The Sun.
London, England, 1863-07-22 00:00:00

THE lONIAN ISLANDS.

Lord J. MANNERS asked the First Lord of the Treasury
whether Instructions had been sent to our naval authorities
off the coast of Greece to refuse protection to the lonian
subjects of her Majesty; and whether, as the Bth article of
the Treaty of .Paris, Nov. 6, iBl6, invited the accession of
the Ottoman Porte to that convention, as well as that of the
Powers which signed the treaties of May 30, 1814, and of
June 9, 1815, it was the intention of her Majesty's Govern-
ment to invite the Porte to attend the conference about to
be held on the proposed cession of the. lonian Islands to
Greece ?
Lord PALMERSTGN said that no instructions of the
extraordinary kind alluded to had been sent to the mili-
tary, naval, or diplomatic agents of the British Govern-
ment, and for the obvious reason that no change had
taken place in the relation of the lonian Islands to Great
Britain. They were still under the protectorate of the
British Crown, and therefore there was no reason why, in
anticipation .of an event that had not yet happened, the
lonian Islands should be withdrawn from the protection of
Great Britain. With regard to the second part of the
question, it was quite true that by the first treaty between
England, France, and Austria, it was stipulated that the
accession of Austria, Turkey, and the Two Sicilics should
be invited. For reasons of his own, and from a disinclina-
tion to mix in European affairs, the Sultan at that time de-
lined to be an acceding party ; but a few years afterwards
there was a convention for the concession of Baba, to which
her Majesty's Government renounced all claim, and in re-
turn for which the Government of the Porte agreed to
acknowledge the lonian Islands a possession of the British
Crown, and to treat with the lonians as possessing all the
rights and privileges of British subjects. That being the
state of affairs, Turkey had not been invited to become a
party to the cession of the lonian Islands to Greece.
Mr. B, COCHRANE wished to know whether the noble
lord thought the recent occurrences in Greece would cause
any delay in the arrival of the King at Athens.
Lord PALMERS rON thought that the King must be
left to determine forr himself the period of his arrival in his
own zninions--but he saw no reason for any delay.
IRISH INDUSTRIAL MUSEUM.
In reply to Mr. GREGORY,
Sir It. PEEL said the-, in deference to the opinions of
many Irish members, the Government would not this ses-
sion propose the amalgamation of the Irish Industrial
Museum within the Dublin Royal Irish Society, nor would
such ansalgtimaCon take place at any time without the
consent.of Parliament
BRITISH EXPORTS FROM FEDERAL PORTS.
Mr. S. FITZGERALD said that some time last session
the attention of the Government had been called to the
circumstance that the Federal authorities at the port of
New York required from British subjects exporting goods
a bond that no portion of those goods should afterwards
fall into the hands of persons connected with the Con-
federate States. The noble lord at the head of the Govern-
ment then spoke of the requisition as a breach of the treaty
between the British Government and the United States,
and some correspondence took place. That correspondence
had not been laid upon the table, but it had been reported
that the course alluded to was still persisted in, and that
the consuls at Federal ports refused clearances unless those
bonds were entered into. He wished to know, therefore,
whether the noble lord's attention had been called to the
continuance ofthat. practice by the Federal authorities, and
whether any further correspondence had taken place.
Lord PALMERSTON said her. Majesty's Government
considered that that practice was net in accordance with the
inteinatienal rights of this country, as founded upon the
ordinary rules for the intercourse of nations and upon the
treaties Remon stpranromiscesewdetroe
therefore admmaede, withand
thet h
eFederal United
t at
Governmentes.
give orders to put an end to it. He feared, however, that
hose orders had not been made very effectual, because very
recently an intimation had been given of an instance in
which that practice had been repeated. Application had
thereupon been made to the Federal Government, and he
hoped that, when the matter had been again brought under
their Consideration, the practice alluded to would be put an
end to.
Mr. FITZGERALD said the correspondence of last year
had been produced,
Lord PALMERSTON
therefore, to I,but not in a complete form. He wished,
know whether the further correspondence
would be laid upon the table
be. said, as far as possible, it should

RUSSIA AND POLAND.
Mr. HENNESSY asked whether the Govern-
ment were in possession of the despatch from Prince Gort-
achakoff, in reply to the French Government, with regard to
the six points, and whether it would be laid before Parlia-
ment,

Lord PALMERSTON—The Government are not in
fore
possession of it in away that will justify
ns in laying it be-
VOTING BY PROXIES IN PUBLIC COMPANIES
Mr. D. GRIFFITH moved the following resolution
" That the present amount of stamp duty on proxy votin.
papers, involving the necessity of procuring a stamp of g;
particular amount, not always easily accessible to the voter,
and thus impeding the exercise of a franchise, and also,
according to the analogy of draft and receipt stamps, ez-
cessive in amount in comparison with such stamps, and not
involving consideration of importance to the revenue,might
conveniently be reduced to one penny."
The motion having been seconded by Mr. WILALLIST,

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the Government had at all times shown a disposition to

facilitate the exercise by proprietors of joint-stock com-
panies of their privilege of voting by proxy, and at various
intervals they had proposed the reduction of the tax from
30s. to 6d., at which sum it now stood. He trusted
that the effect of the motion would be to elicit an expres-
sion of the general feeling amongst the proprietors of
these companies, and thus place him in a position on the
part of the Government to submit a proposal to the house
on the subject,
On this assurance Mr. GRIFFITH consented to with-
draw his motion.

LIEUT. TINLING.
Col, SYKES called attention to the despatch of Admiral
Kuper, dated April 14, 1863, reporting the death of Lieut.
Tinling, of her Majesty's ship Encounter, at the siege of
Showshing, and moved for papers.
Lord C. PAGE 1' read a correspondence relating to the
circumstances under which Lieut. Tinling had met his
death, from which he drew the conclusion that as Lieut,
Tinting had gone beyond the radius of 30 miles, and engaged
in operations against the Taepings, which British officers
had been strictly ordered not to do, he would not be justified
in saying that the gallant young man had died in the ser-

vice of his country.
Mr. WHITE warmly reprehended the conduct of the
Secretary to the Admiralty in not affording to the family of
Lieut. Tinling the poor consolation that the unfortunate

youth had died in the service of his country, seeing that he

had accompanied his captain on the occasion.

Atter a few words from Mr. BAILLIE, the motion for
papers was withdrawn.

MR. WILLIAM BEWICKE.
Mr, BERKELEY moved a resoluticn that the grievances
suffered by Mr. Bewicke, as detailed in his petition of the

28th of April, were such as entitled him to the considera-
tion of her Majesty's Government. The hon. member ex-
plained that thepetitioner had been sentenced to four years'
penal servitude on a charge of firing a pistol at and resisting
some sheriff's officers in the execution of their duty, and that
subsequently he received the Royal pardon on its being

clearly proved that his conviction was the result of a con-

spiracy. Returning to his home, however, he found that

the commissioners of Greenwich Hospital had entered,

seized his furniture, and sold it for less than one-third o
its value as the property of a felon. The case was cne 0:

great hardship, that demanded a remedy, and proved con-
clusively that the law was not in a satisfactory state.
Sir G. GREY contended that there was no failure of jus-

tice, as far as regarded the evidence upon the trial, which
was perfectly satisfactory both to judge and jury. When
the witnesses upon whose evidence Mr. Bewicke was con-

victed were tried and found guilty of perjury that gentle-
man was pardoned, and, as it was impossible to restore his
property, which had been sold by the commissioners of

Greenwich Hospital in the interval, they paid him the sum
it brought. It was not in the power of the commissioners to
make compensation ; but he admitted it might be matter for
consideration whether a person convicted wrongly, and sub-

sequently pardoned, should not be placed in a more favour.

able position.
Sir F. KELLY said the state of the law was disgracefully
unjust, and that it was the bounden duty of Government to
take the case into their consideration, and recommend the
grant of a sum of money as compensation to Mr. Bewicke.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL acknowledged that the
petitioner had been hardly used, though no fault attached
to the law or those who had administered it; but he did not
see how an exception could be made in this instance, or why
it should be placed upon a different footing from that of
other cases where there had been a possible miscarriage of

lustice.
The house divided—
For the motion 2O
Against
Majority
BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY COURT
(DUBLIN).

Mr, VANCE called the attention of the house to the in-
sufficient accommodation afforded to the bar, the suitors,
and the public in the court in which the sittings in bank-
_ _

ruptcy and insolvency were held in Dublin; and moved for
copy of any correspondence which had taken place between
the judges of the court and the Government on the subject,

~ ...
Mr. F. PEEL said the matter was under consideration,
and the Government hoped to be able to make satisfac-

factory arrangements for sufficient accommodation for these
courts ; but he was unable then to state whether it would
be by building new courts, or rearranging other public
buildings.
After some remarks from Colonel DUNNE,
The motion for the production of the correspondence was
agreed to.
DUBLIN AND EDINBURGH CORPORATIONS.
Mr. VANCE moved an address for copy of any furthei
correspondence between the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland,
Ulster King-of-Arms, the Home Secretery, and Garter
King-of• Arms, and of any other person on the subject of
the precedence between the corporations of Dublin and
Edinburgh.
The motion was agreed to.
JAPAN.

Mr. B. COCHRANE called attention to our relations
with Japan, and, in doing so, said that he was induced to
bring the subject before the house at so late an hour of the
night, and at the end of the session, because he thought it
was undesirable that the house should break up without its
being brought forward, and an expression of opinion ob-
tained from her Majesty's Government relative to the state
of affairs in Japan. If we were not actually at war with
that country we were likely to be so, and, judging from the
results of the China war, this country was likely to find
itself involved in an enormous expenditure. Our relations
with Japan might be said to have originated in 1854. In 1853
the Americans entered into a treaty with the Japanese, and
in the following year the same concessions were granted to
England as had been granted to America. In 1858 Lord Elgin
thought fit to go to Japan after the treaty of Tein-tsin, and
in doing so he actually broke a condition of the treaty,which
prohibited the anchoring of a ship of war within a certain dis-
tance of Jeddo. In Japan the authority of the two sovereigns
was completely overridden by the Daimios, who were the
great merchant princes of the country; and until influ-
ence could be exercised over these princes treaties were of no
avail. Lord Elgin, however, had insisted upon a commer-
cial treaty, in spite of the remonstrances made by the great
council of the nation; and surely it was a very hard thing
upon the Japanese to compel them in the first instance to
make a treaty, and afterwards, when they found the state of
their bountry was such that it was impossible to carry it out,
then to declare war against them. He was aware it was the
fashion to say that the Japanese were barbarians, but all the
best authorities spoke of their high civilisation. Towards
Sir Rutherford Alcock the people had evinced the utmost
courtesy and consideration, and that gentleman bore testi-
mony to the goodness of their dispositions. On our side,
however, no attention was paid to the wishes either of the
people or their rulers. It was desired that the consuls
should be located at Yokohama; but the diplomatic agents
insisted on their being stationed at Kanagana. The Ja-
panese, however, objected, on the ground that Kanagana
was on the great line of traffic which was traversed by the
Daimios ; and as they were opposed to the commercial treaty
there would be constant risk of encounters between them and
the foreigners Well, the consuls stationed themselves at
Yokohama, and the result was the unhappy encounter in
which Mr. Richardson was killed. He asserted, upon the
authority of every writer upon Japan, including Mr. Oli-
phant, that the Japanese were compelled to enter into a
treaty with us. The house might not credit all that was
stated in regard to the wealth and power of the Daimios,
but that they were both wealthy and powerful could not be
doubted. In this case they had a stronger weapon than
wealth—they had justice. If British commerce could be
promoted, while theleelings, nay, the prejudices of the Ja-
panese were respected, well and good ; but if it could only
be done by shedding the blood of a happy, contented, and
innocent people, then he should like to see the treaty of
commerce torn in pieces, and our fleet withdrawn from the
waters of Japan. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member con.
eluded by moving for papers.
Mr. LIDDELL seconded the motion, and attributed the
difficulties we had encountered in Japan to the Elgin treaty,
which was a revolution in itself and had been obtained from
the Japanese by fear.
Mr. LAYARD said he had listened with great attention
to the speech of the hon. member for Honiton ; but he con-
fessed he was unable to understand the object of his speech.
The hon, member condemned everything in the past, but
he suggested no remedy. He (Mr. Layard) lamented as
much as anybody the necessity they were under of making
demands upon Japan which might possibly end in hostili-
ties; but he thought he would be able to show that our
presert position was unavoidable, that we were placed in
the position against our wishes, and were only now per-
forming an absolute duty. I) p to 1854 this country had
scarcely any connection with Japan. At that time a con-
vention was made between this country and Japan, which
simply afforded protection to our ships. America and Russia
had concluded treaties of commerce with Japan. British
trade extended all over the world ; wherever there was
anything to buy or sell, there Englishmen were found. It
was to this commercial enterprise that England owed much
of its glory, its renown, and its wealth. Supposing that
while Russia and America were developing the trade of
Japan, England had been excluded, and her subjects ven-
turing to Japan had been repulsed and outraged, what
would be the feelings of the country and the house ? Would
not the Government be denounced for not entering into a
treaty with Japan? But, after all, by whom was the treaty
concluded? Why, under instructions from Lord Malmes.
bury. And when the present Government came into office
it was their duty to see that the stipulations were fairly and
honourably carried out. In Japan, unfortunately, there
was a party, he supposed he must call Conservatives, who
werefetetgopposed
butto anl
not
tp raolgl r et shse.
DTa
thole yio
s opposed
were
ea; l t three:d epa wittTh.
The Government had been asked with whom the treaty had
been concluded. His answer was that it was concluded with
the same authorities as those with whom Russia and Arne-
rice had concluded theirs. He agreed with his hon. friend
that the conduct of some of the British merchants was
highly disgraceful, but his hon. friend had made an excep-
tion in favour of the individual who had committed the
greatest outrages against Japan. That individual had shot
on land interdicted dicted to Europeans a bird sacred to the Japa-
nese, but upon being called to account he shot a policeman.
Alcock Mr.
given
Kong
Punished him, but subsequently had damages
against him at Hong at the instance of the
having,in-
in inflicting this punishment, infringed