The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-18 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF LORDS—This Evening.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat On the woolsack
at five o'clock.
THE INDIAN NAVY.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH. said he would on
Monday week present a petition from the East India Com-
pany, but he would ask on the present occa,ion a question
as to what arrangements had been made corsequent upon
the abolition of the Indian navy. What he understood
was that all the war services formerly performed by the
Indian navy were to be performed by the Crown, and the
conveyance of troops and stores were to be conducted by
the Indian Government.
The Duke of SOMERSET replied that there would be
a small local navy provided by the Indian Government for
the purpose of conveying troops but, as regarded the gene-
ral protection of India the Admiralty would be called upon
to provide. The noble lord then entered into the particu-
lars and extent of that navy.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUcIH wished to know who
was to have the control of the navy.
The Duke of SOMERSET said the Governor-General
of India would direct all its movements.

THE EXHIBITION BUILDING.
The Duke of RUTLAND then rose to put the question
of which he had given notice relative to the purchase of the
International Exhibition building. He thought it would be
a decided mistake to purchase the building, either on the
grovnd of usefulness or economy. It would be altogether
impossible to adapt the building, supposing the purchase
was effected, to the purposes for which it was intended.
Experience had always shown that attempts to convert large
buildings for purposes of an opposite nature for which they
had been erected had resulted in signal failure. As %,r as
economy was concerned the purchase was quite out of the
question, and instead of the building being offered at a
very advantageous figure he thought the price asked was
tar more than its value, because it was only worth as much
as the materials of which it was constructed would fetch in
the market, and that he supposed would not exceed
£30,000. It had been been said that the architectural
teatures of the building were to be improved by
covering bricks with a coat of stucco, but nothing would
convert it into a sightly Hestructure. thought the best
thing that could be done was to remove the building alto-
gether, and to erect an entirely new one, hdapted to the
purposes for which it was intended to alter the one now
standing. The noble earl concluded by asking his ques-
tion, which related to the state of the foundation of the EY.
hibi iou building._ _ .

Earl GRANVILLE said he regretted the noble lord had
not stated the precise nature of his question when he put
his motion on the paper. With respect to eco-
nomy, the noble earl thought the house was
scarcely competent to deal with the question.
He thought it would be the better plan to get the very best
professional advice upon the matter that could be obtained,
and be guided by that. With regard to taste, he did not
profess to be posse-sed of any great taste, but he understood
the picture galleries that had been erected were the finest
in the world. In reference to the question of the noble
duke, he did not think it would be necessary to raze the
the building to the ground before it could be made either a
permanent or suitable one for the purpose proposed.
The Earl of DERBY said he should like to know, as the
ground upon which the building stood was to be sold for
£120,000, why a vote in the other house for its purchase
was only taken fir £67,000.
Lord REDESDALE said it appeared to him the simple
question was should the building be removed or or allowed
to remain. He thought the best thing that could be done
was to let the contractor clear the ground, because no
amount of money would ever make it an ornament or at-
traction to the metropolis.
The Earl of HARDWICKE said it was iecided to pur-
chase the,building, of which very little could be said by
way of admiration, they would buy a bad article, and all
the money that would be spent on it would never make it
4 good one.
The Duke of ARGYLL said it was entirely a question of
evidence, With respect to the value of the materials, that
depended on the time the contractors had to remove them.
After a few words in reply from the Duke of RUTLAND,
the subject dropped.
PRIVATE BUSINESS. _ _ _

The (%haring• cross bridge, New Millford docks, Oswes-
try and Newtown railway (branches), Bradford, Wakefield,
and Leeds railway, Shrewsbury and Welchpool railway,
Evesham and ftedditch railway, Ashbourne, Sudbury, and
Yoxall bridge, and Ulloxeter and Collingwood road, For-
martine and Buchan railway, Great North of Scotland
railway, London, Brighton, and South Coast railway, and
Mid Kent railway bills were rf ad a second time.
[LEFT SITTING.]

HOUSE OF COMMONS—This Evening.
The SPEAKER took the chair at the usual hour.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills were read a third time :—Athenry
and Ennis Junction Railway (Extension of Time)—Bisffopa
W alai= Railway—Galway Water—Kettering and Thrap-
stone Railway —Lor don and North Western Railway (Ad-
ditional Powers) —Midland Railway (Bristol Line)—Mist-
ley, Thorpe, and Walton Railway—and North British
Railway (Wansbeck Railway).
The Great Eastern Railway (Steamboats) Bill was read
a second time.
LON DON (CITY) TRAFFIC REGULATION BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. AYRTON moved that the bill be read a second
time this 'lay six months. He objected to the bill, because
under the guise of a private measure, it sought enormous
public powers. The measure would give the city power
over the traffic on the other side of Temple-bar - but strictly
speaking this proceeding would affect the traffic all over the
metropolis. It soug,t to introduce exceptional legislation,
whereas what was proposed to be accomplished should be
effected by a public measure of a far more general character.
Mr. MASSEY was surprised to find so stanch an advo-
cate of local self government as hi. hon. and learned friend
opposing a measure which would confer upon the city of
London simply power to regulate its traffic with a view to
the public convenience. He hoped if this bill were per-
mitted to go to a private committee that none of its provi-
sions would be impaired by the nut ante of street music,
crawling cabs, and improper loiterers in the streets,
Mr, CRAUFURD supp irtect the bill, which he consi-
dered indispensable for the better regulation of the traffic
of the City. In the course of a very short time there would
be three railway termini within the confines of the City,
and the public convenience would be jeopardised, unless
the powers sought by the bill were conferred on the City.
Mr. LOCKE was an advocate of municipal institutions.
He would have been better pleased if the bill had been
extended to the whole of the metropolis. He greatly ob-
jected to committees of five, because they worked a great
deal of mischief. The bill should have been introduced
as a public measure. He criticised the provisions
with respect to cobs and the delivery of coals,
as in the one case not worth legislation, and
in the other as constituting a system that would increase
the cost of coals from is 6d to 2s 6d per ton, As the bill
was couched in the form of a private measure, the parties
who would be chiefly affected by it would have no locus
standi before the select committee.
Mr, COX supported the second reading, believing that
some of the clauses would confer great advantages on the
public.
Sir G. GREY said the bill was only part of a plan of
legislation pursued for some years by the house. It would
be a great boon to the metropolis. He advised the house
to read the bill a second time, and probably subsequently
it would be well to consider its provisions in a committee or
the whole house-
Sir J. SHELLEY opposed the bill, If the city was so
anxious to rem,,ve all obstructions to the enormous street
traffic, why was not Temple-bar removed ? The bill, to be
effectual, should be extended to the whole of the metropolis.
Atter a few words by Mr. SCULLY,
Mr. AYRTON withdrew his amendment.

The bill was read a second time.
Sir J. SHELLEY gave notice that he should to-morrow
move that the bill be reterred to a select committee of
fifteen.
POLAND—THE KNOUT.
Mr. SCULLY gave notice that to-morrow he should ask
the First Lord of the Treasury whether the statement in
the second edition of the Times of to-day to the effect that
a Russian general in Poland had issued an ordinance that
all Polish ladies attiring themselves in mourning should be
punished with the knout, was authentic.
Mr. FORS lER gave notice that he should move an
amendment to the motion of the hon. member for King's
County (Mr. Hennesse to the effect that her Majesty be
thanked for the papers presented to the house, and that she
be sol,cited to signify to the Emperor of Russia that his
violation of the treaty of Vienna in regard to Poland will
lead Great Britain to withdraw from the contract then
entered into.
SPITHEAD FORTS.

Sir M. PETO a.ked the First Lord of the Treasury when
he proposed to bring in a bill on the subject of a loan for
fortifications, and whether he proposed to re-Commence the
suspended works of the Spithead torts?
Lord PAMERSTON hoped shortly to introduce a bill
on the subject. He would then enter into an explanation.
01,17T,n+".