The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-20 00:00:00

CC"::
:„4-17174.\ti11v
jge 47. tiliii%-41,VC-VerrA w‘N
,fr e, • Nt

LONDON, FRIDAY, FEB. 20, 18E3.

In the House of Lords, Lord ELLENBOROtiGH
gave notice that he should ask the Secretary for
Foreign Affairs a question this day relative to
affairs in Poland.—The Marquis of NORMANBY
complained that Earl Russell had misrepresented
the words of a despatch written by him in 1849
referring to the revolution then going on, and
denied that the construction put upon them was
correct.—Earl RUSSELL said that the extract to
which the noble marquis adverted proved that the
interpretation he had made of it was the right one.—
Lord CARNARVON brought before the notice of the
House the present state of discipline in gaols and
houses of correction. He entered at length into the
question, and concluded by stating that the present
system was not a perfect one in his opinion.
He took this opportunity of pressing the
subject upon her Majesty's Government, because
he believed it was one which the Royal Commission
would not inquire into.—Earl GRANVILLE said the
noble earl had made a clear statement on a subject
at present particularly interesting. Their lord-
ships were aware that the power of Government
was very limited in the management of gaols. If
the noble lord would move for a select committee of
that House it would, no doubt, be most useful, and
would not interfere with the details which were
now under the consideration of the Royal Com-
mission.—Lord CABNARVON readily aocepted the
proposal, and would to-morrow (this day) move for
the appointment of the committee.—Earl DUDLEY
asked if the Home-office would refuse to remit sen-
tences in cases of second conviction.—Lord GRAN-
VILLE3aid that this was undcr the consideration of the
Royal Commission, and the Government could not
anticipate its report. Their Lordships then ad-
journed.
In the Commons, the CHANCELLOR of the Ex-
CHEQUER replied to Mr. STANSFELD, that the Go-
vernment did not propose any change in the duties
upon spirits now payable by law.—Lord PAL-
MERSTON (amid cheering) proposed resolutions on
the provision for the Prince of Wales. He trusted
this marriage would be productive of happiness to
the Prince, and also secure to the country a race

of sovereigns who would partake of the virtues of
the present family. He proposed that the House
should make a grant out of the Consolidated Fund
of £40,000 a year, and that the allowance for
the Princess should be 110,000 per annum.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY took exception to the

proposal, and said that £40,000 was ample.
Mr. DISRAELI had hoped that this resolution would
have been passed nemine contradicente, but he rose
to say that his side of the house shared the convic-
tion thlt this was a temperate preposition. He
trusted it was adequate, and no one could call it
excessive. He trusted at all events that there
would be no dissentient vote ; and, amid loud cheers
from both sides of the house, he suggested that hon.
gentlemen should defer their inquiries as to mat-
ters of detail. After some further discussion the
resolutions were agreed to nem. con.—The Corrupt
Practices Act Election Bill was read a second time
after some discussion.—The Union Relief Aid Act
131-11 was read a second time,—The Telegraphs Bill
was also read a second time.—After some other
bltitleris the house adjourned.

Last night Lord PALMERSTON proposed the
provision for the Prince of WALES'S household.
His lordship made a
very clear statement, and
taking everything into consideration, it appears
that the Government have made a very fair demand
upon Parliament. As Lord PALMERSTON ex-
plained, in consequence of the exeelluentnllt he
manage-
ment with regard to the Duchy of Cornwall,
Prince of WALES is now in possession of most con-
siclemblo revenues. His lordship observed--"To
the honour of Her MAJESTY and the late PRINCE
CONSORT be it said, that in former reigns it was
the practice during the minority of the Prince
of WALES to add the revenues of the Duchy of Corn-
wall to the available income of the Crown ; in the
present reign these revenues have been studiously
and carefully set apart for the benefit of the PRINCE
when he came of age." The HOUS3 received this
statement with loud cheers. Considering the fact
that the round sum of £60,000 may be considered
as the probable income arising from the duchy re-
venues, and that £lOO,OOO a year will not be dis-
proportionate to the expenses of one in so exalted
a position, Lord PALMERSTON proposed that the

House should grant the yearly sum of X4O, flOO,

with the addition of £lO,OOO to the Princess of
WALES. In the event of her Royal Highness
surviving her consort £30,000 would be secured to
her. It is to be regretted that these very reasonable
demands should have been made the subject of con•
troversy by somedoubtless well meaning but mistaken
members. That their objections did not represent
the general feeling of the House was proved by the
applause that was given to Mr. DISRAELI'S speech.
The right hon. gentleman, gave it as his opinion
that the proposition was temperate and doubtless
well considered, he trusted it was adequate, no
one could call it excessive. There was great truth
in this remark regarding the exceptions taken by
the previous speakers as to the Duchy not fur-
nishing sufficient resources for the provision without
the aid of Parliament. " What strikes me as most
remarkable in the observations is that the good
management of the Duchy of Cornwall is brought
forward as a reason why we should not assent to
this proposition. It appears to me that we ought
to be thankful for the good management of the
Duehy, and ought not to make it the basis of an
argument in favour of the reduction of the vote
proposed by her MAJESTY'S Government." The
right hon. gentleman was greeted with loud
cheers from both sides of the House when
he suggested that they should allow the vote to
pass without any dissension. That this fairly repre-
sented the opinion of the House, was proved by
their agreeing to it subsequently ; at the same time,
it is bad taste to take such opportunities to cavil
at proposals that affect important interests. Some
of the objections were most trivial, and none of
them, indeed, of moment ; but the point is, why are
they made when opposition is next to impossible,
and unwillingness is so very ungracious. However,
it is satisfactory to know that the dissentients were
put down by the general consent of the House, and
that the very desirable arrangement proposed was
carried out. Considering the immense sums that
Parliament had to supply the last Prince of WALES
with to pay the debts lae had incurred, these econo-
mical members should rejoice rather than repine at
the prospect of no such calamity ever being in store
for them. Brought up under the supervision of such
excellent management, and with the example of his
parents before him, we have no doubt that this
Prince will tread in the steps of those around him.
After Lord PALMERSTON'S explicit speech of last
night, there seems no reason to apprehend that there
will be any grounds for disapproval when the report
of the affairs of the Duchy of Cornwall is placed in
the hands of hon. members. It is desirable that
they should be fully informed on these points ; but,
considering the extreme care and caution which
always characterised the transactions of the late
PRINCE CONSORT, there is every reason to suppose
that the investigation upon which they will enter
will be highly creditable to those who have managed
the estate," and satisfactory to those who peruse
its records. Had the expenses of the Crown
been such as characterised that of last century
Parliament would have had a very different demand
made upon its liberality last night. It is seldom
that the arrangements of Royal alliances are so cre-
ditably conducted as those to which we now refer,
and there is no doubt that the voice of public opi-
nion will ratify the approval expressed last night
by many influential members on both sides of the
House. Her Majesty's Ministers have conducted
these transactions in a spirit suitable to the occa-
sion, and the various members of the community
will concur in the sentiments of the Houses of Par-
liament, as evidenced in their resolutions last
night in the Commons, and the preceding one in the
Lords.

Last night the Corrupt Practices Elections

-
was read a second time, and some discussion took

place upon it. It will be remembered that the Ac

passed in 1854, and amended four years later, will
expire at the close of next session. It was therefore
necessary, if the present anomalous state of things
is to be maintained, to renew the bill in some form
or another, though, judging from the revelations
of election committees, and the reports that

occasionally fright the isle from its propriety,
the desired result is by no means secured. Seve-
ral modifications are made in the new bill,
some increasing its severity. The election auditor
is to be done away with, and agents appointed in
his stead, through whom alone all election expenses
must be paid. Any payment made otherwise than
through such agents makes the person paying guilty
of a misdemeanour. All claims against candidates
must be furnished within one month of the day of
election, or forfeited. Within three months a de-

tailed statement of all expenses shall be made out
by the authorised agents, and the returning officer
shall publish the same in the local newspapers.

Surely under these arrangements the visions 01
Utopia will be realised, and Liberal and Conger.

vative will no longer have to mourn the loss o
a hardly won seat, or exult over the mortification
of a successful antagonist. Purity of elections,
instead of an unattainable perfection, will become
an every day virtue, and bribery, treating and
intimidation, vanish into the category of obscure
and antiquated malpractices—along with piracy and
high way robbery. Unfortunately there is a cloud on
this brilliant prospect—a doubt cast on these con-
fident expectations. In spite of theorists, phi-
losophers, and reformers, it remains a me-
lancholy fact, that we cannot make men
virtuous by Act of Parliament, and we apprehend
that, in spite of recognised agents, threatened
penalties, and published accounts, the bribery and
corruption attending the election of her MAJESTY'S
next Parliament will be very much on a par with
the preceding ones. It is very easy, as Mr.
BERKELEY remarked, to appoint SMITH as your
recognised agent, and to allow BROWN, JONES, and
ROBINSON to transact sundry awkward pieces of
business without any agency at all. It may be very
true that any person making a payment who is
net a duly authorised agent will be subject to a
penalty, but, if the money be passed from hand to
hand in private, nothing will be known of it, unless
by the avowal of the benefited party, which is not
very likely. Again the details of the election ex-
penses may be published in the columns of all the
local press, but we presume most men of business
have heard of such things as " cooked accounts,"
and there will be no proof that the sum total covers
the whole of the incidental expenses of a contested
election.

There is another very important point in the case
to which these would-be Reformers do not seem
to attach sufficient importance—we mean the
intimidation of voters. The only feeble effort
made for their protection is the insertion of a
clause threatening to fine any individual who
puts a man to loss by reason of his vote. Really
the framers of this measure seem to think
we all live in Madame DE GENUS'S famous Palace
of Truth. It is,
they imagine, impossible for a land-
lord to eject a rebellious tenant, an employer to dis-
miss an unyielding employe, a customer to withdraw
his custom from an unaccommodating tradesman
without 'specifying in direct words that he does so
on account of the political opposition which they
offer him. Yet of the two evils intimidation is,
perhaps, the greatest, for however derogatory to
Imorals may be the results of bribery and treating
both sides are open to blame and contempt. But it