs we can only hope that, being a rather dangerous
game, it will not be carried further than is intended. When
a Government or a large party excite the passions of one
nation against another, especially if there is no just cause,
it is manifest that such a course has a great tendency to en-
danger friendly relations between the two countries. We
understand, however, the object of these proceedings in the
present instance, and therefore we do not feel that irritation
which might otherwise be excited. But if this cry is raised
for the purpose of driving her Majesty's Government to do
something which may be contrary to the laws of the country
or which may be derogatory to the dignity of the country in
the way of altering our laws for the purpose of pleasing
another Government, then all I can say is that such a
course is not likely to accomplish its purpose. (Hear, hear.)
I very much regret, therefore, that the speech of my hon.
friend the member for Bradford, and more particularly
that of the hon. member for Birmingham, are calculated
to encourage these complaints which I think are totally un-
founded on the part of the American Government. (Hear,
hear.) I should have hoped that gentlemen bringing this
question before the house would rather have tries to allay
the irritation, instead of making out, as they endeavour to
do, that the Americans have reason to blame England and
the English Government. (Hear, hear.) My hon. and
learned friend the Solicitor •General, in that admirable
speech which we all listened to with the greatest delight
(hear, hear), has demonstrated indisputably that the
Americans have no cause of complaint against us. He has
shown that the British Government have done, on the
report of the American Minister here, everything which the
laws of the country enabled them to do. I can easily under-
stand that in the United States, where the civil war has
produced so much agitation, and where the coarse of prat •
tice has been to set aside the law, men have been led to for-
get, in a great degree, the obligations of the law, and are
not disposed to give that weight which is due to our argu-
ment—that we cannot go beyond what the law prescribes
and authorizes. Yet I think that the house at least will
see that the statement of my hon. and learned friend proves
that we have, in enforcing the Foreign Enlistment act,
done all that the law enabled or permitted us to do (Hear,
hear.) Hon. members have argued as if the seizure of a
vessel were equivalent to its condemnation. They ask,
" Why did you not seize the Alabama when you were told
that it was knows and believed that it was intended for
warlike purposes on the part of the Confederates." Now,
in the first place, you cannot seize a vessel under the
Foreign Enlistment Act unless you have evidence wanting
in this case. The American Minister came to my noble
friend the Foreign Secretary and said, " I tell you this
and I tell you that ; I'm sure of this and I'm sure of that ;"
but when he was asked to produce evidence on oath, which
was the only thing on which we could ground any pro-
ceedings, he said that the information was furnished to
him confidentially, that he could not give testimony on
oath, but that we ought nevertheless to act on his
suspicions. What would happen if we were to act in that
way? When a vessel is seized unjustly and without good
grounds there is a process of law to come afterwards (hear,
hear)—and the Government may be condemned in heavy
costs and damages. Why are we to undertake an illegal
measure which may lead to those consequences, simply to
please the agent of a foreign Government (Hear, hear.)
I say if there was any fault it was on the part of those who
called on us to do a certain act, and yet withheld the ground-
work on which that act could alone be based. (Hear.) I
have myself great doubts whether if we had seized the Ala-
bama we should not have been liable to considerable de-
meges. It is generally known that she sailed from this
country unarmed and not properly fitted out for war, and
that ehe received her armament, equipment, and crew in a
foreign port. Therefore whatever suspicions we may have
had—and they were well founded, as it afterwards turned
out—as to the intended destination of the vessel, her condi-
tion at that time would not have justified a seizure. (Hear.)
I can assure the house that her Majesty's Government have
no indisposition to enforce the provisions of the Foreign
Enlistment Act. The hon. member for Birmingham re-
proaches us with exhibiting a cold and unfriendly neutrality.
I do not know what the meaning of those terms may be,
but they appear to me to be a contradiction In themselves.
(Hear.) If neutrality is more than friendly towards one
party, it is something very different towards the other—
(laughter, and hear)—and cease to be what, in common par-
lance, is meant by neutrality between contending parties.
But whether our neutrality is warm or cold, friendly or un-
friendly, ic is sincere and honest. (Hear,) I can assure
my hon. friends and the house that whenever it is in our
power to enforce the Enlistment Act legally and justly we
shall not be found wanting in the performance of our duty.
It is a great mistake to suppose that we can view with plea-
sure any transactions which have a tendency to violate not
only the letter but even the spirit of the Foreign Enlist-
ment Act. It would have been much more agreeable to us
if all the supplies that have been so well enumerated by the
hon. member for Birkenhead, and which have been furnished
in abundance to one party and very scantily to the other—
(hear)—had been withheld, and if the whole of the United
Kingdom had remained in a state of perfect neutrality. But
when we are blamed so heavily for not having acted on sus-
picions, is it fair to say that as far as suspicions go, we have
been informed, perhaps erroneously, that not only have
arms been despatched to the Northern part of the United
States, but that efforts have been made in Ireland to enlist
persons to serve in the Federal army and navy ? (Hear.)
Unquestionably a great many cases have occurred in North
America in which British subjects have been seized and
attempts made to compel them to serve against their will in
the civil war. Feeling as we must do the greatest desire
' that the most friendly relations should continue to be main-
tained between this country and the United States, regret-
ting exceedingly any circumstances of any kind which
should have caused irritation in the minds of the people of
the Northern Union, we can only say that it is impossi-
ble for us to go beyond the law. The law is in this case
of very difficult execution. (Hear, hear.) This is not
the first time when that has been discovered. When the
contest was raging in Spain between Don Carlos and
Queen Isabella it was my duty—the British Government
having taken part with the Queen—to prevent supplies
from being sent to Don Carlos from this country. There
were several cases of ships fitted out in the Thames, but,
though I knew they were intended to go in aid of Don Carlos,
it was impossible to obtain that information which would
have enabled the Government to interfere with success.
(Hear) I hope, therefore, that those gentlemen who have
made themselves in this house the mouthpiece of the North
will use the influence which they are entitled by the course
they have taken to exert to prove to their friends on the other
side of the Atlantic that the charges made against the British
Government are not founded in reason or in law. (Hear.) I
trust they will assure them that her Majesty's Government
will continue, as I maintain they have done hitherto, to en-
force the law whenever a case shall be brought before them
in which they can safely act upon good and sufficient
grounds. There must, however, be a deposition upon oath,
and that deposition must be made upon facts which will
stand examination before a court of law, for to call upon us
arbitrarily and capriciously to seize vessels with respect to
which no convincing evidence can afterwards be adduced is
to ask the Government to adopt a course which would cast
discredit upon them, and lead to much subsequent difficulty
and embarrassment. (Hear, hear.) I hope the people and
Government of the United States will believe we are doing
our best in every case to execute the law, but they must not
imagine that any cry which may be raised will induce us to
come down to this house with a proposal to alter the law.
(Hear, and a laugh.) I have had some experience of what
any attempt of that sort may be expected to lead to—
(laughter)—and I think there are several gentlemen sitting
on this beach who would not be disposed, if I were so in-
clined myself, to concur in any such proposition, (Cheers.)
Lord FERMOY thought the natural consequence of
what was taking place would be the complete independence
of Poland. (Cheers.)
Sir F. GOLDSMID believed that, under the existing
state of things, if there were not treaty obligations on this
country, there were moral obligations from which no first-
rate Power could recede without injury to its own position.
Mr. NE WDEGATE objected to the course taken by the
advocates of Poland, and he believed that the causes of the
misery of that country must be ascribed to its internal dis-
sensions. There was no middle class there, which was the
essential element of constitutional government—and more-
over there was the same disturbing cause which:prevented
England from producing content in Ireland.
Sir H. VER NEY said the hon. member was trying to
turn the insurrection in Poland into a religious war, but
the people of this country would net be led away by such
an argument. Those in England who defended the Poles
believed that they were acting right in their endeavours
to gain their freedom and independence. He hoped this
country would combine with France and Austria in order to
give to Poland one frontier upon which she could depend,
and that some good would result from the course about to
be pursued by her Majesty's Government.
Sir H. STRACEY, in referring to the observations of
the hon. member for North Warwickshire, said that if we
supported the treaty of 1815 wo must support the religion
and the clergy of Poland. Much delicacy had been shown
towards Prussia, but why, he was at a loss to know, seeing
that Prussia was as culpable, or nearly so, asßussra.The
in
nationality of Poland had not been preserved Prussia.
Mr. H. GRENFELL said, that, notwithstanding what
had been said by the lion. member opposite, he believed the

noble lord at the head of the Government was perfectly able
to satisfactorily deal with the cause of Poland, and they
might leave in his hands, with safety, any negotiations
that might uadertaken in behalf of the oppressed Poles.
He objected to any ,;!her action by this country than that
of giving sound constitutioi.l3l advice.
The motion for the adjournment of the house to Monday,
April 13, was then agreed to.

SUPPLY-THE CHATHAM MURDER.

On the motion for going into supply,

Mr. BLAKE called attention to the recent trial of Bur-
ton for the murder of a child at Chatham lines, and asked
if an application was not made at the trial for the examina-
tion of the prisoner by Dr. Forbes Winslow or some other
physician of experience in insanity, and refused by the
judge ; and whether, taking into consideration the fact then
stated of Burton's mother being confined in a lunatic asylum
and his brother not being of sound mind, it was his inten-
tion to order such an examination to be now made.
Sir. G, GREY said he had never heard of such an ap-
plication as that referred to in the first part of the ques-
tion. The jury, after hearing the evidence, and under
the direction of the learned judge. had found the prisoner
of sound mind, and guilty of murder; and no facts had been
laid before him (Sir G. Grey) to justify him in ordering
such an examination as that referred to.

The motion was agreed to, and the house went into com-
mittee of supply pro forma.

SAVINGS BANK-; ACTS

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose to
move the following resolution as the foundation of a bill
embodying the provisions to which it referred :—" That it
is expedient to amend the laws relating to the investment
of the money of savings banks, established under the Act 9
Geo. 4, c. 92, to create a charge for such savings banks upon
the Consolidated Fund, in place of certain perpetual annui-
ties now standing in the names of the Commissioners for
the Reduction of the National uebt for such savings banks,
to give powers for converting certain other amounts of such
perpetual annuities into certain other annuities, and to pro-
vide for the due payment out of the Consolidated Fund of
any deficiency which may arise from insufficiency of the
securities to meet the legal claims of the trustees of such
savings banks." The right hon. gentleman then proceeded
to explain in detail the provisions of the bill which he should
ask leave to introduce. Its first object was to extend the
principle of the conversion of perpetual annuities into ter-
minable to a degree farther than it had been yet carried.
The operation contemplated by the Post-office savings
banks of the present year was to convert about one-sixth
of the income from the stocks purchased on account of the
savings banks, into the form of terminable annuities, and
he now proposed to apply the same principle to a portion of
the funds held on account of the old savings banks. The
effect would be to add £120,000 a year to the present charge
on account of the national debt; but, with a view to the
ultimate discharge of a portion of the capital, his next enact-
ment was to convert £24,000,000 of savings banks moneys into
a passing charge resembling the debt now due to the Bank of
England. In the next place, the bill provided that, in case of
a demand arising on account of the savings banks, which
could not be met out of the proceeds of the securities or cash
standing to the credit of the Commissioners for the National
Debt, such demand should become an effective charge upon
the Consolidated Fang. Lastly, the bill authorised the
commissioners, in cases where it might be desirable, to
meet the demands of the savings banks out of the moneys
in the exchequer, instead of going into the market for the
sale of stock.

The resolution was agreed to.
SUPPLY.

Mr. MASSEY brought up the report on supply.
On the vote for the salary of the Civil Service Chi3f Com-
missioner,

An HoN. MEMBER mond that the house be counted, and
it being found that there were only 34 members present,

The Speaker left the chair at 10 minutes before 1 o'clock;
and the house stood adjourned to Monday, April 13.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

.k,,-.

LIVERPOOL-MARCH 27.

At this day's market there was a fair attendance of
the town and country trade, and wheat met a slow de-
mand, at Tuesday's rates. Flour was not improved, and
prices nominal. Indian corn in fair demand, at late rates.
Oats unaltered, and oatmeal in favour of buyers. Barley
and peas easier. Egyptian beans 6d per qr cheaper.