The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-11 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, FEB. 11, 18(33.

In the House of Lords, the Marquis of NoR-
MANBY gave notice that on Monday next he would
call attention to the correspondence which has
lately been presented respecting Roman affairs.
Earl STANHOPE inquired what changes had lately
been made by the Home Secretary in the system of
tickets of leave. He referred to the recent increase
of acts of violence throughout the country, and said
he thought it would have been better tied the Go-
vernment at once brought forward a measure instead
of appointing a fresh commission, when they pos-
sessed such ample information on the subject. He
understood, however, that the Secretary of State
had already communicated with the Chairmen of
the Quarter Sessions, and he wished to know the
nature of the changes proposed.
Earl GRANVILLE said that the only alteration
which had been thought advisable, pending the re-
sult of the commission, was that re-convicted felons
should have no remission of their sentences.

The'Elrl of DERBY wished to know, in case of a
re-committal for a fnrther clime, whether the sen-
tence should not begin until the unexpired sentence
had been fulfilled.

Lord GRANVILLE said that the second sentence
'would begin directly after the second conviction.

Lord DERBY disapproved of that arrangement.

Lord CRANWORTII said the matter was in the
discretion of the judge.
The Duke of MARLBOROUGII wished to know
whether it was-true that the convict Redgath was
at liberty, on a ticket-of-leave, and enjoying the
proceeds of his fraud.
Earl GRANVILLE could not answer, but would

make inquiries.
The Earl of CARNARVON expressed his surprise
that notwithstanding Sir G. Grey's repeated expe-
rience at the Home-office the system should be so
unsatisfactory. He censured Sir G. Grey's inter-
ference with the judicial sentences as trifling with
the prerogative of mercy, and complained that the
matter had been referied to a committee whose re-
port would probably not be laid on the table till
they were too busy to attend to it.
Earl GRANTILLE defended his colleague, and
did not anticipate any delay in the report.
The Earl of HARDWICKE thought that the
frequency of official inter►erence lessened the public
estimation of the decisions of the bench.
In the House of Commons, Mr. SMITH moved for
copy of any correspondence between the Indian
Secretary and the Governor-General, or other per-
sons, on the subject of cotton cultivation in India.
Mr. FITZGERALD gave notice that, on an early
day, he Ph ou Id call attention to the question of
commercial treaties.

Mr. GARNETT asked the Home Secretary to pro-
duce the circular recently addressed to judges
respecting tickets.-of-leave.
In answer to Sir F. KELLY,

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the Govern-

merit did not see any necessity for materially
amending the Law of Bankruptcy. They proposed
Kra() alteration, especially the appointment of a
chief judge. The attention of the Lord Chancellor
Lad been directed to the cen.solide.tion of bank•
ruptcy law, but the Government conld not premise
any alteration this session.
Leave was then given to bring in several bills,
among them one by Sir J. TRELAWNY to allow the
1.1.,;e of affirmations to certain persons, and by Mr.
ALCOCK for the voluntary redemption of church
rates.

Mr. HENNESSY again referred to the Polish ques-
tion, and asked whether Austria during the Crimean
war had not offered to join the Atlies on certain
conditions, one of which was the independence of
Poland ; and whether at the Congress of Paris Lord
Clarendon had net objected to the aiscuEsion of the
subject in the hope that the Czar would grant the

necessary reforms.
Mr. GRIFFITH Ohl PEACOCKE made some
observations respecting the cession of the lonian
Islands.
Lord PALMERSTON said that no proposal for the
re-estubliAment of Polish independence had been
made by Austria. On the contrary, they were
informed Vtat she would oppose such an
a rrange-
mont. What pF ssod at the Congress of Paris
lvai been laid before Parliament in the protocols.
Tbcre were several precedents for ceding terri-
tory ip the position of the lonian Islands, though
the CROWN had no right to alienate British ter-
ritory without the consent of Parliament. With
regard to th© present cage, the Greeks, not having