The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-30 00:00:00

rica had hitherto ranked very high in the jurisprudence of
the world. The system of procedure in the American prize

knowledge the despatches from England and France
have been received at St. Petersburg and presented, but I
alai not aware that any answer has yet been received in
this country.
PUBLIC WORKS (MANUFACTURING DIS-
TRICTS) BILL.
On the order of the day being read for considering this
bill as amended,
Mr. BENTINCK said he wished to have replies to ques-
tions which he had put on a former occasion to the Presi-
dent of the Poor Law Board, but which he had not answered,
viz., whether the money proposed to be advanced would
be advanced on a perfectly good security ; whether the
distress in the manufacturing distriFttvas not caused as
much by over trading as by the want of ctton ; and thirdly,
whether the present measure would afford permanent relief
for the existing distress, or whether he anticipated coming
again to Parliament for further assistance, or resorting to
emigration ?
Mr. FERRAND would also like to know who would be
responsible, if the distress extended during the ensuing
winter, and was not provided for ?
Mr. VILLIERS said that, looking to the principle of
the bill, and that it met with the appoval of hon. members,
he probably did not enter so fully into the circumstances on
a former occasion as he otherwise should have done. The
question of security rested with the Public Works Com-
missioners. They were satisfied with it, and he had not
the least reason to be otherwise. The security was one
year's available value of those districts, which amounted to
£5,000,000 annually; and if the rates were not paid, the
security would be on the property itself. He did not think
it was his duty to inquire into the cause of the distress, but
only to satisfy himself of the fact. There New a proximate
cause of distress. The mills were stopped, and for the want
of cotton. As to whether it arose from over-trading
was not for him to inquire, and the hon. member for West
Norfolk had not ventured to define what he meant by over-
trading. Everything was prosperous till it was suddenly
stopped for want of material. There were no anticipations
of the distress till the outbreak of the American civil war.
The millowner seemed to be the incarnation of mischief in
the hon. member's mind when he spoke of over-trading;
but there must be more than the manufacturer concerned
if over-trading existed. The hon. member had used the old
phrase of over-trading, but he had given them no explana-
tion. He (Mr. Villiers) had seen no instance of it, and he
looked forward to the revival of trade as soon as the raw
material could be obtained. The bill was a temporary bill
to meet temporary distress, and not as a panacea for the
evils. The amount and the continuance of the distress were
uncertain, but it was considered by competent persons that
the whole amount would be applied for, and a large number
of persons would in consequence be employed. And so far
from the whole of the money really being applied for, as had
been stated by the hon. member for Devonport, he could
assure the house that application had that day been made
by Blackburn, one of the 27 unions of the distressed dis-
tricts, for £104,060 to expend in public works. A great
number of the distressed hands would also be employed
this summer for harvesting, which would afford some re-
lief. There was not the least apprehension of a want of
funds for the support of the poor of the districts. What
they might do under inflammatory speeches he could not
say, but there was no cause to fear there would not be a
sufficient sum to meet the wants of the winter. He should
ask to continue his rating bill, and there was a large
amount of subscriptions in hand, and what was asked by
this bill was to give the people an opportunity of working
and obtaining their living. It would be impossible to serve
the people better than by passing this bill.
Mr. B. FERRAND said he based all his statements on
Mr. Farnall's information, and it would be unfair to charge
him (Mr. Ferrand) with having made exciting speeches.
Sir H. WILLO UGHBY said that when the new poor
law was under the consideration of the house the principle
affirmed was that relief should be given in workhouses
alone. He asked Lord Althorp whether, if anythkg hap-
pened in the manufacturing districts, they were to be so
treated, and received an answer in the affirmative, but he
was happy to find that time had made such a favourable
change in this matter. He cordially approved of the bill,
though he regretted there was so much power given to the
poor law board, instead of the treasury, in handling public
money. He hoped the relief committee would not interfere
with the general action of the local bodies. This was not
to be considered an effectual measure, but it would likely
be beneficial as far as it went. The security did
not attach to the property from its being put in the
alternative in the clause, "rates or property ;" and he sug-
gested an alteration to " rates and property." The house
could not be too cautious about the security to be taken
from private individuals, and he expressed an opinion that
provision should be made for requiring, in addition, the
security of the local boards.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
those who supported the new poor law when it was first in-
troduced might also support this bill. The new poor law
came into operation when the community was much demo-
ralised by out-door relief, and now that the principle was
thoroughly understood, he thought it might be relaxed un-
der the present pressure of circumstances. As regarded the
financial part of the question, he begged to state that the
Government did not intend to commence by the contraction
of any loan whatsoever. The money would not be provided
in the same way in which it was provided for the erection
of fortifications, in which case it was raised by loan, whereas
in this instance it would be provided by a charge upon the
Consolidated Fund. The hon. baronet seemed to think that
the proposal would involve some usurpatibn by the Poor
Law Board of the functions of the Treasury; but the fact
was that in this instance there would be a combination of
Several authorities—the Treasury, the Poor Law Board, and
the Exchequer Loan Commissioners; and it would be most
inconvenient if the function of examining all the details of
the expenditure of the money was to be transferred to the
Treasury. The truth was, the major part of the authority
would rest with the Exchequer Loan Commissioners. It
would be for them to examine the nature of the security in
all cases, and he thought that the house would be disposed
to continue in their hands duties with which they had been
charged with very great advantage to the country for a pe-
riod of 30 or 40 years. The Government, of course, would
look to the local boards for the reimbursement of the money,
but the property of the district would be responsible to the
local board.
Mr. R. KNIGHTLEY said that, although the discus-
sion in which they were engaged might not have any great
point, it was so far useful that it postponed the attempted
robbery of the Irish Church. It seemed to him not unlikely
that this loan to Lancashire would share the fate of the
loan for the relief of Irish distress, and that, after the lapse
of a year, Parliament would be called upon to remit the
payment altogether.
Mr. SCULLY begged to inform the hon. member that
Ireland had repaid the famine loan ten times over. Whe-
ther the measure was generally right or wrong, there was
no doubt that Ireland had suffered immensely by the im-
positionof free trade— (Oh, oh, and hear, hear)— and, be-
sides that, many millions had got into the pockets of Eng-
lish corn merchants through importing meal to Ireland in
the days of the famine. Then the imposition of the income
tax upon Ireland had repaid the loan fifty-fold. In con-
clusion, the hon. and learned gentleman declared that Par-
li had become a mere debating club, and a very miser-
able one toc—(laughter)—for the discussion of foreign
affairs ; and that Ireland need expect no relief in her dis-
tress, as she was entirely unrepresented on the Treasury
Bench.
The report of the bill as amended was then agreed to,
and it was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow (this
day.)

courts was exactly the same as in the English courts; but

one advantage of their system was that, in the first instance,
all questions must be determined by evidence obtained ex-
clusively from the ship herself ; that was to say, from the
papers on board the ship, and the testimony of the ship's

- -
officers. On the other hand, as a kind of counterbalance to

that advantage, where the circumstances raised a strong

presumption that there was something disguised or irregular,
the judge might on further evidence condemn the ship, and

in some cases where the circumstances were of a gross char-

acter, he might proceed at once to condemn without further
evidence. That was the practice of Lord Stowell during the
French war, and the records of our prize courts abounded

with such instances. The case of the Adela was, he be

lieved, the only one mentioned by the hon. gentleman in
which the judgment was open to exception, as unlike such a
judgment as we had a right to expect from the court. The

- -
hon. member stated that the judge condemned the ship be-
cause he was aware that the parties intended to appeal, but

:he Government could find no confirmation of that state

merit. It was to be regretted that no reason had been
given for that judgment; but it was impossible to treat as
_ _ _

a violation of international law that which had happened

in prize courts in all nations from time to time.

regard to the case of the Pearl, if the hon. gentleman
imagined that touching at Nassau, where the intention

was to break the blockade, would exonerate the ship, he
was in error ; but it was quite obvious that in her case the

court put its judgment on the ground that there was suffi-

cient reason to raise a strong presumption which, unless re-
butted, enabled it to condemn the vessel, In the case of the
Dolphin, there were on board the ship a very large quantity

of arms, which were not entered as arms but as hardware,
and although she was ostensibly consigned to a firm at Nas-
sau, yet a letter was found on board which the prize court
held justified the presumption that her ultimate destination
was either to break the blockade, or to land her cargo on
some part of the Confederate States. He did not undertake
to say that that was a right presumption, but the principle

was one which was to be found in every volume on the sub-

ject of international law. It was well known that an exceed•

ing large contraband trade was carriedon by way of Nassau

and the Confederate States, and as English ships monopo-

Heed that trade, it was not surprising that, in their case, the
rate of insurance should have been so increased. The hon.

gentleman also charged the Government with having aban-

doned the doctrine of damages, and cited two cases in sup-
port of the allegation. But why had not her Majesty's Go-
vernment demanded compensation in those instances?
&mply because it would have been undignified to insist

upon that which they knew they were not likely to get ; but
still more, because they felt that if a like demand were made
upon this country under similar circumstances, they would
not accede to it. They would claim exemplary damages in
all cases where the circumstances justified the claim; but
they would not seek to relax the code simply because that

relaxation would, for the moment, be in favour of them-

selves. (Hear, hear.)
Lord R. CECIL admitted that the law of prize courts
was such as had been laid down by the honourable
and learned gentleman, but maintained that peculiar sus-
picion attached to those of America, when, as they knew,
American judges had delivered their judgments under the
pressure of fixed bayonets. They knew that the supreme
court of America two years ago was appealed to for the pur•
pose of enforcing the provisions of the American constitu-
tion, and that the judges could not pronounce the judgment

:heir consciences dictated, because the soldiers of President

Lincoln were at the door, and obliged them to bend the law
to the wishes of the executive. He therefore thought they
should not attach to the decisions of the American prize
courts that authority which they would attach to the deci-
sions of such courts in any constituted State, and we should
protest against their assumption to make prizes of vessels
which were peaceable traders. He maintained that the
law, as laid down in the condemnation of the Pearl, was
altogether novel, and that no case could be found to sup-
port or justify it. He complained that her Majesty's Go-

BRITISH TRADE WITH MATAMORAS.

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 30, 1863.

might be in America or Brazil.

quite mistaken. The trade was in no way affected by
the Queen's proclamation. In a despatch published that
morning from Earl Russell to Lord Lyons (it was a pity it
had n.,,t been written months ago), it was clearly shown that
a very large trade was carried on from New York and other
Northern ports, as well as from Liverpool. (Hear.) To
contend that goods carried to Matamoras might possibly be
taken afterwards into the Southern States was no ground of

complaint at all, said the noble earl. (Hear, hear.) The
hon. gentleman then alluded to the cases of the ships Adela,
Pearl, and Dolphin, which had been seized by the American
government, as he contended, without any justification. In
the case of the Dolphin, she was condemned simply by one

letter found on board from the owner to the captain, telling

him not to unship his cargo at Matamoras or Nassau, but to
wait and try and get some more. (Hear, hear.)

Mr. COBDEN—What about the "hardware?"
Mr. FITZGERALD said that did not affect the question
at all whet a vessel was bound to Matamoras on some other

neutral port. If it did the Northerners wou'd he the first
to suffer, for there was scarcely a vessel left Liverpool for

New York without some "hardware" for the Northern bel-

ligerente. (Hear.) The Pearl was simply condemned be-
cause she appeared to be built for fast sailing, and, there-
fore, it was presumed she meant sailing into Charleston.
What he complained of was, that when those extraordinary
doctrines were made public Earl Russell did not immedi-
ately repudiate them. The truth was the Americans were
at all times joalous of our trade, and they saw we were doing
well at Matamoras, so they would endeavour at all risks to
interfere with us. It would have done more hon ur to Earl

Russell if he had acted promptly in all cases, whether they

The amendment was then withdrawn.
RUSSIA AND POLAND.
Mr. lIORSMAN, referring again to this subject, said he

was not satisfied with the answer previously given, and to-
morrow (Tuesday) evening he should again ask whether or

not it was true that the Russian answer to t7:ie combined

notes had been received in London at the Russian Embassy
on Saturday, as had been reported. He thought it was im-
portant this discussion should not be delayed till the close
of the session, because we were just now in the same posi-
tion in 1863 as we were in 1853. England and France ne-
gotiating with Russia, and Austria playing her own game,
and reported to have a secret understanding with Russia.
In that year the session closed at peace, but the next year
we were at war when the Parliament reopened. He thought
discussion ought to precede, and not follow negotiation.
(Hear, hear.)