The Sun.
London, England, 1862-06-21 00:00:00

THE "BRITISH STAR" NEWSPAPER.

Mr. MAGUIRE moved for copies of correspondence on
the subject of the non-transmission, by direction of the
Foreign-office, of the British Star newspaper through the
British Post-office at Constantinople ; and of articles alleged
to have " excited revolt against the Government and laws
of Turkey." He characterised the case as one in which
the Government had violated a great principle enunciated
by them. They had, he said, as far as they could, sup-
pressed a British newspaper owned by a naturalised British
subject, M. Xenos, a Greek by birth, and his object was to
extract from the Government an explanation of an act
which he declared was a disgrace to the country. He gave
details of the case, interspersing them with comments, vehe-
ment in manner, strong in language, and stronger in the
meaning they appeared to convey. He expatiated at much
length upon the abuses of the Turkish Administration,
which, he asserted, was corrupt and rotten, a system of
peculation and robbery; and upon the violation by the
Porte of promises solemnly made to its Christian subjects,
the most valuable portion of the population.
Mr. LAYARD observed that the notice of motion was
for copies of papers relating to M, Xenos and his news-
papei ; but Mr. Maguire had travelled into matters for
which he had not been prepared by the notice, and had
even indulged in personal attacks. With respect to the
British Star, its circulation had been prohibited by the
Turkish Government on account of the inflammatory
articles it contained, inciting the subjects of the Porte to
rebellion ; the British Government, therefore, could not
suffer M. Xenos to avail himself of the privilege given him
by the British Post-office to circulate such matter. Ad-
verting to the remarks made upon bim by Mr. Maguire
with reference to the Turkish loan, he said he would not
condescend to deny such a charge coming from such a
man.

Mr. SCULLY moved that the words used by Mr, Layard
—namely (as he understood), that "he could not be ex-
pected to answer such a charge, coming from such a man,"
might be taken down.
Mr. LAYARD said the charge was that he had endea-
voured to " rig the market for the Turkish loan ;" such a
charge against a gentleman, a member of Parliament and
of the Government, he could not condescend to answer,
coming from such a quarter.
After some conversation, in which Mr. DISRA/ZLI and
Lord PALMERSTON suggested that the expressions were not
Parliamentary, the latter observing, at the same time, that
the remarks of Mr. Maguire were most offensive and un-

becoming.
Mr. LAYARD said as the terms he had used were con-
sidered unparliamentary he withdrew them. He then re-
sumed his speech, replying to Mr. Maguire's strictures upon
the Turkish Administration, the liberality of which he con•
trasted with the intolerance of a certain Christian Govern-
ment.
Mr. BRIGHT said M.Xenos, of whom Mr. Layard spoke
with so much contempt, hal lived 14 years in this country ;
he was a merchant of great respectability and a gentleman
of education. He had not established the paper for pur-
poses of profit. He was an enthusiast for everything Eng-
lish, and his object was to enlighten and elevate the people
of the Levant. His object was patriotic and useful, and he
thought the Government were not justified in what they
had done ; that their proceeding was harsh and unreason-
able, and that they had followed a bad example.
The discussion, which was continued by Mr. Whalley,
Mr. O'Brien, Mr. P. Taylor, and Mr. D. Seymour, termi-
nated in the withdrawal of the motion.
ASSIZES AT OMAGH.

Lord C. HAMILTON called attention to a return and to

the constitution of the Grand Jury panel of the late assizes
at Omagh, and, stating in much detail the particulars of the
case, inquired whether any steps had been taken to prevent
the repetition of such conduct as occurred on that occasion.
Major KNOX added further particulars with reference
to the alleged improper and illegal constitution of the Grand
Jury panel.
Mr. M,MATION argued that if the facts stated by Lord
C. Hamilton were true, the charge against the Sheriff and
Sub-Sheriff of Tyrone ought to be formally investigated.
He made a counter-statement, from which he inferred that
there was no foundation for the charge, and that inquiry
Was not really courted. He therefore moved for a cora-
mittee to inquire into the facts.
Captain ARCHDALL, in replying to Mr. M'Mahon, in
contradicting an assertion of Mr. M'Mahon, employed an
expression too strong, and which he was required by the
chair to withdraw.
After some remarks by Mr. M'Cann, Mr. Newdegate,
and Mr. Roebuck,
Sir R. PEEL
observed that if the accusation brought
against the Sheriff or Sub-Sheriff of tampering with the
jury panel was true, it would have been better to bring the
question before the hatise in the shape of a motion for an
inquiry. The Government had nothing whatever to do
with the constitution of the Grand or Petty Jury panel ; it
would be utterly unconstitutional for them to interfere with
the duties of the Sheriff. He —e gave explanations of the
occurrence complained of, adding that there was no rafts=