The Sun.
London, England, 1863-05-16 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 16, 1868.

a common deliberatite Asserably, and thaterrangetnent was
absolutely refused. -H9lsteih infoimeci thaworld-thatrunder
no circutastandea would she consent to such a proposal, and
even under the monstrous proposition which was put for-
ward on the part of Germany, that the three duchies Hol-
stein, Schleswig, and Lauenberg, being in the aggregate
considerably less than the division of Denmark Proper,
should yet have each an equal numerical share in the repre-
sentation of the country, and should be able not only to
control their own affairs absolutely, but actually to exer-
cise an administrative and controlling power over the in-
ternal affairs of the kingdom of Denmark Proper. What
was the next declaration of Holstein ? It was only the
other day that the Estates came to the determination
that no arrangement would be satisfactory which did
not recognise the- ancient indissoluble union between
Schleswig and Holstein. But that union has been
practically abolished for a considerable period, and in those
particular engagements to which reference had been made,
it was recognised that that union did not exist, and that it
eould net be sought to be re-establ:shed. (Hear, hear.)
Yet that union, the dissolution of which formed a main
point in the diplomatic negotiations of 1851, and which was
affirmed by all the Powers, was declared by the Estates of
Holstein to be the one condition without which it would be
impossible to come to any practical or amicable arrange-
ment with the kingdom of Denmark under any circum
stances whatever. (Hear, hear,) The King of Denmark,
finding it impossible either by means of an united Parlia-
ment cr by separate legislation to come to any terms with
this Assembly of Holstein, made up his mind to a great sac-
rifice on the part of Denmark; and, although he did not
admit the extent to which the Federal Diet pressed their
claims over the administration of Holstein, he yet consented,
for the purpose of doing away with any pretence which
could be made for interference with the rest of his domi-
nions, to give to Holstein all, and more than all Holstein
herself had asked, with the exception of the union with
Schleswig, and all, and more than all, the German Powers,
on the part of Holstein, had demanded. He gave to Hol-
stein a complete autonomy, exclusive administration within
its own territory, control over its own budget, power over
its own laws ; and though by so doing he materially weak..
sued the collective power of Denmark, he consented to this
course for the purpose of showing that, as far as Holstein
was concerned, he had gone even beyond those demands
with which it was ent.tled to expect compliance. (Hear,
hear.) In doing so, however, he was careful to press
this point, that beyond the limits of Holstein the Federal
Diet had no more right to interfere with Denmark in the
administration of its internal affairs than any other Power
in Europe. (Cheers.) It is as Duke of Holstein that the

King of Denmark is subject to the control of the Federal
Diet,. and, as regards Schleswig and Denmark Proper, he is
as independent a Sovereign as the Sovereign who sits on
the throne of these realms. (Cheers.) As far as the Federal
Diet is concerned it clearly has no locus standi; and when'
all the claims of Holstein are satisfied, for the Federal Diet
to interfere with the other pordons of the Kingdom of Den-
mark would be a piece of gratuitous impertinence. (Cheers.)
I do regret that mero nytu and spontaneously the King of
Denmark did not take upon himself to remove, by the power
which he possesses, any just, reasonable cause of complaint
which the inhabitants of Schleswig may have against the
administration and m de of carrying on the government,
but the question is, to what extent have the grievances been

carried ? What demand is there which has not been com-
plied with ? In what respects has the King of Denmark

violated any engagement he bad entered into ? The main
engagements were two—first of all that Schleswig should
not be incorporated with the kingdom of Denmark; and,
secondly, that the Danish and German subjects should be
treated on an equal footing. My lords, it is not to be denied
that Schleswig has been made a stalking horse for the ambi-
tion of Germany. (Hear.) It is not to be denied that there
has been a considerable immigration into Schleswig; that a
considerable number of German settlers, amounting to
nearly one-half of the population, have settled themselves
there; and they demand equal laws and equal justice. The
points involved are really comparatively trifling when you
look at the enormous and important consequences that may
result from any serious misunderstanding in regard to them.
They amount to this—that in one village there are a cer-
tain number of Germans, in another, a certain number of
Danes, and in a third a mixed population—one where the
German element prevails, another in which the German
and Danish elements are equal; and up to the present time
the King of Denmark has not been able to arrive at a solu-
tion of the difficulty as regards education in the schools or
service in the churches with respect to the language of
Germany. There is no other charge against the King
of Denmark than that he has not been able to solve
that difficulty, expressing his readiness to do his
utmost to solve it. Are yru, then, to compel him to
enter into an engagement, which, in his opinion and in the
opinion of his subjects, amounts to a vitiation of the inte-
grity and a dissolution of the monarchy ? (Hear.) The
original proposition of the noble earl was very just and rea-
sonable. He repudiated the union between Schleswig and
Denmark ; he repudiated the extravagant claims for equal
representation in favour of small minorities ; he repudiated
any right of interference with regard to Schleswig, except
so far as the engagements of the King of Denmark in 1851
were concerned, and I entirely concur with him in his policy,
but where was it ever laid down in the engagements of 1851
—or (although it might be contemplated that Schleswig was
never to be incorporated with Denmark) was it not assidu-
ously and carefully notified that Schleswig should not be
separated from the kingdom of Denmark ? Had not the
King and people of Denmark a perfect right to say, "We
consent, to obviate embarrassment, that Schleswig shall
not be incorporated with Denmark r being, as it were, like
Hanover with this country, bound together by no other tie

than that of the Sovereign ; but when you call on the King
of Denmark, without the most pressing reasons, still fur-
ther to weaken and dissolve his monarchy by a complete
separation of Schleswig, you call upon him to do that which
you have no right to do—an act of no less singular injustice
than impolicy. (Hear, hear.) The integrity of the mo-
narchy of Denmark is a matter of vital importance to this
country. She is a small country, but a country with the
most resolute, determined, honest, and honourable popula-
tion, She is a country in which there is a large, perhaps
the largest amount of personal and political freedom of any
country in Europe, next to our own ; and she is a country,
moreover, well. disposed to England. Whatever interrup-
tion of that friendship there may have been from time to
time, we may hope that a tie recently formed may connect
us still more closely together. (Cheers.) She has interests,
feelings, and affections with thin country, and email as she
is, yet the character of her people, great power in compa-
rison with her population, and her geographical position
on the map of Europe, in case of an European war, would
render her an important ally, even for England. It
then, an act of policy as well as justice, when ambitious
Powers are pressing Denmark, to protect her from aggres-
sion ; and though, God forbid the last extremity should be
forced upon us, yet on a question whether the Danish mo-
narchy should be destroyed and its integrity frittered away,
and, still more, be placed by collateral means and indirect
influences as a dependency of the German Federation, there
is no alternative not preferable on the part of England, on
the ground of policy as well as justice, to such a consequ, nee
as the dissolution of the monarchy or its dependence en the
German Confederation. On that ground I do deeply lament
that the noble earl has departed from his original proposi-
tion. I feel certain that with a firm attitude held by us in
concurrence with Russia, and as I believe with France, we
should have shown the German Powers that, though not dis-
posed to withholding anything from their just rights, we are
not content to allow with impunity any unauthorised or un-
called for aggression on the liberties of Denmark. (Cheers.)
Lard WODEHOUSE thought that, if Denmark was
bound to fulfil her engagements, Germany was also bound
in honour not to place insurmountable obstacles in her
way, (Hear, hear.)

After a few words from the Earl of ELLENBOROUGH
in reply,

Earl RUSSELL said it would not be convenient to pro-
duee the papers asked for just now, but at an early date
they would be forthcoming if desired.
TELEGRAPHS BILL.

This bill was read a second time.
FURIOUS DRIVING.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH moved for a return of
the number of persons killed and maimed within the Me-
tropolitan and City Police districts within the last twelve-
months, by persons driving vehicles at furious rates in the
public thoroughfares. From 1858 to 1861 there had been 30
persons killed, and 130 maimed in the City district; and
140 killed, and 1,457 maimed in the Metropolitan dis-
trict ; and he thought something ought to be done.
Pecuniary fines, which were paid by the drivers' masters,
were clearly useless.—Agreed to.
CORRUPT PRACTICES BILL.
This bill was read a third time.
AUGMENTATION OF BENEFICES BILL.
This bill was read a third timo.
ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN (IRELAND).
The Commons' amendments to this bill were agreed to.
CITY OF DUBLIN RAILWAY BILL.
Lord TALBOT DE MALAHIDE complained that this
railway would be a great disfigurement to the City of
Dublin, and moved that the evidence taken before the com-
mittee be printed.

Ater some discussion tho motion was negatived.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OP COMMONS—Last Evening.
The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock.

PETITIONS.

By Mr. MuNDY, from the archdeacon and 174 clergy-
men of the archdeaconry of Derby in favour of the closing
of public houses on Sunday, and against the sale of Sunday
newspapers, the running of trains and steamboats, which
required a great amount of labour on the Sabbath, and thus
led to its desecration; Sir 11. STRACEY, from Great Yar-
mouth, against the closing of public-houses in the Sabbath;
Mr. PEASE and Mr. BRIGHT, in favour of the closing of
the closing of public-houses on the Sabbath,

his GoVernment to suspend diplomatic relations with our
Government ?

THE REPORT ON THE SHANNON.

Colonel FRENCH asked the Secretary to the Treasury,
when Mr. Bateman's reporc on the Shannon would be laid
upon the table of the house ?

Mr. F. PEEL replied that it had been presented to the
Treasury, and would be printed and circulated in a few
days.

CHALMERS' TARGET.

Mr. A. TURNER asked the Secretary to the Admiralty
whether the principle upon which the " Chalmers Tar-
get" was constructed was not the same as the plan
furnished by Mr. John Clare, jun., per Admiralty order,
dated June, 1855, on the 25th June, 1855; and if the prin-
ciple upon which the Erebus, Terror, Thunderbolt, Warrior,
Black Prince, Resistance, Defence, Achilles, Hector, Va-
liant, Minotaur, Northumberland, &c., were constructed
was not the same as the plans furnished by Mr. John Clare,
jun,, the 9th and 16th July, 1855, as published in Parlia-
mentary papers moved for by Mr. Maguire, 3d March, 1863,
developing the mode of placing timber between metal as a
non-conductor of vibration ?
Lord C. PAGET replied that he answered a similar
question the other day. The Admiralty could not take
upon itself to decide whether a piracy or not had been corn •
witted. The Court of Queen's Bench had decided that the
patent had not been infringed.
SUEZ CANAL.

Mr. D. GRIFFITH asked the First Lord of the Treasury
whether the despatch from the Turkish Government, pro-
hibiting the compulsory employ went of forced labour on
the Suez Canal, which had obtained publicity, was au-
thentic; and, if so, whether her Majesty's Government
would support the Sultan in carrying that object into
effect ?
Lord PALMERSTON said it was well known that
Egypt constituted part of the Turkish empire, and was un-
der the sovereignty of the Sultan. Enforced labour had
long been the practice in Egypt, but recently the Sultan
and the Pasha had resolved to put an end to it. (Hear,
hear.) The Government entirely approved of this resolve,
and would give it their entire support. (Hear, hear.) The
independence of Turkey has been guaranteed by the five
great Powers, and he did not therefore apprehend that
France or any of the other Powers could possibly object to
the abolition of enforced labour.
ROMAN BRIGANDS AND THE NEAPOLITAN
STATES.

Sir G. BOWYER asked the First Lord of the Treasury
what were the proofs of a statement that there exists at
Rome a committee of no less than 200 persons by whom
bands of murderers were organised, and sent forth into the
Neapolitan territory to commit every sort of atrocity; and
whether he would lay upon the table any official correspon-
dence or other documents in support of that statement ?
Loid PALMERSTON replied that ho had no positive
proof that the statement he made the other evening was
correct, but he had every reason to believe that it was based
upon facts. He had no documents to lay on the table.
From time to time he was in the habit of receiving infor-
mation about men and things in various parts of the world
—(hear, hear)—but if he were to state publicly the names
of his informants, he should know as little about such
matters as the hon. baronet himself. (Laughter.) But he
could on this occasion adduce an authority from whom
the hon. baronet could easily obtain information with re-
spect to the doings of the Bourbon committee sitting at
Rome. On Monday, the 3d of the present month, a cer-
tain father, Conchi, preached at Rome by request of the
Archbishop of Naples, before the ex-King of Naples,
hia Court, and a large Bourbon congregatzon.
The priest reproached the assemb y with making
promises of money to and issuing inflammatory ad-
dresses among. ignorant and. excitable people, in order
to induce them to commit acts of pillage and
murders in Southern Italy, whilst they would net furnish
the smallest coin for the relief of the poor of the Imperial
city. (Hear, hear.) If the hon. baronet would communi-
cate with Father Conchi, no doubt he would obtain the
most accurate information with respect to whom the Bour-
bon Committee sitting at Rome consisted, the aims it had
in view, and the system they did not hesitate to enforce.
(Hear, and laughter.)
TAXING THE CHARITIES OF IRELAND.

Mr. BLAKE, asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer
whether he intended withdrawing Resolution 18 in Ways
and Means, relative to imposing legacy duty on bequests
intended for charitable purposes in Ireland ; and, if not, on
what day after theWhitsuntide recess he would be likely to
move the said resolution.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied
that as the Government had withdrawn its proposed plan
to impose the income tax on English charities, they did not
intend to persevere with it in regard to the charities of Ire.
land. (Hear, hear.)

result anticipated by Lord Elgin, and a result which had
greatly exaspekated the _Chinese Government against Eng-
land. The almost necessary cons quench of opening up 600
miles of a river for trade was to come into collision with
the rebels ; for during a time of civil war it was almost
impossible to say to which party the territory belonged.
This country had undertaken to give protection to life and
property in China, and to protect certain spaces round the
treaty ports, such as Shanghai and Ningpo. This protec-
tion extended over an area of 30 miles round Shanghai,
Since the spring of 1862 this country had been in constant
conflict with the rebels at Shanghai and Ningpo. He
wished to call attention especially to the case of Ningpo,
which had been captured by the rebels in the autumn of
1861. In May, 1862, the British forces recaptured the
town. Soon after, Consul Harvey discovered that England
had never obtained a legil settlement for trade in Ningpo;
and it also appeared that Admiral Hope, on hearing of the
fact, wrote a letter full of alarm to Mr. Bruce, and request-
ing his attention to the matter. While this state of things
was going on, Captain Dew, under the pretext of protecting
a settlement which this country did not legally possess,
brought his vessels up the river, and placed them in the
line of the enemy's fire. They were soon struck by a num •
ber of balls which had been fired from the guns oftherebels.
The" assault was resented, and for five hours shots and shells
were fired into that town. One of the evils arising from the
sites which had been originally granted for the purpose of
allowing foreign merchants and traders to erect warehowes
and dwelling .houses, so that they might live apart from
the Chinese, was that since the civil war broke out an
enormous number of the Chinese population fled to these
places for protection, which gave rise to frequent collisions
and reprisals. Remonstrances were frequently made by
the Imperial Government at Pekin with regard to the dis-
turbances which took place in these settlements, but Mr.
Bruce always disclaimed interference on the part of the
Chinese Government with these sites, as he asser ed they
were " f x-t erritoz ialised." He believed that the joint pro-
tectorate of England, France, Russia, and the United
States was likely to produce the most serious evils, by
making China the theatre of foreign intrigue. He
had no wish to defend the cause of the foreign
traders in China; but what he said was that, if the only
justification that could be offered for the naval and military
occupation of China was the obtaining facilities for trade,
then, if the Chinese were left to themselves and the question
of politics was not mixed up with it, they would give us
every facility for quietly and peaceably carrying on our trade
in that country, as was the case under the old East India
Company, The int rchants were not satisfied with the rules
and regulations laid down for trade. (Hear, hear.) The
question of indemnity figured very largely in every budget ;
but, so far from our being recouped for the expenses of the
war, we had to pay the indemnity in the increased taxation
imposed by China on her trade in order that she might be
able to pay the indemnity. They had heard a great deal
about the expedition to China, and when application was
made to the Home Government to permit our officers and
men to engage in it, it was described as a very unusual re-
quest. He thought it was, and felt a rry that Capt. Osborn
and he picked men who were with him should be engaged in
such a service. (Hear, hear.) He complained of these men
wearing her Majesty's uniform, all but the crown on the
button, in the service of China, which, with other matters,
were very irritating and annoying to the home service. The
Foreign Enlistment Act had been carried out with rigour,
and in a manner offensive to the people of England, against
honest English traders. Their goods and their premises
had been infested with spies under the powers of the En-
listment Act, but why, he asked, had its provisions been
set aside by a Royal proclamation in favour of the Emperor
of China. (Hear, hear.) No doubt our stake in China was
great. It was a struggle for supremacy in that -quarter •
but our success would depend on the means we employed
for carrying out our efforts. (Hear.) He would not say
whether we had or had not violated neutrality, or that we had
or had not kept our promises; but he asserted that sooner
or later all those matters must be brought before the search-
ing tribunal of public opinion, before a clear and abso-
lute verdict could be given in our favour. (Hear, hear.)
Unless we changed our policy, that civilisation we wished
to give to the Chinese would be advanced by a blood-stained
path, and those efforts which promised blessings and plenty
would carry irritation and discontent into the hearts of a
naturally industrious and peaceful people. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. BAILLIE said our military force in China cost
this country a million per annum, which was equal to a
penny in the pound on the income tax ; and the question
they had to consider was, whether that money was wisely
and judiciously expended—to ascertain what end and ob-
ject was to be gained by all these desultory naval and mili-
tary operations in China, and what were the views and in-
tentions of her Majesty's Government with regard to it.-
The right hon. gentleman referred to the occupation of
China by the French, observing that it was difficult to un•
derstand the object of France in inaugurating a crusade
against the Taepings. Some persona attributed it to reli-
gious motives; and if the Tappings had incurred the hatred
of France on account of their fanaticism, they had no less
incurred the hatred and hostility of the Anglo-Indian
opium merchants by their vigorous and successful prohibi-
tion of the use and consumption of that pernicious drug.
Both felt aggrieved, but what cause of complaint her Majes-
ty's Government had against the Taepings he had yet to
discover. However, things had come to such a pass that
they were actually engaged as partisans in the bloody war
which was now raging in China. Lord Aberdeen was said
to have dragged the country into a war with Russia. Well,
the same Government being in power now which was in
power in those days, it was doubly the duty of the house to
take care that England was not dragged into a war with
China, the ultimate consequence of which, so far as ex-

pense was concerned, no one could foresee. It certainly
was not a little remarkable that the noble lord, who was
such a champion of nationalities, should now be engaged,
in conjunction with France, in propping up a Government
in China which was obnoxious to the great majority of
the population. He denied that the Taepings were the
worthless multitude which they had been sometimes de-
scribed. It was true the war had been marked by great bar-
barities, but the barbarities were common to both sides, and
were only such as had characterised the warfare of the Tar-
tar race from the commencement of their history. Where,
however, the inhabitants submitted to the government of
the Taepings no devastations were perpetrated.. Upon that
point they were in possession of the evidence of British mer-
chants who had travelled over the whole country in posses-
sion of the Taepings. It was impossible for any one to sup-
pose that our operations on the coast of China could ewer •
cise any influence upon the result of the contest ; and if that
were so, it became a question whether they were not doing
more harm than good, even as regarded the commerce of
England, by interfering at all in the matter. It appeared to
him that her Majesty's Government had placed themselves
in a false position, and that, in their anxiety to preserve the
commerce of England, they had got into a difficulty out of
which they could neither advance nor recede.
No other hon. member rising to address the house, the
Speaker put the question, which was negatived without a
division.

On the main question, that the house resolve itself into
committee of supply, being again put,
Mr. COBDEN rose and said—Sir, during the course of
my experience in this house I have never encountered such
an occurrence as that which has taken place this evening.
(Cheers.) An hon. member opposite brings forward a most

important question—a question to which he has devoted con-
siderable labour, and which ho has stated with considerable
ability. (Hear.) There were undoubtedly many hon. gen-
tlemen prepared to take part in the discussion which, with
good reason, they imagined would arise ; and so, after the
hon. member had been followed by the hon. member for In-
verness, it was naturally expected that some answer would
be made by the hon. member representia3- the Government
to the observations of those hon. members. I think that
not merely a due regard for the ordinary routine of our pro-
cedure, but that common respect which was due to the hon.
members themselves, ought to have induced the hon. gen-
tleman to make some reply to the very important statement
which was laid before the house. (Renewed cheers.) I
consider this question of China, whether viewed from its
commercial or political aspect, to be one of the most grave
and perilous that can come before us. (Hear.) The forms
of the house will not allow us to continue tho discussion
now, and I can therefore only repeat my astonishment that
the Government had acted in the way they did this even-
ing. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. H. SEYMOUR concurred in the sentiment of est°.
nishment just expressed by the hon. member for Rochdale.
Such a scene he had never witnessed since he had had the
honour of a seat in that house. (Cheers.) It was the firm
conviction of many persons in the country that the expedi-
tion of Capt. S. Osborn had for its ultimate object the con-
quest of China; and yet, in respect of a question so grave
and so elaborately treated, they were not to be favoured
with any explanations on the part of the Government. In
his opinion the hon. members opposite had been treated
with the grossest disrespect—(hear)—and he hoped that
the question would be very speedily before the house again.
(Cheers.)

Lord NAAS said he had been 15 years in the house, and
he never recollected such an cecurrence as that which had
taken place that evening. (Cheers) The question of China
was perhaps the most important of all the questions likely
to occupy Parliament during the present session ; but it was
now made apparent that, if the Government thought fit to
disregard the ordinary forms of the house at any time, it
was open to them to deprive members of the opportunity of
discussing the most important questions. As it was no
doubt exceedingly disappointing that the subject should be
treated in such a way, he begged to give notice that he
would take an opportunity of again calling attention to it,
and the Government must not complain if for the purpose
he interposed en a supply night. (Cheers.)

Mr. WHITE said that when so scanty a house was pre-
sent to hear one of the most important questions discussed
that could be brought forward in Parliament—when they
found themselves with only an audience of some ten ora
dozen members—(cries of "No, no," from hon. members on
the benches below the Ministerial gangway)—on an occa-
sion of such interest, it really Was not surprising that the
debate collapsed. (No, no.) Personally, he greatly de-
plored that the Government had made no reply to the state-
ment of the hon, member opposite; but, at the same time,
when such general apathy was shown towards the question,
he did not think that their conduct upon that occasion ought
to have been visited with so severe a measure of wrath.
Mr, LAYARD desired to say a few words in explanation,

If his enthusiastic friend the hon. member for Poole (Mr.
H. Seymour) had looked at the notice paper, he would have
seen that he was precluded by the forms of the house from
immediately repl)ieg to the statement of the hon. members
opposite. On the paper there were no less than four notices
with respect to foreign affairs, and then there came another
notice with regard to China on the part of his hon. and gal-
lant friend the member for Aberdeen (Col. Sykes). He
therefore, very naturally, did not wish to preclude himself
from the opportunity of speaking in reply to those other
notices, which would have been the case had he risen im•
mediately after the hon. member for Inverness (Mr. Thalllie)
He must say he thought the observations of hon. members
were most unfair towards hims2lf, and that if the debate was
prematurely closed it was their own fault.

Mr. S. FITZGERALD said his hon. friend the Under-
Secretary for Foreign Affairs was under an entire misß p-
prehension ; for it would have been perfectly competent
for him to have addressed the house with respect to
each of the several notices referred to by him on the
question of going into committee of supply. (Hear,
hear.) However, he was very glad that it was owing to a
misapprehension that the discussion had ended as it had,
and that it was not owing to what bore the appearance of a
contempt for the feelings and opinions of members of the
house. (Hear, hear.)
Colonel SYKES said that if his hon. friend the Under-
Secretary had looked at his notice he must have seen that
it referred to papers which were included in the notice of the
hoe, member for Northumberland, and that would have
superseded the necessity of his addressing the house at all
with respect to that notice. He must say, as an indepen-
dent supporter of the Government, that he could not but
regret the effect which the occurrence of that evening would
have upon their reputation throughout the country. (Hear,
hear.)
Sir H. VERNEY reminded the house, in defence of the
Government, that the practice was for the Minister to reply
at the end of all the motions. (Cries of "No, no; ques-
tion.") In regard to the main subject, he believed that the
atrocities of the Chinese Government were nothing in com-
parison to the frightful conduct of the Taepings, who over-
ran districts of the country and devoured it like locusts.
The only means of restoring tranquillity and order was by
supporting the Imperial Government.
The motion was then agreed to.
The house went into committee of supply pro forma, and
immediately resumed.
THAMES EMBANKMENT (NORTH SIDE) BILL.

This bill, as amended, was considered and agreed to.
LONDON COAL AND WINE DUTIES CONTINU
ANCE BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
VACCINATION (IRELAND) BILL.

This bill, as amended, was considered and agreed to.
SALE OF MILL SITES, (IRELAND) BILL,
This bill was read a third time and passed.
STATUTE LABOUR, ROADS AND BRIDGES
(SCOTLAND) BILL.

This bill was committed pro forma.
STATUTE LABOUR ROADS AND BRIDGES

(SCOTLAND) TRANSFER BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
FISHERIES (IRELAND) BILL.

Mr. BRAND (for Sir R. Peel) obtained leave to intro-
duce a bill to amend the laws relating to fisheries in Ireland.
PIER AND HARBOUR OR ,ERS CONFIRMATION

BILL.

Mr. M. GIBSON moved that the select committee on the
Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation Bill, so far as it re.
lates to the piers at Llandudno and Rhyl, be appointed by
the committee of selection, in the same manner as in the
case of a private bill.

The motion was agreed to.
The house adjourned at a quarter-past 8 o'clock.