The Sun.
London, England, 1863-07-11 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 11, 1363,

State. I trust, from the action of her Majesty's Govern-
ment, such cases will not happen again to British subjects,
but with regard to Mr. Belsham I cannot tell where he is.
We have heard no more of him since the statement received
from Mr. Moore.

Mr, GREGORY—I wish to ask the hon. gentleman the
Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs two questions, which
1 think he can answer at once. The first is, when he spoke
of torture being applied to a British subject, did he mean
torture, and that it was employed on the part of the autho-
rities of the Confederate Government ? (Hear, hear.) The
second question is, whether, inasmuch as this is a very grave
affair, he will lay all the papers connected with the case on
the table of the house ?
Mr, LANA ELD—I am afraid that torture, in the staid
sense of the word, has been inflicted, and I am bound to say
that these acts were committed by persons apparently acting
under the general authority of the Confederate Government,
but at a distance from tne seat of Go vernment. On Monday
next I will state whether the papers can be produced.
THE PATRIOTIC FUND.
Col. NORTH asked the hon. member for Chichester if he
lintended to name a day to move for a select committee to in-
quire into the management and present condition of the
Patriotic Fund.

Mr. J. A. SMITH said he intended to move an address
for a Royal commission for ir quiry into the subject instead
of a select committee ; but, inasmuch as there was to be a
meeting of Royal commissioners on Tuesday next, he should
await its result.

me with reference to this lamentable war, and I ventured
to express my opinions frankly; but never did one word

cross my lips of what his Majesty was pleased to say to me,
either upon the maritime questions or upon any other of
the questions involved, until the 23d of last month, when
it was his pleasure I should make them known if 1 thought
proper. Perhaps, however, in any event, I would not have
divulged all that my hon. friend has stated. Perhaps I
could not have adopted the same tone. (Hear, hear.) Still
I must say that what fell from my hon. friend is but too
true ; and I am desirous of stating and proving to the
house—although I do not bring down a notebook for the

purpose—that that statement is too true. The question is
a very delicate one; but I could have proved, without re-
ference to books or notes—which under no circumstances

I would produce—that the despatch referred to by my hon,
and learned friend was not the despatch referred to by the
Under-Secretary as the despatch of November, and which
had been published in the lif oniteur, but a despatch written
about the month of February; and that despatch proves
that there was too much truth in the rumour with respect to
it. However, Igo no further into the question, as I con-
sider the statement of the noble lord of far more importance
than any obloquy cast upon me, inasmuch as it concerns the
peace and happiness of 10,000,000 of people and holding the
u
o cart with the Emperor ofintahbteho
ueFtlir ewnoarcrthlawinsodauyol
opinion that if the word "recognition" was pronounced in
g
that word would go forth to the States as a harbinger of'
peace—that the people of the Western States would receive
Nistiwthitjhoyjo, yin,
satneaddthofatbrminagniynthhaearl
ts also
hohewaielr
con-
sideration of the question is a thousand times of greater
consequence than any contumely or reproach that may be
passed upon an individual so humble as myself. Ido feel
for the Southern people. I feel that they are a nation—that
they are a down-trodden nation—(cheers)—and therefore I
want my hon. and learned friend not to give an answer to
the question put to him by my hon. and gallant friend with
ho has had full time to consider the statement of the noble
lord, and the extent to which the Government may be pre-
pared to go towards coinciding in the well-known views of
the Emperor of the French. It will be time enough for my
hon. and learned friend to say en Monday whether he will
sgcoootia is
nor
due,not anAdnwotehmerary have before Monday importanteason for hesitation is that the
intelligence that will induce the Government to come forward
and say that the time has arrived to acknowledge the Soutb,
and put an end to this useless war. I think my hon. and
learned friend will exercise both caution and prudence in not
giving a hasty answer to the appeal made to him, but that
he will wait until Monday for the purpose. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. CONINGHAM said no middle course was open to
them, and that the question ought not to be allowed to hang
over. Mr. Beecher—(laughter)—had told him that the
eyes of North America were fixed upon the conduct of
England—(renewed laughter)—and that nothing had
struck him with more admiration than the course which
the working classes of Lancashire had followed throughout
the contest. The working classes of Lancashire had been
throughout strong supporters of the Federal cause. (Loud
cries of " No, no.") He spoke ad visedly. Some 150 meet-
ings had been held in the manufacturing districts, and at
these meetings, with the exception of some ten or twelve,
resolutions were carried in favour of the North. In con-
clusion, the hon. member declared his firm belief that if the
hon. member for Sheffield went to a division he would find
himself in a disastrous minori y. (Cries of "No, no.")
Lord PALIVIERSroN—I desire to make tbis explana-
tion. I think the hon. member for SunderlandLind-
say) seemed to imagine that I gave some
pledge that on
Monday her Majesty's Government would state the course
which they intended to pursue. Now I said no such thing.
Mr. LINDSAY—What J said was that, as the Scotia
would be due before Monday, information might reach the
country which would induce the Government to alter the
views which they seem to hold.
Mr. KINGLARE desired to express his earnest hope
that the house would not too readily accept the principle
laid down by the noble lard at the head of the Govern
ment. A question so very novel was involved, that it
deserved the most serious attention of the house. The
argument of the noble lord against discussion would have
been very cogent and applicable before the speech of the
hon. member for Sheffield—(hear, hear)—but now that they
had become possessed of the subject, it was evident that
matters were before them pre-eminently calling for obser-
tion. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. B. OSBORNE—I, for one, never doubted the vera•
city of my hon. and learned friend the member for Sheffield.
(Hear.) I have known him too long not to know that he
is incapable of stating what is not the fact ; but, at the
same time, I must be allowed to state that I have not the
same confidence as to his discretion—(hear, hear, and
laughter)—and, if he will allow me to add, I think he is not
acting fairly towards the house in keeping the question
hanging over till Monday. I have the fullest confidence, as
regards American affairs, in her Majesty's Government. I
think they have conducted the American business all
through with singular ability, and that they deserve the
confidence of the house as regards this question. Ido en-
treat my hon. and learned friend not to keep the matter
hanging over us, but to state at once, "aye" or "nay,"
whether the question is to be brought before us on Monday

evening. (Hear, hear. )
Mr. GREGORY asked, was the hon. and learned mem-
ber for Sheffield satisfied with what had taken place that
evening ? For himself, he must say he had heard nothing
that evening to relieve the hon, and learnedi member from
the charge of inaccuracy. He considered it most impor-
tant that the country should know the real truth of the
question, for enough had come out of these personal
matters to show that the whole ought to be made known.
(Hear, hear.) Indeed, enough had fallen from the hon.
member for Sunderland to show that the country did not
know the real state of the case. With respect, how-
ever, to the great political question involved, he agreed it
t
be a very large majority
Was infinitely better that the discussion shoulct not be
continued ; and for this reasoagainsth he mot ion; n he ad no doubt there
not because
would
Brighton (Mr. Coningham) and all those who
of No, no)—for he believed that the hon.
of any sy nipathy on the part of the house with the cause of
tmheemNboerrthfo-r- (cries
thought with him,could be carried away in a single omni-
bus. (Laughter and cheers.) Still, he wished to prevent
the chance of its going forth to the world that the opinion
of the House of Commons was against the independence of
the Southern Confederacy.
Mr. W. E. FORSTER would put it to the house whether
it was desirable that the question should be allowed to drop
t
after the discussion of a single evening. The argument of
the noble lord was very efficient about its being brought
forward at all; but nothing had been stated to
show that
they ought not to come to a conclusion, once the question
was fairly before them • .d
the common sense of the ques-
tion before them was this, was every section of that house
that if anything could convince
He thought the Houseof Commons
ought to mark its sense of the unconstitutional attempt of
tithavfoeran diplomacypoer s o
v f its own for carrying on negotiations
with foreign
the hen. member for Sheffield to import a foreign element
into
the hon. and learned member for Sheffield of the advise-
course of the discussion that evening. Those who urged
discussions.L
Lord said
the hon. member not to press his motion to a division
were, one and all, friends to the South, including the hon.
baronet the member for Ayrshire (Sir J. Fergussou
), and
their well-known Confederate Premier. (Laughter.) On
bil ityof
acceding to the appeal made to him, it was the
theirn . c uc i
the other hand the only persons who urged him to go on
were the hon. members for Bradford and Brighton.
(No, no, from Mr. Coningham.) Well, at all events, he
was urged by the hon. member for Bradford (Mr. Forster),
who was a fanatic on the side of the North, to go to a divi-
sion, in the hope, no doubt, to steal a vote in favour of the
North. He believed, however, that his hon. and learned
friend was too wise to take advice from Federal zealots,
whose anxiety was, not to establish a principle of interna-
tional law, but to render some slight assistance to the
Northern cause in the days of supreme agony, (Hear.)
Considering the important intelligence that was travelling
across the Atlantic, considering the military operations
which had been reported already in the City and in that
house, and considering the effect which that news might
he thought the hon. and learned gentleman
would
produce,-until Monday.
Mr. wisely in reserving his decision
Mr. ROEBTJCA. said that amid the multitude of coun-
sellors there was safety ; and he would accept the advice of
the noble lord who had just sat down, an a
d would give his
answer on Monday next. He thought r
y much better
answer might be given before that day ; but,
as the hon.
member for Galway had drawn a distinction between the
personal and the political, he was bound, in justice to him-
self, to say that he would also give an answer to that on
Monday.
Mr. LAYARD said, after what had fallen from the hon.
member for Galway and the on. member forinnl
he could not remain quite silhent. He would, the first
place, put the hon. member for Galway right upon one
The hon. member intimated that he (Mr. Layard)
point .
stated that Baron Gros had not left a copy of the despatch
to which he had referred. Now, ho had said nothing of the
kind. What ho had stated was that a copy of the despatch
had not been left with her Majesty's Government, because
it was not a confidential despatch, but a public one, having
been previously published in the Moniteur. With respect
to the remarks of the honourable member for Sunderland,
he would remind the house that the hon. and learned
member for Sheffield had made two allegations—first, that a
communication had been made to her Majesty's Govern-
ment, earnestly wishing to ascertain whether they were pre-
pared to unite with the Government of the Emperor in re-
cognising the independence of the Confederate States .
secondly, that a despatch had been communicated to the Go-
vernment at Washington which had been confidentially
sent by the French Emperor to her Majesty's Government;
and that on that account the Emperor declined making
another proposal to her Majesty's Government. The answer
to that statement, as given by the Moniteur, was most com-
plete, and showed that the Emperor had made no asserti •
on
of the kind. What the Emperor stated was
request—not that he had requested—Baron Gros to sound
her Majesty's Government. With regard to the
second
statement, the hon. member for Sunderland had put the
question on an entirely different issue.
The statement made
the other night was that, in consequence of a breach
con-
fidence, the Emperor of the French would not makeof
any
further proposals. But if the despatch had been sent in
Febrnary of last year which her NI • ty' . aies s Government were

accused of having communicated, the whole question fell to
the ground, because the proposal was not actually made until
the month of November. That despatch of which they had

heard for the first time tonight had been communicated in

February or April; if so, how came it that the proposal
should only have been made in November of the same year?
The Moniteur had clearly pointed out the despatch of Octo-
ber as the despatch which, by some misapprehension on the
part of the hon. and learned gentleman, had been commu-
nicated to the American Government. He had stated the
other night, most unreservedly, and without equivocation,
that no such communication of any despatch whatev r to
her Majesty's Government had been made to the Govern-
ment of the United States, either in the early or latter part
of the year. He now distinctly reasserted that. He had
gone through every despatch himself ; the chief clerk in
the department, and another clerk, had done the same ;
so that there had been three minute searches from the be-
ginning of 1862 up to the present time; and he declared
upon his honour that no trace of any such despatch could
be found in the Foreign-office. (Hear.) There must have
been, therefore, some misapprehension on the part of the
hon. and learned gentleman. [Mr. Roebuck—Not the
least.] (Laughter.) He would remind the hon. member
for Sunderland that he had fallen into a similar mistake
last year ; and it was the more surprising that he had not
taken warning from what had then occurred. In April
last year the hon, member came to this country with a con-
fidential communication; but he had scarcely arrived when
a telegraphic message was received stating that the hon.
member was not authorised to make that communication.
(Laughter.) What he (Mr. Layard) stated was no secret;
the whole mistake arose from the hon, member having as-
sumed the character of a special envoy.
Mr. AYRT ON suggested that, unless they had a dis-
tinct intimation fr,,m the hon. and learned member for
Sheffield that he would proceed with the debate on Mon-
day, it would be for the convenience of the house to put
the adjourned debate down as the last order.
Viscount PALMERSTON proposed, in fulfilment of the
pledge given to the hon. and learned gentleman, to put
down the debate as the first order. But if the hon. and
learned gentleman did not proceel with it, the Government
would take the Fortifications Bill, and after that the Relief
Bill.

Mr. TAYLOR protested against the adjournment of the
debate, and against such a violation of international law as
that proposed by the hon. and learned member for Sheffield
in favour of the recognition of a state founded on slavery.
The motion for the adjournment was then withdrawn.
POLAND.

Mr. BEAUMONT inquired when the hon. member for
King's County intended to proceed with his motion on
Poland.

Mr. HENNESSY said he wished the discussion should
take place as early as possible, and he hoped the noble lord
would give bim Thursday for the purpose.
Viscount PALMERSTON said he was desirous of pro-
ceeding with supply on Thursday; but he would give the
hon. member Monday week.
Mr, HORSMAN hoped the noble lord would reconsider
his decision, and allow the discussion to be taken on Thurs-
day.

After a few words from Sir G. Grey, Mr. Sclater-Booth,
and Mr. Collins, who suggested that a series of morning
sittings should be given to the discussion of Poland,
Mr. H ENNESSY expressed his surprise, after the
pledge given by the noble lord on a former occasion, that he
should now object to give Thursday for the discussion of
the Polish question, The right hon. member for Stroud
had a motion on the paper on the same subject, and he
trusted the right hon, gentleman would inaugurate the dis-
cussion.

Mr. HORSMAN said he had not put his notice on the
paper with any intention of interfering with the hon. mem-
ber for King's County; but, believing that it was extremely
important to have a discussion on Poland, he should on
every motion for supply endeavour to raise the discussion,
unless the Government gave up Thursday for the purpose.
Lord PALMERSTON said the hon. member for King's
County accused him of a breach of faith. He denied the
accusation. He had promised to give the hon. member a
Government night, and he now offered him Monday night
week, which was a Government night.
The matter then dropped.
VANCOUVER'S ISLAND.
Mr. FITZ WILLIAM moved for copies of any corres-
pondence between Mr. Langford and the Colonial Depart-
ment, relative to alleged abuses in the Government of Van-
couver's Island ; and between the Colonial Government and
Governor Douglas, referring to Mr. Langford's changes ;
and with the Government of Vancouver's Island relative to
the appointment of Chief Justice Cameron, and the remon-
strances against such appointment ; and of any petition re-
cently received from Vancouver's Island praying for the
redress of grievances.
Mr. C. FORTESCUE was willing to grant the papers if
the words "or extracts" were inserted in the motion. He
would propose an amendment to that effect.
After a few words from Mr. Pender, Mr. Malins, and Mr.
Wyld,
Lord PALMERSTON hoped the hon. member would
assent to the insertion of these words. It was the regular
way in which motions for correspondence wherein there
might be mixed up personal details were framed.
Mr. FITZ WILLIAM assented,
The amendment and motion were then withdrawn, on
the understanding that the papers would be granted as an
unopposed return.
THE BOARD OF WORKS.

Sir S. M. PETO, in calling attention to the want of
efficient control of the public works of the country, and
the necessity of reorganising the Board of Works, with a
view to remedying the evil, said there were 120 buildings
in England and 24 in Scotland, 17 parks, 10 post-offices,
31 probate registries, and £28,000 a year for several
offices rented, which paid their owners from 5 to 7 per
cent., under the care of the First Commissioner, who ought
therefore to be called the First Commissioner of Parks,
Palaces, and Public Offices. And yet the real public works
of the country were conducted by the departments with
which they were severally connected. For instance, the
Admiralty took charge of the harbours throughout this
country. Now in France, if a dock was to be made, it was
referred to the Minister of Public Works, who was guided
by the navy department and other officials in drawing up
the plans. To illustrate the expensive system adopted in
this country, ho might say that the harbour of Keyham cost
four times the amount of its original estimate; and that
though the first estimate for Alderney harbour was only
£650,000, the construction of one pier cost £1,500,000. A
like extravagant departure from the original estimate took
place in the case of Holyhead harbour, and the story would
be repeated until the public works of the country were
placed under one Minister, who would be responsible to
Parliament. In France, Prussia, Austria, and Italy shch
a system prevailed, and the result was that estimates were
not exceeded to any considerable extent ; that plans were
well considered before they were undertaken ; and that no
useless works were constructed, at an extravagant cost. He
desired to see a similar system adopted in this country, and
he believed that it would result both in economy and
efficiency. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. B. COCHRANE expressed his conviction that
nothing would be done to improve the present system until
things became intolerable, when Parliament might inter-
fere. With regard to the public monuments, it was most
desirable that they should be put under the control of some
responsible authority, and the metropolis saved from the
absurdity of a statue without legs or arms—(laughter)—
being erected in Leicester-square.
Sir C. WOOD denied that the changes which were
made in the original plans for Alderney, Keyham, or
Holyhead harbours had been the result of want of fore.
sight or extravagance. When first projected, steamers
were very small; but, when they assumed the proportions
which they now exhibited, the harbours in question had to
be increased in a like manner. That, and not the department
which had charge of the works, had led to the expense.
Sir F. SMITH admitted that any suggestion in regard
to public works coming from the hon. baronet the member
for Finsbury deserved the utmost attention, but he did not
believe that the plan of concentration as proposed would
secure either efficiency or economy. He advised them not
to attempt to cent! alise too much, or they would get into a
difficulty, for they would get men overcharged with work
they could not superintend, and men would be placed to
conduct works they could not accomplish.
Sir J. TRELAWNY supported a more efficient control
over public works.
Col, FRENCH referred to the state of Holyhead harbour.
Mr. COWPER defended the present conduct of public
works in this country, and contrasted our system with that
adopted in France. He urged that our system was the pre-
ferable for this country. He thought it was impossible to
separate the political from the permanent duties of the
First Commissioner of Works. The effect of the separation
would be to place the political part in the hands of a head
of department who would have neither the time nor the
leisure to make himself so conversant with the details of
the office as was required from a Parliamentary head who
was responsible to Parliament for his own department. It
was a mistake to suppose that the estimates were never ex-
ceeded under the French system ; on the contrary, it was
of very frequent occurrence, and must always be so where
plans were altered. Latterly we had consulted competent
judges for designs for public buildings, instead of leaving
it entirely to the First Commissioner of Works, and he in-
stanced the National Gallery, the Houses of Parliament,
and the proposed new Foreign Office, which he thought
was a very near approach to the suggestion of
the hon. member who had brought forward this subject.
The right hon. gentleman referred to the impossibility of
forming a suitable council of architects to co-operate with
his department, on account of the two great schools into
which the profession was divided, viz., the Gothic and the
classic. He deprecated the superficial criticism to which the
office had been subjected, and showed that none of the great
failures which had been pointed at had occurred since he
came into power. He had no control whatever over Leices-
ter-square, otherwise the statue in the centre would have
been long since repaired ; and it was equally true that he
was in no way responsible for what occurred in St. Paul's.
As for the fountains in Trafalgar-square, the fault lay in
their original construction ; but he had done much to im-
prove them.
Mr. LINDSAY referred to Alderney harbour, and as-
serted that, notwithstanding the enormous sums expended

there, it was worthless as a harbour of refuge, and question-
able for the purposes of defence.
The subject then dropped.
THE ATTACK UPON TRINGANU.

Sir J. HAY rose to direct attention to the attack upon
Tringanu, the capital of the southern province of the king-
dom of Siam, which took place on the 1211 November last,
and to move for papers. The hon. and gallant officer stated
the particulars of the outrage of which he complained, which
were shortly these : It appeared that the younger brother of
the King of Siam, whose pretensions had been favoured by
the Dutch, had taken refuge in Tringanu with the Rajah,
his uncle ; and it having been supposed that the ex-Sultan
of Lingga was concerned in a conspiracy against his brother,
and in injuring the trade between the dis' rict of Benang and
Singapore, the merchants of the latter place petitioned the
governor, Col. Kavanagh, to demand the surrender of the
ex-Sultan from the Rajah of Tringanu. Major Macpherson
was deputed to negotiate with the Rajah for the purpose.
Capt. Corbett and an English squadron were also despatched
to Tringanu. This seemed to be the usual way of proceed-
ing in the East to unite a political officer with a military or
naval one ; the former would be sure to quarrel, and, as a
matter of course, the latter would be sure to fight. Well,
Major Macpherson waited upon the Rajah, and demanded
the surrender of his nephew. The uncle asked Major Mac-
pherson whether England, at t he bidding of another Power,
would give up a political refugee—whereupon Major Mac-
pherson returned to the squadron, reported that his diplo-
matic endeavours were at an end, and directed Captain
Corbett to bombard Tringanu. It was due to Captain Cor-
bett to say that he was desirous of doing the smallest pos-
sible injury to the town ; but, owing to the unsteady posi •
tion of the vessels, a portion of the town was set on fire by
the shells. He could only say that this outrage was dis-
graceful to the arms of England, and he hoped the right
hon. gentleman would lay copies of all the papers on the
table.

Sir C. WOOD said he could not complain of the hon. and
gallant gentleman for bringing forward this subject ; at the
same time he was in difficulty on account of not having re
ceived from the Government of India an official statement
of the transactions complained of; and it would be hardly
just towards the officers implicated to pronounce an opinion
upon their conduct until all the facts were in his possession.
The origin of the interference of the Governor of Singapore
arose in this way :—There was a southern district called
Benang which was friendly to the English Government,
and between it and Singapore a considerable trade was car-
ried on. The ox-Sultan of Lingga, who had placed himself
under the protection of his uncle, the Rajah of Tringanu,
having been charged with getting up plots against his
brother, and destroying the trade between Benang and
Singapore, Col. Kavanagh at the request of the merchants
of Singapore, directed Major Macpherson to obtain redress,
and the result was the bombardment of Tringanu. He
would give the hon. and gallant officer a list of the papers;
and if he thought they were of importance, they would be
produced. _ _ _

After a few words from Mr. LIDDELL and Lord NAAS,
in condemnation of our present policy in the East, the sub.
ject dropped.

RAILWAY ACCIDENTS.

Mr. BENTINCK, in calling attention to the subject of
railway accidents, said a great part of the mischief was at-
tributable
to over-speed. This was the conclusion arrived
at by the committee over which he presided five years ago,
but he regretted to say that the resolutions then adopted
had never been acted on. A most inhuman argument had
been used by the President of the Board of Trade against
the interference of the house with the present excessive rate
of speed, in saying, on a former occasion that, out of many
millions of travellers, a few individuals only had been
maimed or killed. Mr. Stephenson, a manufacturer of loco-
motives, said that any person who knew as much as he did
of the effect of speed on express trains, and who was killed
when travelling thereby, ought to be buried on the cross-
roads as a confirmed lunatic. (Hear, and laughter.) The
hon. member concluded by moving that, in the opinion of
the house, it was the duty of the Government to legislate
for the better prevention of such accidents.
Mr. DUTTON Supported the motion, and agreed with
his hen. friend (Mr. Bentinck) that speed was the principal
cause of railway accidents.
Mr. M. GIBSON did not well understand what his hon.
friend wished that the Government should do.

Mr. BENTINCK explained that what he desired was,
that the Board of Trade should have the power to interfere
when the rate of speed travelled on any line was considered
not consistent with safety.

Mr. M. GIBSON continued—Speed was a relative term,
and what might be a safa rate on one railway might be a
very unsafe rate on another. Speed depended on the con-
dition of the permanent way, the rolling stock, the curves,
and gradients, and he for one could not consent that the
best managed lines should be reduced to the standard of the
worst. (Hear, hear.) if interference were at all attempted, it
would be necessary to have a sliding scale of speed— (hear)—
but that he believed was a task whichcould not be discharged
by any Government department. The best security for the
public lay in the damages awarded by juries for negligent or
reckless management ; but, however that might be, it was
satisfactory to know that railway accidents were yearly de-
creasing. In 1861 there were 56 accidents, attended with 46
deaths and 781 injuries; and in 1862, 52 accidents, with 24
deaths and 537 injuries. But while in the former year the
number of passengers was 173,000,000, in the latter they
amounted to 183,000,000. In regard to the present year the
returns were not completed, but during its first halt there had
been only 16 accidents, attended with four deaths and 165 in-
juries,.which showed a considerable CI ecrease as compared with
preceding years. Speed had not been altogether the cause of
accidents, many of them having arisen from collision, the ne-
gligence of the railway servants, and a want of sufficient
break power, It was difficult to guard against negligence and
no legislation could prevent it more efficaciously than by
the present law, which made companies pecuniarily respon-
sible. The best for the public was to leave the law as it at
present stands, leaving it to the directors of railways to
transport travellers from point to point in the best and
safest manner, subject to their present responsibilities.
Mr. HODSON said railway directors would be glad to
throw their responsibility on some Government department.
Railway directors were most anxious to ensure safety to
passengers, but often accidents occurred which were beyond
their control. Nine-tenths of the accidents occurred from
want of punctuality of the trains, and not from speed. He
undertook to say that, where the rolling stock and perma•
nent way were in good condition, and the directors and obi•
cials did their duty, accidents were extremely infrequent,
Mr. H. LEWIS differed in opinion from the hon. mem-
ber that the frequency of accidents arose from unpunctua-
lity from one terminus to another. He believed that less
accidents arose from fast trains, because more attention was
paid to them. He admitted very many accidents occurred
from the loss of time at intermediate stations, owing to
their having to make up those losses by spasmodic efforts
at increased bpeed. He considered the object of the motion
was not to relieve, but increase the responsibility of rail-
way directors. The Government inquiries into accidents
several hours after every trace had been removed was a
farce, for it was ridiculous to imagine that railway servants
would convict themselves of negligence. To save acci•
dents, railway directors must be made to feel in their
pockets for unpunctuality at intermediate stations.
After some remarks from Mr. CONINGHAM and Mr.
KINNAIRD,
The motion was withdrawn.
THE UNION MERCANTILE COMPANY OF
PORTUGAL.
Mr. AYRTON called the attention of the house to the

losses sustained by British subjects in consequence of the
acts of the Government of Portugal respecting the Union
Mercantile Company, guarnnteed by Royal decree, and by
_ _ _ _ _

acts of the legislation of Portugal. He considered that
whereas in this case the English public had shown no rash-
ness in the matter, but had adopted every possible precau-
tion and had rcted on the good faith of the Portuguese Go-
vernment, it was a case in which our Government ought to
interfere—and he hoped the exertions that had been made
to get redress from the Portuguese Government would be
continued, and ultimately bocome successful. He asked
for the production of papers relative to the subject.
Mr. LAYARD said the papers should be produced. It

was too complicated a question for him then to enter into
details. There could be no doubt those Englishmen who

had invested their money in this company had been de-
ceived by the Portuguose Government, but he hoped they
would listen to the recommendations of her Majesty's Go-
vernment. It was for the interest of the Portuguese Govern•
ment to admit the claim of these English capitalists. ,
THE COURTS OF LAW AT WESTMINSTER,
AND IN THE CITY OF LONDON.

Mr. M. SMITH called attention to the insufficient ac-
commodation in the courts of law at Westminster and in
the City of London, and asked the First Commissioner of
Works whether it was the intention of the Government to
introduce any measure for providing courts suited to the
increased wants of the country. The hon. and learned gen-
tleman stated he brought the matter forward on behalf of
the suitors and the public; for the present courts were defi-
cient in ventilation, and in all convenient arrangements.
Of the eight courts at Westminster there were only two
suitable for the transaction of business—namely, the first
Queen's Bench and the first Exchequer. And in the City
there were only two courts—the first Queen's Bench and
the first Common Pleas—fit for the transaction of business.
He did not think the City authorities were fairly open to
blame for this deficient accommodation, as it was only in
recent years that the practice obtained of bolding double
sittings for each of the superior courts. Formerly one
judge from each court went into the City to try causes.
Mr. MALINS wished to make an appeal on behalf of the
courts of equity, which were still more inconvenient. The
right hon. gentleman the First Commissioner of Works
had visited the court at Lincoln's-inn, and saw the insuffi-
cient accommodation. There was no place for the juries,
and no room to retire to consider their verdict. Two of the
Vice-Chancellors sat in sheds that were a disgrace to the
country. It became the duty of the Government to provide
one large building for all the courts of the country, or, at
any rate, to improve the equity courts at Lincoln's-inn.
Mr. COLLIER supported the motion, and in doing so
said, if a new trial were moved for in the Queen's Bench,
the chances were that, owing to the pressure of business' it
could not be heard for 12 months, The judicial strenolliof
the country was not sufficient to discharge the duties ;laced
on it.
Mr. COWPER rose to reply, but having already spoken
was prevented from again addressing the house.
The SOLICITOR,GENERAL regretted that the bill

of last year had been passed, but would prefer to bear the
ills that were now suffered than see any plan adopted which
permanently separate the courts of law and equity.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER defended
the scheme, and declared that the cost then stated would
have been the maximum cost of the building.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND an-
nounced, in reply to Mr. Whiteside, that the consolidation
of the Irish statute law had been actually entered upon.
After some observations from Mr. C. BENTINCK, the
subject dropped, and the house went into committee of sup-
ply pro forma, but immediately resumed.
The Sydney Branch Mint 13111 passed through committee.
The Promissory Notes and Bills of Exchange Bill passed
through committee.
The Alkali Works Regulation Bill as amended was con-
sidered.
The Fisheries (Ireland) Bill was read a third time.
The India Stock (Remuneration) Bill was reported.
The India Stock Bill passed through committee.
The following bills were read a second time : Green-
wich Hosi ital (Provisions for Widows) Bill; Metropolitan.
Main Drainage Extension Bill ; Growing Crops Seizure
(Ireland) Bill ; and English Church Services in Wales Bill.
The Navy Prize Agents Bill was read a third time and

passed.
The Nuisances Removal Act (1855) Amendment Bill
passed through committee.
On the motion of Mr. BRUCE, leave was given to intro-
duce a bill to confirm certain provisional orders made under
an Act of the fifteenth year of her present Majesty, to facili-
tate arrangements for the relief of turnpike trusts; and also
a bill to amend the law relating to the repair of turnpike
roads, and to continue certain turnpike Acts in England.
Mr. WHALLEY was moving an address on the subject
of the Jesuits, when an hon. member suggested that there
were not forty members present, and
The house stood adjourned at twenty minutes to two.