The Sun.
London, England, 1863-03-21 00:00:00

MARYLEBONE AND AN IRISH PAUPER.

Mr. VANCE rose to put a question to the President of
the Poor Law Board, respecting the deportation of Mary
Brophy, from the Marylebone Workhouse to the South
Dublin Union ? The hon, gentleman read a statement made
by the woman to the effect that when she desired to leave
the Marylebone workhouse she was prevented, great vio-
lence being used, her shoulder dislocated, a strait-
waistcoat placed upon her, and finally removed to Ireland.
Mr. VILLIERS replied that as yet he and his depart •
ment were entirely ignorant of the case referred to. Pro-
bably the hon. gentleman would put the question another
evening.

Col, DUNNE said he had learned that the poor woman
had been sent back and had arrived in London this morn-
ing, showing that the parish authorities had discovered
that they had acted illegally. (Hear, hear.)

_ . .
Sir R. PEEL intimated that the statement of the hon.
and gallant member was correct.

THE DISTRESS IN LANCASHIRE.

Mr. FERRAND asked the First Lord of the Treasury,
whether he would give a Government night immediately
after Easter to enable him to bring under the notice of the
house the present state of the cotton trade, and of half a
million of cotton operatives living in unwilling idleness.
Owing to the extreme urgency of the matter he trusted to
receive a favourable reply from the noble lord. (Hear,
hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON assured the hon. member and
the house that the subject to which the question related
was one which must necessarily create great anxiety in
the minds of the Government, and that being so, he
should be naturally desirous of giving any opportunity
that might be required for the consideration of the sub-
ject. The two first Tuesdays immediately after
Easter were very much engaged, otherwise he might have
Fet aside a portion of either day for the discussion, but
anxious to afford the hon. gentleman every facility he
should set apart ono of the first Government nights after
Easter for the discussion.
PORTSMOUTH DOCKYARD.

Mr. LAIRD asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whe-
ther he would have any objection to lay upon the table of
the house any plans, reports, and estimates which might
have been laid before the Admiralty in reference to the
proposed extension of Portsmouth Dockyard ?
Lord C. PAGET replied in the affirmative.
THE EXPERIMENTS AT SHOEBURYNESS.

Sir J. PAKINGTON asked the Secretary to the Ad.
roiralty whether it was true that, in the trials at Shoebury-
ness- on Tuesday last, 52 inch iron plates were penetrated
by shells, and the wooden backing set on fire; and, if so,
whether the Admiralty still intends to build of wood the
five new ships to be plated with iron? (Hear.)
Lord C. PAGET replied that on Monday last very im-
portant experiments took place, not only with Armstrong,
but with Whitworth shells, and undoubtedly these shells
pierced 51 inch plates. As, however, the targets had not
been taken to pieces he could not furnish the exact effect of
the shells. Last year, owing to the anxiety of the house,
he expressed an opinion on a similar subject which was very
much modified on the examination of the targets. He
could not venture, therefore, to express an opinion until the
targets had been thoroughly examined. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON argued that his question had not
been fully answered. (Hear, hear.) Had the wood behind
the plates been set on fire and blazed ? And did the Go-
vernment intend to continue building the five ships speci-
fied of wood ? (Hear, hear.)
Lord C. PAGET begged pardon that he had omitted
to reply to the latter part of the question. The Admiralty
had not, in consequence of the experiments last Monday,
altered their opinion with respect to wood versus iron.
THE FRESCO PAINTINGS IN THE HOUSES OF