The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-27 00:00:00

1
tjj 11114

LOYDON, FRIDAY, FEB. 27, 1863.

In the House of Lords, yesterday,
Lord NORMANBY called attention to the state-
ments which had appeared last week in the German
newspapers referring to Mr. Odo Russell's inter-
'view with the Pope, and the reported demand of
Cardinal Antonelli as to the right of Mr. Russell to
address the Pope in such terms.
Earl ItussELL was ignorant of the version of the
affair given in the German newspapers. He had
written no letter saying that the Pope would be
compelled to leve Rome. thought such an
event unlikely, inasmuch as the recent change of the
French Foreign Minister showed that the Emperor
of the French intended to continue the occupation
of Rome. Cardinal Antonelli had asked Mr. Rus- ,
sell in what capacity he appeared at Rome, and had
observed that owing to the excommunication of
the King of Sardinia, it -would not be agreeable to
the Papal Court to receive the attaché of an em-
hussy from Turin, and in consequence Mr. Russell
hod been made an attache to the Foreign Office
direct. Jr he had spoken to Cardinal Antonelli on
blate LfftailE, it WFS in consequence of the Cardi-
nai's having spoken to him in a confidential, though
not an official manner.
The En.' of DELBY said that Earl Russell had
not answered the most important part of the ques-
tion, which was, whether he had anyreason toknow
that Cardinal Antonelli had written a despatch to
Mgr. Chigi declaring that Mr. Russell's representa-
tions were so incorrect that he had determined not
to recognise him in an official capacity, but only as
a private individual. The question was, whether a
person accredited by the British Government was
to be received as a private
Earl RUSSELL said he had no information on the
tabled.

Tre Public Gardens in Towns Protection Bill
was r
read
Services
iltitv,s,eyend time, and the English Church
remsarßkill pas2ed through committee.
After some
respecting
a adjourned.
the University of
Durham, their Lordships
In the House of
Commons,e Sir G. GREY fixed
tf,_ ~ committee on
on
Monday.errupt Practices Bill
for the second reading
Sir F. SMITH drew attention to a question of
breach of privilege. In the detateonthe navy
estimates he had felt bound to make
some remarks
*
on the appointment of Mr. Reed as chief construct
r
of the navy, and ho had asked whether that gentle-
man had ever built a ship, as, if not, he considered
the appointment to be dangerous and improper. To
his great surprise, he had that running received a
letter from Mr. Reed, calling upon him to say why
he had made a false and libellous statement in Par-
liament concerning him, and otherwise couched in
offensive terms. He h t ow,ht the House would feel
with him that members 15
were not to be subjected to
attacks of this kind In the performance of their
duty.

The letter having been brought up and read at
the table,

Lord C. PAGET said the letter was a most im-
proper one, and clearly a breach of privilege, but

he asked the hon. and gallant member to defer the
matter that he might see Mr. Reed, and procure a
suitable apology.
Mr. ROEBUCK said the offence was to the House,
and the apology sliculd be made at the bar.
The motion that the letter was a breach of pri-
vilege was then carried, and it was ordered that
Mr. Reed be called to the bar of the House this
day.
The Prince and Princess of Wales' Annuities
Bill was read a third time and passed.

On the order for going into a committee of sup-
ply Mr. H. BAILLIE moved that where differences
of opinion had arisen with the native princes and
peoples of India the questions at issue ought to
be referred to the Privy Council. The hon. gen-
tleman charged the Indian Secretary with having
in several instances broken the promises made in
her Majesty's proclamation, more especially with
respect to the Nawab of the Carnatic. The native
princes were waiting for the decision of the House
to know whether the treaties they held were worth
the paper they were written on. He asked that
when disputes arose they should not be decided by
the Minister for India, who was an interested party,
but that they should be referred to her Majesty's
Privy Council, which was admitted by the natives
of India to be a just and fair tribunal.

Mr. SMOLLETT seconded the motion.
Sir C. WOOD defended the Indian Administration,
and said he was most anxious to carry out the pro-
mises of the proclamation. He hoped the House
would leave such questions to be dealt by the
Government.

After some remarks from Colonel SYKES in
favour of a disinterested tribunal, the motion for
going into committee was carried by 104 to 24.
The House then proceeded with the consideration
of the Navy Estimates, and agreed to the following
votes :—£165,322 for the Admiralty-office; £299,695
for Coastguard service ; £71,961 for scientific
branch ; £153,316 for home establishments ;
£36,370 for establishments abroad; £1,112,878 for
wages to artificers at home; £69,957 for wages to
artificers abroad; and £1,334,051 for naval stores.
A discussion took place on the first of these votes,
when Mr. LINDSAY, Admiral WALCOTT, Mr. BEN-
TINCK, and others objected to the system of naval
administration, and the continual official changes at
the Admiralty, Sir M. PETO remarking that dur-
ing thirty years there had been 17 first lords and
100 other changes in the Lords of the Admiralty.