The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-27 00:00:00

BOW-STREET POLICE-COURT.

Sir G. BOWYER desired to refer to a case at the Bow-
street Police-court, which was reported in the newspapers
of Wednesday, the 24th. It appeared that a boy named
Nicholls, 12 years of age, was charged before the magis-
trate (Mr. Corrie) with stealing a horse and cart from
Covent-garden Market. The father said the boy had borne
a good character until recently, but that, having fallen into
bad company, he bad taken to stealing small articles and
small sums of money, and therefore he thought that the best
thing to be done was to send him to a reformatory. Mr.
Corrie asked whether the father was willing to pay ss. a
week for the purpose, when the father said that his earnings
were only 15s a week, and that be had a wife and three other
children to support ; nevertheless, he would try to pay the
5& a week rather than the boy should go on in his present
ways. The mother then stated that she was a Catho-
lic, and that the boy had been brought up in that faith,
although the father was a Protestant. Said Mr. Corrie :
" His religion does not appear to have done him much good
—(Great laughter, and cries of "Hear, hear ")—and per-
haps the best thing for him to do would be to change it,"
(Renewed laughter, and cries of " Hear, hear.") However,
after some consultation between the parents, they agreed
that the boy should continue a Catholic, but subse-
quently, on being told that it might be easier to get him
into a Protestant reformatory, they determined upon leav-
ing it to the magistrate to settle the question of the child's
religion. Now, he (Sir G. Bowyer) wanted to know
whether the right hon. gentleman the Home Secretary had
instituted any inquiry into the most extraordinary conduct
on the part of the magistrate.

Sir G. GREY said that on looking into the newspaper
report of the case he found there was nothing in it to justify
him in calling upon the magistrate for an explanation. But
the magistrate had sent him a memorandum to the effect
that a member of the bar, a Catholic, had called his
attention to the report in the newspaper, which was under-
stood to imply that he (Mrr Corrie) had induced the boy to
change his religion ; but the gentleman in question acknow-
ledged that the charge was entirely without foundation.
The boy •was 12 years old, and he had been twice brought
up on a charge of felony, and, under the circumstances, Mr.
Corrie was quite justified in sending him to a reformatory.
Further, having ascertained that the only religious instruc-
tien he ever received was from Catholic clergymen,
Mr. Corrie decided upon sending the boy to the Roman
Catholic reformatory at Walthamstow, in case there should
be room in that establishment to receive him. (Hear, hear.)
MR. HUNT AND THE EXHIBITION BUILDING.

Mr. DILLWYN asked the First Commissioner of Works
whether Mr. Hunt, who had made the estimate for the re-
pairing, altering, and arranging the International building
at South Kensington, was the same Mr. Hunt who took
out the quantities for Sir C. Barry for the New Houses of
Parliament, which quantities formed the basis of the first
estimate of £750,000 for the construction of the Houses of
Parliament; and whether Mr. Hunt, who had been em-
ployed by Government to value the Exhibition building be-
longing to Messrs. Kelk and Lucas, was or had been em-
ployed for Mr. Kelk as his surveyor and valuer.
Alr. COWPER said that Mr. Hunt did take out the quan-
tities for Sir C. Barry which formed the basis of the first esti-
mate.at for the construction of the Houses of Parliament ; but
only showed that 26 years. ago Mr. Hunt occupied a
position in his professionu entitling him to undertake so im-
that hoe
portant a duty
authority of documents laid upon the
He could, however, prove most satisfac-
torily, upon th
estimates roaleu2bye.sinlrthe year 1837, the correctness of the
estimates for the build'in Runt. It was well known that the
„tug were exceeded, but not through
quantities, but because Sir C. Barry
errors in the original
zitahiant had been originally made,
had disregarded the dra
at first designed, Then
employed about tehrooleeeoryead ruspaegnoibnycluNilrry.
and had not erected the hqueatiz
withth.at
i‘rierg.airiduntot
wasthe other
by
44/ sit the
KelkVic-
toriao
Kelk to make a valuation of theploanndhis
yaipniaetlio
any inferenceo
station, Pimlico, and that u
made a purchase to the extent of something like
If, however, the hon. member meant to imply
derogatory to Mr. Hunt from that fact, he was particularly
in the wrong. Any such insinuation against the professional
character of Mr. Hunt would be entirely groundless. Mr.
Hunt was one of the most truthful and honest of men, and

he possessed a most unblemished reputation. If the hon.
gentleman meant to insinuate—(Loud cries of "Order"
compelled the right hon. gentleman to resume his seat.)

THE QUESTION OF POLAND.

Mr. BENTINCK—I beg to ask my hon. friend the
member for King's County whether, in consequence of the
entirely altered position of the Polish question, and in con•
sequence of the very grave disclosures made the other even-
ing by the noble lord at the head of the Government, it is
his intention to bring on the Polish question on Monday
next.

Mr. HENNESSY said his hon. friend was one of those
who upon a recent occasion, voted against the motion of the
noble viscount at the head of the Government, that the dis-
cussion with respect to Poland should take precedence of
the orders of the day, and therefore the request of his hon.
_ _

friend was entitled to the more consideration. But, as he be-
lieved the Government were in daily expectation of receiv-
ing the answer of the Russian Government to the recent
despatch, he should fix his motion for Monday, in the hope
that the noble viscount would repeat the motion on that
evening which he had made upon a former occasion.
Subsequently, a discussion took place as to the advisa-
bility of fixing the motion for Monday--it appearing, ac-
cording to S r George Grey's statement, uncertain whether
Lord Palmerston would be in his place cn that evening—
which was terminated by

Mr. HENNESSY saying that he should fix the motion
for Thursday. (Hear, hear.)
TERRY'S RIFLE.
_ .

In reply to Mr. H. BERKELEY,
The Marquis of HARTINGTON said that the com-
manding officer of the 18th Hussars had expressed the
highest satisfaction with respect to Terry's rifle, which had
been in use in the regiment for two years, except in regard
to a trifling difficulty experienced when the weapon was
used for blank firing.
MONDAY'S BUSINESS.

111 reply to Mr. B. COCHRANE,
Sir G. GREY said the first business to bo taken on
Monday would be the report on the bill relating to public
works in Lancashire and Cheshire; and that supply would
be the next order on the paper.

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JUNE 27, 1863.

to pursue the course which had been adopted in this in
stance, and which would always prove unsatisfactory.

After a few words from Mr. BLACKBURNE and Mr. Mmt
the subject was allowed to drop.
THE IRISH CHURCH.

Mr. B. OSBORNE rose to move that a select committee
be appointed to inquire into the present ecclesiastical settle-
ment of Ireland. The hon. member said, in common with
many members on both sides of the house, he could not but
regret the position which this question of the Irish Church
had assumed ; and he was not surprised that his hon. friend
the member for Swansea (Mr. billwyn) should feel disap-
pointed at the somewhat Fabian policy displayed by the
Government when he brought it before the house. At the
same time, it should be remembered how great was the
ignorance which prevailed in this country on the prospects
and position of the Irish Church, and how long an in-
terval had elapsed since the treatment of a question which
was both the stalking-horse and the sturablin4block of
the Whig party, but which now, no doubt, found but
little favour on the Treasury bench. (Ironical cheers.)
True, it was far easier and much more popular to read
lectures to the Emperor of Russia on the management
of Poland than to legislate for Ireland—(hear, hear)—
and he could imagine that the ghost of Banquo rising
in the midst of the festivities was not more unwelcome to
Macbeth than we s the revival of this question to the noble
lord and those of his colleagues who formerly rocked the
cradle of the Irish Church agitation, but who finally stood
by, if not as murderers, at least in the character of mutes,
at the downfall of their old friend "appropriation." (Much
laughter and cheers.) Nevertheless, despite all, in the face
of the returns recently moved for, in the face of the census
of 1861, it would not ho possible for any long period for the
House of Commons to avoid dealing with the ecclesiastical
settlement of Ireland. Great ignorance prevailed in Eng-
land upon the subject. Indeed, he could not but think that
more knowledge was displayed here en the concerns of China
than on the affairs of Ireland. Ireland was very much in the
same situation she was described to be in 20 years ago by
Lord Russell. She was occupied, but not governed. (Oh,
oh, and cries of "Hear, hear.") There was a tranquillity of
exhaustion on the surface, but discontent, if not dissatisfac-
tion was below. (No, no, and hear, hear.) The hon. mem-
ber then referred to the opinions formerly pronounced by
Lord Carlisle, Lord Palmerston, and Sir G. Grey, on the
subject of the Irish Church. The opinion of Lord Palmer-
ston, declared in 1843, was to the effect that in no country
of the world was there a grievance to compare with the Irish
Church establishment—it was a grievance of an enormous
character ; it was a grievance which it was within the power
of the Government to remedy, and for which the Govern-
ment were bound to provide an instant remedy. (Loud iro-
nical cheers.) Such was the declaration made by the Lord
Palmerston of 1843 ; and here was the declaration of the
Home Secretary of to-day. The hon. member quoted from
the speech of Sir G. Grey, delivered in Feb., 1844, in which
the right hon. baronet declared that the Irish people could
not look upon the Irish Church except with the most egre-
gious dissatisfaction; and that nothing could be more hazard-
ous than for Parliament to refuse to entertain the question.
(Cheers.) Well, where were the remedial measures produced
by those men for the rectification of this enormous griev-
ance. Searching the records of Parliament for the present
session, he found that a compulsory bill for the vaccination
of adults and infants, and a bill now hanging in nubibus for
the protection of Irish salmon, had exhausted the 'Whig
budget of reform for Ireland. [Loud cheers and laughter.)
He would ask, should such a state of things be allowed to
continue by the Liberal party. (Loud cheers.) He owned
at the outset that he for one did not contemplate the de-
struction of the Irish Church. It would neither be politic
nor prudent to uproot it, What he contended for was that
there should be some adaptation of its monstrous establish-
ment. He intended to prove that, so far from the Churches
of England and Ireland being united, they were dissimilar
in all respects. the Church of England had been always
identified with the liberties of Englishmen, and her clergy
were as tolerant and as educated a race as any clergy on the
face of the globe. But could any one affirm that the Irish
clergy had been identified with the liberties of the Irish
people ? As an institution the Church of Ireland was a
plunderer ; as national religion, it was a fraud, although
a pious fraud. (Much laughter and cheers.) Anyone who
had had the misery to listen to Irish sermons must know
that the great bulk of the Irish clergy were Puritanical and
Calvinistic in their tendencies ; and certainly that was not
the case in England. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman
had also complained that the whole revenues of the Irish
Church only yielded £2OO per annum on the average to
each clergyman; but he did not know that that was not
quite enough, considering the small amount of work they
did. (Hear.) The fact was that the present immense staff
of archbishops, bishops, archdeacons and clergy was most
ridiculously large as compared with the number of Pro-
testants in Ireland. Bishops with only 5,000 Protestants
in the whole of their diocese were in receipt of £5,000 and
£6,000 a year, with a large staff of archdeacons and clergy.
He recommended that the number of bishops should be
reduced from twelve to six, and the salaries (as formerly re-
commended by Sir W. P. Wood) to a uniform £1,500 a
year. The hon. gentleman caused some laughter by reading
an auctioneer's catalogue of the effects of a deceased bishop,
which included 100 dozen of wine, 200 fallow deer, &c.,
and which he said was a disgrace to the age. The hon. gen-
tleman quoted Archdeacon Stopford and several other emi-
nent Irish Churchmen, who were in favour of reform. The
hon. gentleman gave an account of the incomes of the
bishops and clergy of the different dioceses, the number of
Protestants and Catholics in each parish, and the church
accommodation in comparison with the number of Pro-
testants who attended the church services. In one case the
number of Protestants, including the parson and clerk, was
eight, and the church accommodation for 150 ; in another
there was church accommodation for 100 persons, and one
policeman only attended. On the other hand, there were
parishes containing over 3,000 population, with church ac-
commodation for 500, but only 31 Protestants, the bishop's
income being £1,152. In Powerstown there was a population
of 400, with church accommodation for 100, and the attend-
ants—one policeman ; but, to be sure, there was one other
Protestant parishioner in the parish, but he had been bed-
ridden
for years. (Laughter.) He quoted those facts from
the " Irish Church Directory," a work which the right
hon. gentleman the member for the University of Dublin
had said could be perfectly relied on, and they proved that
the Protestants were limited in number and that the clergy
almost exceeded in number their flocks. The remedy be
proposed was to reduce them in the same proportion as
he proposed to diminish the bishops. He next called atten-
tion to the number of clergymen who did not reside in
their respective parishes, and he asked to be informed
whether those absentees could claim to be paid their tithe
rent charge. (Hear, hear,) The "Irish Church Direc-
tory" summed up these facts with the observation that the
census showed that, whether as regarded population or
distribution, the result could not be regarded otherwise
than satisfactory. He urged that the house should take
the matter into their consideration, and send her Majesty's
Ministers to the other side of the house to agitate the ques-
tion. The remedy was, to make the system congregational
instead of territorial or parochial, as proposed by Earl Rus-
sel in 1844. The late Sir G. C. Lewis also urged the reduc-
tion of the State provision to the level of the actual num-
bers, and adoption of the congregational system, with one
biship only for each province. The right hon. gentleman
(Sir R. Peel) perhaps would say he was not a follower of
Earl Russell ; but he was of the noble lord at the head of
the Government, who also approved of the congregational
system in 1844. He next inquired how far the Irish Church
was a missionary Church. They boasted at having spent
£30,000, and of their having made 30,000 converts. When
he objected to the means taken to deceive the public mind
on that subject, he wished to direct the attention of the
house to what ho called the monstrous deceptions which
had been, and were, practised upon the old ladies of this
country who had more money than wit, with regard to those
missionary societies. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) It was
said the missionary societies in Connaught were attended
with signal success, and that within the last few years
30,000 converts had been received into the Church. That
was all in Galway, whose population consisted of 251,256,
and of whom 7,500 were Episcopalians. But where were
the 30,000 converts? (Hear, hear, and laughter.) The
truth si as, that any one who could give credence to such
statements, or believe " Good News from Ireland"—
(laughter)—must be bereft alike of intellect and judgment.
(Hear, hear.) The hon. member quoted the opinions of
Lord Plunkett, the late Sir Robert Peel and Lord Palmer-
ston, in support of the position that the fifth article of the
Union did not stand in the way of the revision of the
Irish Church, and then referred to the management of
its property by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. The
wisdom of that management might be judged from the
fact that at Clonmel, after spending £4,000 in improving
the pariah church, it was found that it would contain 200
less than it did before—(laughter)—and that they were now
about to expend £2,800 more to enlarge it to its old propor-
tions. (Laughter,) He had himself seen cobwebs in the
font for want of baptisms—(laughter)—marriages were at
a stand-still for want of people, and funerals likewise—
(laughter)—•and in his own parish the sexton was an old
woman and a Roman Cathclic. (Great laughter.) A
vacancy took place in the deanery of Ardfert, where there
was no cure of souls ; and the Ecclesiastical Commissioners
in their report, stated that they were about to recommend
his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland not to fill up
the deanery, but that they found his Excellency had already
filled up the vacancy. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) What
was the right hon. gentleman about, whose duty it was to
keep the Lord Lieutenant in order? (Laughter,) The
hon. gentleman concluded by saying—But while they are
endeavouring with such assiduity to pull the beamfrom the
eye of his Holiness the Pope, they might find sufficient time
to remove the Irish mote from their own vision. (Cheers.)
This I know, that a noble lord in another place has lately
kindly offered a palace and an asylum to his Holiness at
Malta. I think it may be suggested to the noble lord that
if the people of Ireland were consulted, they would not ob-
ject to see the Protestant Primate of the Irish Church re-
moved to a smaller mansion, and a more circumscribed in-
come. (Cheers.) I know that where the Pope is concerned
the people of England are apt to lose their reasoning powers.
(Hear.) At the same time there is a strong analogy between
the position of the Pope and the situation of the Prime
Minister. Both the Minister of England and the Pope of
Rome have been made heads of the Liberal party in their
respective countries. (Laughter.) Both at one time have
been ardent reformers. Both have produced Reform Bills,

The housa adjourned at a quarter past one.

and both have abandoned them. (Cheers.) The Pope is
supported at Rome by French soldiers. The Prime Milli-
ster is kept upon the Treasury Bench by Conservative
votes. (Loud cheers.) Both are inclined at present to
do little or nothing. Non possumus is as much the
motto of the Pope of R ome as of the Minister in
Downing-street. (Cheers.) I regret that the Ministers
do not sometimes look at home "and see ourselves as others
see us." If they did so they would see four and a half mil.
lions of Catholics in Ireland who would accept some of the
six points which are offered for four millions of Catholics in
Warsaw. (Cheers.) I think they would not object to see
men who have the confidence of the Irish people sitting is
the noble lord's Cabinet. The noble lord can recommend
to the Czar in suggestive lectures that there should be no-
thing but Poles having the confidence of Poles in the ad-
ministration of Poland, but he sedulously excludes every
man who is an Irishman and enjoy the confidence of Irish-
men from his own Cabinet. (Cheers ) It is because lam
not content to masque, ade as a reformer in a foreign coun-
try, and act as an obstructive at home, that I for one, who
prefer contentment in Ireland to want in Italy, am opposed
to these projects of the noble lord ; and I think that if the
Liberal party pretend to has e any claim to the name they
will not be content for ever to rest in their present torpid
state, but will unite upon this question, and insist upon the
measure which I have so inefficiently and so lengthenedly
advocated. (T he hon. gentleman resumed his seat amid
loud cheers.)
Mr. CA RD WELL, who rose as soon as the question was
put, was received with loud calls for Sir Robert Peel,
Mr. Cardwell, however, persevered, and said that,
although he could not aspire to continue the animated
and amusing tone with which the hon. gentleman had so
long kept the house in pleasant occupation, he hoped they
would permit him to offer them some serious remarks upon
a subject which sufficiently deserved their serious conside.
ration. (Hear.) The hon. gentleman had given notice on
the 19th May of a much less extensive motion than his pre-
sent one. But now he wanted to open up the whole ques-
tion of the ecclesiastical settlement of Ireland. They all
knew what that meant. On the part of the Government,
he asked the house to resist the motion of his hon. friend,
and to go on with the business before them. (Cheers.)
They ought not to touch so great an institution as the Irish
Church without good cause, or unless there were a h-pe
that the movement could be brought to a satisfactory con-
clusion. The hon. member had said that circumstances
altered cases, and when he charged the Liberal party with
being on the other side of the house, he forgot to tell the
house that he was amongst them, and did not enliven the
house with one of those animated sallies he had treated
them to that night. The proposition of 1844 was different
from that now proposed, He believed the house would not
surrender the principle of an Established Church, or
alienate from its ecclesiastical uses the revenues of the
Church--(Opposition cheers)—zand the plan of 1844 he felt
certain would not find favour with either party. He ob-
jected to the appointment of a committee, on the ground
that it would not result in a just or satisfactory solution of
the evils complained of. It would be more consistent with
what they owed to the interests of the country and their
conscientious convictions to reject the motion. The Regius
Donum and the Maynooth grant were mixed up in the set-
tlement of this question, and he advised them not to adopt
a motion that would lead to such a complication of difficul-
ties.

The O'DONOGH UE said the Protestant Established
Church in Ireland had not been, and never could be, any-
thing more than the Church of the minority in that coun-
try, and it was unjust to compel them to contribute to
the support of a Church in whose doctrines they did
not believe, and whose teachings they emphatically re-
jected. The hon. gentleman condemned the existence of the
Protestant Church in Ireland as an insult to the people,
and a misappropriation of funds originally created for the
support of the Catholic establishment. It would always be
a bar to social harmony, and an obstacle to public peace,
and he appealed to any body of Englishmen to say whether
they would endure such an interference with their own
Church. He spoke in no spirit of bigotry, because many
of his most esteemed friends were Protestants, but simply
as a matter of juetice, for which arguments might be ad-
duced that were totally unswerable.
Mr. G. DUFF then moved the adjournmert of the debate.
Mr. NEWDEGATE complained that the hon. mem-
ber for Liskeat el should have selected that evening, when
it was well known that many members of the Conservative
party would be engaged elsewhere—[Mr. B. 03borne—I
know nothing about it]—and when it was known that the
Prime Minister was indisposed, for dressing up that old
doll the " appropriation" clause with such tinsel as hie wit
could furnish, and thrust it upon the house at so advanced
an hour of the night, He, for one, as an English Protes-
taut, would never be induced to follow the example of some
members in that house, and cast aside the Church of Ire-
land as a poor relation. There was co consistency in main-
taining the union between England and Ireland unless the
Protestant establishment was maintained in Ireland.

Sir G. GREY hoped that, as it would be impossible to
bring the debate to a conclusion that night (it was one
o'clock), the house would now consent to the motion for
adjourning the debate. (Hear, hear.)
The debate was then agreed to be adjourned until Monday.
The Harwich Harbour Bill was read a third time and
passed.
The llowth Harbour Bill, as amended, was considered,
The Partnership Law Amendment Bill was committed
pro forma.

We are bound to consider, before we make a pro-
posal, whether it is likel7 to be accepted ; and we
are also bound to consider whether, supposing it to
be accepted, there is any probability of its effecting
the result we have in view. Let us admit the strange
and almost impossible proposition that Russia and
Poland j pin in accepting terms from which each is
so entirely averse. How long doei any one sup-
pose that the state of things which we shouid have
created could possibly endure? Would Russia, with
the sword in her hand, with Poland in the occupation
of her army, bleeding from a recent war, and smart-
ing from the terms imposed upon her by the Western
Powers, he very nice in observing the conditions of
a constitution after the pressure which had imposed
it had been taken off ; and would Poland, even were
Russia so wise and so moderate as to abstain from
any encroachment, permanently bow her head be-
neath the sovereignty of the House of Romanoff ?
All that could have been obtained would be a hollow
and hostile truce, in which each party would be
watching the other in order to plant a deadly blow
atthe first unguarded moment. Have we any reason
to suppose—do the events even of the present war
countenance the notion—that Poland has outlived
her old and deplorable tendencies to domestic fac-
tion and aristocratic rivalry ? Is there in the con-
ditions offered to Russia anything upon which we
can build the hope that, even if those conditions
were fully granted, we should be able to found a
better and more permanent state of things, and thus
end the protracted agony of an expiring nation ?
And yet, while the prospect of the acceptance of our
proposals is so remote, and the chance that if ac-
cepted they would work any part of the good we look
for from them is so problematical, their rejection
would nevertheless place us in a position of the most
extreme embarrassment. We have repeatedly ex-
pressed our conviction that, come what may of our
proposals, this country has never seriously enter-
tertained the idea of going to war for the sake of
Poland ; and we have reason to believe, notwith-
standing some loud talking and violent writing, that
the same thing is true with regard to the great
mass of public opinion in France. We seem to
have made a demand which we do not expect to ob-
tain, in order to receive a rebuff which we do not
intend to resent. To our mind, the position we ap-
pear to have chosen for ourselves is neither agree-
able nor dignified. We ought to demand nothing
but what is right and reasonable, and, if what
is right and reasonable is refused us, we ought not
to rest content with the refusal. The present case
is very different from a discussion of the affairs of
Poland which might have been brought on at an
ordinary European Congress—at the Congress of
18561 for instance. We are not revising Europe
in accordance with the faith of existing treaties ;
we are intervening in a struggle inspired by the
bitterest hatred on both sides, and prosecuted on
both sides with the most unsparing ferocity. We
have allowed the memory of the violated Treaty of
Vienna to sleep for thirty years, and now we wake
up from the grave in which it has been so long
buried solely, as it would seem, to show that, while
we have not forgotten its provisions, we are unable
or unwilling to enforce them. We do not blame
England or France because they are unwilling to
plunge Europe in war for the sake of a forlorn hope
like the Polish insurrection, but we have un-
doubtedly a right to object to such proposals which,
besides being unacceptable to the contending par-
ties and inefficient for the settlement of the pending
dispute, expose us to the alternative of a war which
we ought not to undertake, or a peace which our
own conduct will have made discreditable.

DAILY NEWS.—It must be admitted that Lord
Palmerston has displayed his usual gallantry in his
endeavour to defend the purchase of the Exhibition
buildings at Kensington. With the confident air
of an experienced auctioneer he has pointed to the
hideous cupolas of the Exhibition, and asked his
opponents whether they do not recognise the well-
known types of St. Peter's and St. Paul's. It is
true, he candidly admits that the walls are blank
and bare ; but then, he says, you forget the virtues
of stucco._ Walk through London—look at Pall-
mall, the street of palaces—what would they be
without stucco? There is no material more admir-
ably adapted for ornamentation than stucco; and if
you will only allow Captain Fowke to plaster his
walls with stucco—or cement, if you like the term
better—l think, said the lively Viscount, that the
building will turn out a very handsome thing.
There is at present in the neighbourhood of
Bond-street an ingenious French lady who has an
establishment for renovating dried-up ladies of
fashion. By balm as miraculous as that of Gilead
this enchantress can recall the bloom of youth,
smooth the wrinkles of age, and send forth into the
whirlpool of London life worn-out matrons of fifty
in the likeness of girls of eighteen. Does Lord Pal-
merston propose to do the same thing for the hideous
architectural skeleton at Kensington P Even if he
were to succeed as well as Madame Rachel, the re-
sult must be loathsome. And in all probability that
result will only be obtained with the same disagree-
aole incident which always accompanies the efforts
of the French Merlin—an enormous bill. Courts
of justice have furnished abundant proof of the in-
convenience endured by the husbands of those who
have paid their court to Madame Rachel. Should
the public allow themselves to be persuaded by the
plausible audacity of Lord Palmerston, they must
make up their minds to endure a similar inconveni-
ence. The joke of plastering a continent of bare
wall into a Palace of Art is too practical. Lord Pal-
merston can put the best face upon most things.
But the transformation of Captain Fowke's shed is
beyond his powers. It was hoped that after the
debate in the House of Commons last week the pro-
ject would have been withdrawn. Unfortunately
the new estimate, or rather memorandum, drawn up
by Mr. Hunt, almost forbids the expectation. But
further, it must be admitted that the obstinate
boldness which both Lord Granville and Mr. Glad-
stone have displayed in answering questions con-
nected with the project tends to the conclusion that
the Government are resolved to persevere in the de-
sign. It is now pretended that the removal of the
building will cost the public more than it will cost
to pull it down. Lord Derby, indeed, says that this
seems scarcely intelligible, because, according to the
contract, the contractors are bound to remove the
old materials at their own expense. Well, says Lord
Granville, that may be so, but then the ground
must be made level and fitted to receive other struc-
tures. That, too, replies Lord Derby, is provided for
by the contract. But the retort of the ingenious
Chancellor of the Exchequer was that if the
contractors are bound to do all this at their
own expense, the clearing away will occupy a
a long time—probably two years—during which
period the public will be kept out of the property
which has been bought. These are strange diffi-
culties. It is admitted that the contractors are
bound to do certain things at their own expense,
and the obligation in this respect must be defined
by the coulract. The terms of that contract must
be, or ought to be, known to Lord Granville, because
he has filled the position of Commissioner in both
the great Exhibitions. Let us, then, look at the
contract Let us see what are its terms. If it pro-
vides, as Lord Derby seems to think, for the r...moval
of the building, for the restoration of the ground to
its original state, and for these acts being completed
within a reasonable time, then it is obvious that the
objections of Lord Granville and of Mr. Gladstone
at once fall to the ground. Now, at the same time
it is clear that both of these Ministers are 'Ass fully
informed upon the subject than the public have a
right to expect that they should be. If, on the other
hand, the removal or the restoration of the ground
to its original condition is not provided for, or if the
time at which this work is to be completed is not
defined, then the persons who drew the contract
and the Commissioners who sanctioned it have been
guilty of the grossest neglect. Iu short, one of two
things must be true. Either the Commissioners are
misinformed, or they are very bad men of business.
Let us clearly understand how the matter stands;
and for this purpose let the contract with Messrs.
Lucas and Kelk be produced and laid before Par-
liament. Even if Lord Granville and Mr. Gladstone
had been less hazy in their view of the nature of the
contract, this ought to be the course pursued. It is
utterly impossible to form a correct opinion as to the
propriety of the bargain proposed by the Govern-
ment without the position of the contractors being
precisely ascertained. It may be that the contract
is so imperfectly drawn, and so ambiguous, that it
cannot be enforced against the contractors. On the
other hand, it may be that the contract is perfectly
clear, and that the contractors are bound to do much
more than they are now called upon to do. The
public is entitled to know, accordingly, how the
matter stands ; and therefore no time should be lost
in insisting upon the production of the instrument
in question.

The Misappropriation by Servants Bill passed through
committee.

The Courts of the Church of Scotland Bill, as amended,
was considered.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIMES.—We recently announced, though not with-
out some natural hesitation at the importance of the
step we were taking, very grave doubts as to the wis-
dom of the course adopted by our Government,
together with the Governments of France and Aus-
trie, on the Polish question. We showed the ex-
treme improbability that the Emperor of Russia
would really and sincerely acquiesce in the proposals
of the three great Powers, and how unlikely it is that,
even if Russia should be willing to entertain these
propositions favourably, Poland would rest satisfied
with them. We have not had long to wait for a
confirmation of these opinions. The letter of our
correspondent from Brody, which we published
yesterday, supports them in every particular. The
Powers must, one would think, have had in the
proposal which they made one of three objects in
view. They must either have meant to satisfy
Poland, to satisfy Russia, or to satisfy both Poland
and Russia. It is only too clear that the policy
we propose will not attain any one of these objects,
Our correspondent is of opinion that the Russians
will never willingly introduce a Polish adminis-
tration into the Ruthenian Provinces, and yet this
must sooner or later follow from the concess'on
which we demand. Russia cannot afford to esta-
blish on her western frontier a kingdom like Poland
speaking a different language, administered by
a different race, endowed with those free Parlia-
mentary institutions to which Russia does not pre
tend, and animated by a spirit which, if it failed to
be intensely national, is perfectly certain to be in-
tensely anti-Russian, Still less is Russia likely to
do this when she is aware that the language and in-
stitutions of this neighbouring State must, by an
inevitable consequence, extend themselves to the
vast contiguous provinces which once formed part
of the as yet unconquered and undivided kingdom
of Poland. Russia, it seems to be thought, may
temporise, may acquiesce for the moment in condi-
tions pressed on her by force, which she feels
herself unable to resist ; but it will be with no
sincere and bona fide intention of giving effect to
those conditions, but only to tide over a crisis
in her affairs, and wait the opportunity of taking
back what she has conceded. According, how-
ever, to our Correspondent, the difficulty of ob-
taining the consent of Russia to the proposals of
France, England, and Austria is as nothing compared
with the difficulties which are to be encountered in
obtaining the assent of Poland. Poland is not fight-
ing for a Constitutional Government under the Em-
peror of Russia, nor for the use of the Polish lan-
guage in judicial and official proceedings, nor that
she may be governed by Polish officials, nor for
an amnesty, nor for a suspension of hostilities. The
nation has been stung to the quick,—has been
goaded by a sense of intolerable wrong to a
point of desperation, recklessness, and fury which
leaves it little disposition for caret* illy weighing
diplomatic proposals. This heroic people are
playing a last and desperate stake ; their lives,
their fortunes, their hopes, their memories, are
all staked on the issue of battle, and of battle
fought under every possible disadvantage. But,
if the stake be high, the prize for which they play
is high also. That prize is nothing less than com-
plete and absolute independence—emancipation
from the detested bondage of Russia or annihilation.
They will not accept any compromise ; they do not
desire the restoration of the Constitution of 1815;
they are quite aware that the causes which made
that experiment fail then will make it fail now ; they
trust nothing to Russia; they do not believe that a
man will be an absolute Monarch on one side of a
river and a constitutional Sovereign on the other.
They have lost all faith in promises so often broken,
constitutions so often cancelled, treaties so often
torn up and thrown to the winds. They are ready
to die, but to submit again to a proved and ascer-
tained imposture they are not ready, Whatever
be the reply to the Western Powers, our cor-
respondent assures us the Polish Insurrection
will continue, and only when the land is de-
vastated will the proposals we make be accepted
from sheer inability to refuse them. If this be a
correct picture of the feelings of Poland and Russia
the effort to mediate between them will be fruitless
indeed. Neither party will listen to our proposals,
and those who agree in nothing else will at least
agree in rejecting them. Surely it was scarely
worth while to pat this vast dipiomati.; apparatus
in motion for a purpose so little satisfactory as this?

POST.—It is one of the misfortunes incidental to
the commercial greatness of this country, and the
multiplicity of its relations with every portion of
the globe, that there is at all times somewhere or
another a disturbance of that harmony which, as
an eminently commercial State, we would most
willingly maintain with those who are in any way
connected with us. British trade and British enter-
prise penetrate everywhere, and there is scarcely a
land oa the face of the earth, whether civilised or
uncivilised, where British interests do not need pro-
tection. It should then surprise no one that our
complicated and extensive foreign relations do not
universally exhibit that appearance popularly
known by the expression couleur de rose. The
Foreign-office cannot govern events—it can only
make the best of them when they occur. A chance
shipwreck on a desolate coest may, as we have re-
cently seen, disturb the relations—nay, for a time
completely suspend the connection—between two
States which not only nominally, but actually en-
tertain towards each other sentiments of the most
sincere friendship, A short time since the storm

was in the western hemisphere, now it is in the
eastern. The efforts which we have made to open
communications with Japan, and, at the same time,.
to develep the resources of that country and create
a new field for British enterprise, have not been as
successful as we could have desired. Japan was,
until within a few years past, completely closed.
against the rest of the world. Its Government be-
lieving that, within its own confines, it possessed.
411 the elements of wealth and happiness, obsti-
nately and persistently refused to open commercial
relations with other States. At length, however,
the perseverance with which both Eugland and
America endeavoured to divert the Japanese Go-
vernment from its strange resolution met with
its reward. The barriers which had so long been
opposed to the entrance of strangers were thrown
down, and after a short time the representatives of
foreign States permitted to take up their residence
at the Japanese capital. It was idle, however, to
hope that the prejudices which were fostered
during centuries would instantaneously disappear.
We have been received by the Japanese, it is true,
but our position has been that of persons living in
an enemy's territory. It would be needless now
to recapitulate the outrages which not only our
merchants, but even our representative, have expe-
rienced at the hands of the Japanese. On one
occasio❑ the embassy was attacked, and the greater
number of its occupants either killed or wounded.
At the close of last year an English merchant was
foully murdered on the public road at mid-day by
the retainers of one of the native princes whom it
was his misfortune to encounter ; and, if we mis-
take not, his wife, who accompanied him, narrowly
escaped the same fate. In fact, never during the
brief interval which has elapsed since our settle-
ment in Japan have our relations either with its
Government or population been otherwise than ex
tremely precarious. The news brought by the In-
dian mail which has just arrived indicates that
matters ere far from mending. We are, in fact,
drifting into what may become a petty war, which,
however slightly felt its consequences may be in
these islands, may bring to a close our commercial
connection with Japan. Her Majesty's Govern-
ment found it absolutely necessary to demand from
the Japanese authorities reparation for the several
outrages committed upon our IT erchants, but with
these demaeds the latter hesitated to comply.
Under these circumstances orders were transmitted
to the English admiral on the station to employ
coercive measures; and in accordance with these an
ultimatum was communicated to the Japanese
Government by the British Charge d'Affaires on the
6th April, with an intimation that if within twenty
days reparation was not made Admiral Kuper would
have recourse to force. In accordance, however, with.
the wishes of the Japenese, this time was extended
by 15 days, viz., until the 11th of May. It would
seem, however, that this delay was demanded, not
for the purpose of reconsidering the expediency
of complying with the British demands, but simply
with the view of maturing preparations for ware
When the mail left on the 28th of April the
Japanese were said to be busily engaged in collect-
ing a considerable army. Arms and ammunition
have for some time past been imported in large
quantities, and it is said that since hostilities were
resolved upon by our Government, in the event of
reparation being refused, the American merchants
resident in Japan have largely supplied the native
Government with munitions of war. Assuming
that this report is correct, it must not be supposed
that the Americans have violated any moral or
'egal duty. The possibility of an interruption of
amicable relations between ourselves and the
Japanese could of course give us no right to inter-
fere with the trade of another nation. It may,
however, be questionable whether the Americans
acted with prudence in placing the means of resist-
ance in the hands of our probable adversaries. In
the present instance England is virtually taking up
the cause, not of her own subjects, but of the entire
foreign mercantile population of Japan. The out-
rages of which we have had to complain were dic-
tated not so much by a dislike to ourselves as by
general antipathy to the interference of strangers.
Indirectly we were maintaining by our remons-
trances and demands for reparation the interests of
American as much as of English traders. The po-
sition in which the foreign residents were placed
when the mail left was critical in the extreme. The
commands to the admiral were said to be peremp-
tory—to proceed to hostilities in the event of com-
pliance with our demands being refused. In a com-
munication addressed to the residents Admiral
Kuper stated that it was not in his power to afford
them protection, and consequently no, other alterna-
tive was left them than to embark with all their
effects before the time granted by the British repre-
sentative had expired. With regard to the parti-
cular measures to be taken by the admiral, it is
supposed that, with the force at his disposal, he
would blockade or possibly bombard some of the
principal seaports. From Yedo, the chief seaport
town, the Daimios have, however, departed, and,
with its exception, it is not believed that the Japa-
nese Government care very much about the damage
which can be effected by a naval force. If war un-
fortunately does ensue, the employment of a land
force will become absolutely necessary, and the
troops now stationed in India must supply the con-
tingent necessary to vindicate our rights in Japan.
It is very unfortunate that this collision between
ourselves and the Japanese should have arisen, but
however much it is to be regretted it was inevit-
able. None could be more desirous than the British
nation of cultivating to the utmost amicable rela-
tions with Japan, but all our efforts in that direc-
tion have been frustrated. Our grounds of com-
plaint were such as the government of no State
should have refused to recognise, and the repara-
tion we demanded such as none should have refused
to accord. The refusal of the Japanese Government
to entertain or satisfy our demands leaves us no
option as to the course to be pursued. If an Eng-
lish admiral should find himself compelled to bom-
bard the seaports of Japan, or an English general
be forced to lead an expedition into the interior of
the country, the fault will be entirely that of the
Japanese themselves. We are desirous of living on
terms of amity with all the world, and more espe-
cially with semi-barbarous nations, but we cannot
be expected, for the sake of avoiding hostilities, to
submit patiently to outrages as barbarous as they
are unprovoked,

COUNTRY MARKETS.

~.____.

LIVERPOOL-FRIDAY.

At this day's market there was a small attendance, with
a retail demand for wheat, and late prices receded ld per
cental. Oats and oatmeal very dull. Beans neglected, at
9d per qr decline on the week. Indian corn in better de-
mand. Flour 6d per barrel cheaper.

STAMF ORD-FEIDAY•

White wheat, 49s to 60s; red, 45s to 46s per 36 stone.
Barley, malting, 36s to 40s; grinding, 28s to 30s per qr.
Oats, 22s to 26s per 24 stone. Beans, old, 40s to —s per
qr. ; new, 38s to —s.