The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-14 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 14, 1853.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY.)
The Royal assent was given by commission to the fol-
lowing bills :—Tho Exchequer Bills ; The Crystal Palace
Company ; 4he Lowestoft Water, Gas, and Market ; the
Dublin and Belfast Railway Company; and the Great
Yarmouth Waterworks.
The Lords Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor,
Lord Canning, and Lord Stanley of Alderley.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the wool-
sack at five o'clock.
The Earl of CARLISLE presented a petition from
medical practitioners in favour of legislation with regard
to the medical profession.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from
Northumberland in favour of extending the jurisdiction
of County Courts ; also a petition from Barnstaple to
the same effect ; also a similar petition from Yorkshire ;
also a petition from Scotland praying for the amend-
ment of the Sheriff's Courts.
Lord CLANRICARDE presented a petition from '
Galway Union against the extension of the income tax
to Ireland. He would take that opportunity of asking
whether it was intended that clergymen of all per-
suasions in Ireland should be treated different to any
other class of the community with regard to levying the
income tax in that country ?
The Earl of ABERDEEN hoped the noble lord
would not think him guilty of any discourtesy if he ab-
stained from answering the question. As the matter
would be fully explained when the bill was introduced
into the other house, any premature discussion at pre-
sent on the subject would be attended with great incon-
venience.
Lord CAMPELL said that having had the misfortune
of being an Irish landlord against his will, he felt an in-
terest in this subject, and he must say that though he
thought it highly just and equitable that the income tax
should be extended to Ireland, it should only be con-
fined to the rent actually received. (Hear, hear.) If
it only went to that extent frwould not touch him.
(Laughter.)
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.

The Earl of DERBY wished to call the attention of
their lordships to what he might be justified in con-
sidering a breach of the privileges of their lord-
ships' house—not so much on his own account,
as for the purpose of doing justice to another gentle-
man, with regard to whom the most unfounded misre-
presentations had been made in one of this evening's
papers. Their lordships were aware that he had attended
that day a committee of the House of Commons for the
purpose of being examined with regard to certain
proceedings before that committee ; and a ques-
tion was there put to him to which he gave
a very distinct and decided answer, which he
found was reported with perfect correctness and
almost verbatim in The Sun of this evening, but was re-
ported in the Globe not only with great inaccuracy, but
in a way to convey an entirely opposite meaning, and
conveying an impression most unfavourable to the gen-
tleman to whom he bad referred. If this question had
merely touched himself alone, he should not have
thought it consistent with his duty to call their
lordships' attention to it ; but when he was represented
to have given a most unfavourable opinion with regard
to the conduct and personal honour of a gentleman whose
conduct was under examination, and with regard to
whom he expressed a precisely opposite opinion, he
thought it was due to that gentleman to bring this mat-
ter before their lordships' notice in the most public and
authentic manner, and to compare that which he did not
state with that which he had stated. The question was
put to him whether he was aware of a statement which
had been made before that committee, that Mr. Stafford

'iad said that he (Lord Derby) had put great pressure
upon him with regard to the disposal of the patronage
of the Admiralty in dockyards. His reply was, that he
should be very much surprised to hear that Mr. Stafford had
made that statement, because he had the highest opinion
of his honour and veracity, and he felt convinced that Mr.
Stafford had not made such a statement as he must have
known that it was utterly inconsistent with the fact, and
had not the slightest foundation. In making that state-
ment he had expressed what he felt—that he had perfect
confidence in Mr. Stafford's veracity, and he should hear
with great surprise that Mr. Stafford had ever
made such a statement. He could not bring him-
self to believe that that statement had ever been
made by Mr. Stafford. That was given in The Sun of
this evening with perfect accuracy, and he would now
read the answer as it appeared in the Globe;
and he would only say, that as he was but
asked four or five questions in the committee, and as

the answers were clear and distinct, and as there was
perfect silence in the committee, and as the answers were
taken down in short-hand, he thought a journalist who,
under those circumstances, inserted false statements was
perfectly inexcusable. (Hear, hear.) In the Globe
he was represented as having said, " I have heard
with regret some statements made by Mr. Stafford,
because I had a very high opinion of Mr. Stafford and
his honour, and Mr. Stafford must have known at the
time he made those statements, that they were entirely
inconsistent with the practice of the Admiralty and the
rules of the service." Thus it was represented he had heard
Ar. Stafford's statement with regret, because he (Mr.
Stafford) must have known they were contrary to the
fact, and because previously he had a very high opinion
of Mr. Stafford's personal honour. He was quite sure
their lordship's would consider he would have abandoned
his duty if he had not called their attention to this re-
port, for the purpose of giving to it the most immediate
and emphatic contradiction. (Loud cheers.)
After some conversation this bill was read a second

,ime.

-------
The Earl of ALBEMARLE presented a petition from
the citizens of Manchester, praying that the future
Government of India in this country should consist of a
minister and a council appointed by the Crown, and
directly responsible to Parliament.
COMMON LODGING-HOUSES BILL.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY moved the second
reading of this bill.
After a few words from several noble lords, the bill
was read a second time.
THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.
The Earl of A.LBEMARLE presented a petition from
the citizens of Manchester, signed by the mayor on be-
half of the meeting at which the petition was agreed to,
praying that the future government of India should con-
sist of a Minister and Council appointed by the Crown,
and which should be directly responsible to the Imperial
Parliament. The noble earl, in supporting the prayer
of the petition, said that the document proceeded from
a locality which, London not excepted, had a more vital
interest than any other part of her Majesty's dominions
in the material well-being of the people of India. The
petitioners, while praying for a reform in the home
government of India, complained that the existing go-
vernment had neither developed the resources of the
country, nor provided for the wishes of the people. He
would not venture to anticipate the scheme of govern.
ment which it was the intention of her Majesty's Govern-
ment to submit to Parliament ; but it was certain that
no scheme of government would meet with the approval
of the public which was not responsible, expeditious,
economical, and effective.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH wished to say a few
words in reference to this petition, which was one of
very great importance, coming as it did from so influen-
tial a community. He welcomed the noble earl as
another recruit in the service of Indian legislation. The
statements in the petition were additional and striking
indications of the change which was taking place in the
public mind with respect to the future government of
India. The conclusions to which the petitioners had
come were always his conclusions, as he had stated them
before the committee which sat up stairs, namely, that
it was advisable altogether to disconnect the East India
Company from the Governor of India, and to carry on
the government on the sole authority of the Crown, by
means of a president and council nominated by the
Crown. He did not, however, venture at that time to
state the whole extent of his views on this question ;
and it was gratifying to him now to find those views
stated in their fullest extent by the citizens of Man-
chester, the most populous city in the kingdom next to
metropolis.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE believed that her Majesty's
Government had nothing to do but to take care that the
bills they proposed for the government of India should
be such as would be effectual for its purpose. (Hear.)
He saw no reason for supposing that, in case the Go-
vernment should think it their duty to introduce a bill
this session, it should therefore be considered they were
legislating either ignorantly or precipitately. (Hear,
hear.)

suppose that one of those dispatches 'contained the act
of the Colonial Legislature, of which the draft bill had
reached this country. Of course he was unable to say
so positively, but as soon as the dispatch was received,
if it did contain the act, he would lay it on the table of
the house, for the information of the noble lord.
TRANSPORTATION FROM IRELAND.

In answer to the Earl of GLENGALL,
The Duke of NEWCASTLE said, although there wr.s
some accumulation of convicts in England, in conse-
quence of the order not to send more convicts to Van
Diemen's Land ; yet, as' regarded Ireland, two vessels
containing convicts had been sent, not to Van Diemen's
Land, but to Western Australia, and as large a number
had been sent as before.
h NAVIGATION RETURNS.
Lord,BTANLEY of ALDERLEY, in reference to
some returns moved for a few nights ago by the Earl of
Ellenborough, said that a great number, of sailors had
gone out to Australia at wages of not more than a shil-
ling a month. It might be satisfactory to their lordships
to know that the number.of vessels trading in coals be-
tween the Tyne and London, so far from" having dimin-
ished, had increased. There was also a large increase in
the number of steamers, and with regard to the sailing
vessels he found that a great many had been employed
'on long voyages because more profitable; and had left
the short voyage trade to vessels of other nations It
was not in his power to give any information to the
noble lord with regard to the number of ships and sailors
that went to Australia and returned therefrom.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH saicl.he had not the
least doubt of the improvement of the foI-eign trade, but
what he looked at was the falling off 4 the navigation
for the home trade.

CHIMNEY SWEEPERS REGULATION BILL.
This bill went through committee.
CATHEDRAL APPOINTMENTS BILL.

This bill was read a third time adiassed, after a
statement by Viscount CANNING that Goiernment could
not agree to some amendments which had been proposed
by the Archbishop of Canterbury ; and ser an amend-
ment moved by the' Bishop of OxFORD,'-imposing certain
restrictioni*On'thii appropriation of. chapter property,
bad been agreed to.
COPIES OF SPECIFICATIONS REPEAL BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
LAW OF EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE BILL.

This bill went through committee, and was ordered to
be reported after the recess.

ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.

On the motion of the Earl of ABERDEEN, it was
agreed that the house, at its rising, should adjourn until
Monday, the 23d inst.
Some bills on the table were then advanced a stage,
and their lordships adjourned shortly after 8 o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-(YESTERDAY. )

The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills were read a third time :—Darenth
Valley Railway, Monkland Railway, Norwich and
Spalding Railway, Portadown and Dungannon Railway,
Allendale Road ; Ballymena, Ballymoney, Coleraine,
and Portrush Railway (No. 2); Edinburgh Waterworks ;
Gorbals Gravitation Water (No. 2) ; Limerick Corpora-
tion ; Londonderry, Coleraine, and Belfast Junction
Railway ; Peebles Railway ; and Waveney Valley
Railway.
Rooker's Disabilities Removal Bill was read a second
time.

ROYAL ASSENT.
Mr. Pulman, the Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod,
appeared at the table of the house, to desire the attend-
ance of this house to hear the Royal assent given to cer-
tain bills, for a list of which-see Lords' report.
STAINES, WOKINGHAM, AND WOKING-
RAILWAY BILL.
On the return of the Speaker, the third reading of
this bill having been moved,
Mr. JAMES MACGREGOR moved that this bill be
recommitted, on the ground that the committee before
whom it had been discussed had not allowed the South-
Eastern Railway Company, as landowners, to be heard
by counsel against the preamble of the bill. He con-
tended that the South-Eastern Company had a locus
standi, and the committee had decided wrongfully.
Mr. CHRISTOPHER defended the course taken by
the committee. He objected to recommitting the bill,
because everything that could be said by the South-
Eastern Company had been already said, and that at
very great length.
After a few words from Mr. EVELYN, the motion
was withdrawn, and the bill was read a third time. ,
Fisher's Divorce Bill was read a first time.

PETITIONS.
Mr. CAYLEY presented a petition from Harrow-
gate, in the West Riding, praying the house to interfere
in the case of Edward iVlurray.
Mr. TURNER presented a petition from the magi-
strates of Liverpool in favour of an amendment of the
law relative to juvenile and destitute criminals.
Lord GODERICH presented a petition from Bradford,
against the opening of the Crystal Palace on Sundays.
Mr. L. KING presented a petition from Boston, in
favour of the
Mr; W. PATTEN presented a petieffin from Preston,
praying for the abolition of the advertisement duty.
Mr. T. DUNCONIBE presented petitions in favour
of the opening of the Crystal Palace on Sundays.
A number of petitions were presented in favour of
the Parliamentary enfranchisement of the London Uni-
versity.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
Lord PALMERSTON moved that the house at its
rising adjourn until Thursday next.

COURSE OF PUBLIC BUSINESS.
Mr. DISRAELI—Perhaps the noble lord will inform
us what is to be the course of public business next week ?
It would be very convenient to know what business is
to be taken on Thursday and Friday.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied,

that must, of course, in some degree, depend on the pro-
gress made to-night. The house will understsnd that
the great object of the Government is to put forward the
financial business, of course allowing full time for the
consideration of these matters, but not permitting others
to interfere with them. Among the financial business,
that which it is most important to get forward is the in-
come tax, up to the point of passing the bill through
committee. What I propose is, to report the resolution
to which the committee of ways and means came with
regard to the income tax immediately. A learned gen-
tleman has given notice of a motion in reference to the
exemption of income below a certain amount ; but I
have received an intimation from him that he intends to
postpone making that until we are in committee upon
the bill. That being so, it is perfectly practicable for
me to bring in the bill this evening, and to print and
circulate it to-morrow. Under these circumstances, I
should hope the house will take the second reading on
Thursday next week ; if not, upon Friday, so as to get
it into committee at the earliest possible period, and I
trust it will go through committee without delay. I
have spoken so far under the expectation that the legacy
duty resolution will be proceeded with immediately after
the report of the income tax has been made, which I hope
will be to-night. After that, and probably between the
present time and going into committee on the Income
Tax Bill, the only business connected with finance likely
to lead to discussion is the second reading of the Spirits
Bill.
Mr. DISRAELI thought it would be impossible to take
both bills on the same night ; but there was another
matter of importance which the noble lord the member
for the city of London had promised should be an-
nounced before the recess, namely the day on which it
was proposed to state the views of the Government with
regard to the future administration of the affairs of

India,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
then he would take the Spirits Duties Bill next Thurs-
day, and the Income Tax Bill on the following night,
but only on the (understanding that the bill should be
committed on the following Monday.
Mr. DISRAELI saw no objection to taking the In-
come Tax Bill on Friday, but it would be much better
to postpone it, that was the second reading, until Mon-
day week.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could
not accede to this proposal.
Mr. MILDER GIBSON said his County Rates D.

-.. • • • _
stood on the paper for Thursday next, but under the
rule which ;had been recently passed, Government
claimed the right of giving their orders the precedence.
Now, this was contrary to the standing orders which said
orders of the day should be taken as they stood on the
paper, and he wished, therefore, to know from the
Speaker whet her the Government were entitled to this
privilege ?
The SPEA: KIER decided that they were according to
the practice of :the house.
SPIR LT DUTIES--ISLE OF MAN.
In reply to a. question from Sir R. H. INGLIS,
Mr. WILSO:N stated that the papers relative to the
change in the C ustoms duties of the Isle of Man would
be laid before ti te country as soon as possible.
THE EAST INDIA CHARTER.
Mr. DISRAJ Z.LI said he had received no answer yet
to his question. relative to India.
Lord PALT iIERSTON could only state, in the ab-
sence of the nc ,ble lord the member for the city of Lon-
don, that in th .e present state of public business no day
could be fixed for the purpose alluded to.
Mr. HUME suggested that the question had better
be postponed v .ntil a future session.
ED U CATION.
Mr. CORD] LiN said the noble lord the member for the
city of London . promised to state before the house broke
up for the holi Ezys, the day upon which he would take
the discussion ru the Education Bill. Could any mem-
ber of the Go vvrnment state now for the noble lord
when the subje would be brought on ?
Lord PALM IBSTON replied in the negative, but
ample notice woo ld be given of the day after the recess.
STAMPS ON TRANSFERS OF LAND.
Mr. E. EGE] ;TON wished to ask the Chancellor of
the Exchequer wl tether he would be prepared to direct
the Board of St: imps to make such arrangements as
would afford Jillek public information of that portion of
the stamp dui ies in any year derived exclusively from
the transfer o f lzaded. property.
The CHAT ICELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was not
able to supply •Ahe ixtformation.

ANTIGUA.
Mr. NEWDEGATE wished to ask. the Chancellor of
the Exchequer whether it was the intention of her Ma-
jesty's Government to require from the proprietors of
estates in Antigua the full amount of five per cent.
interest upon the capital advanced to them by the
Government.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
was intended to charge 4 instead of 5 per cent., but
there would be no extension of the time fur repayment.

THE CAPE.
Sir J. PAKINGTON wished to ask the Under Secre-

tary of State for the Colonies whether he intends shortly
to lay upon the table further papers on the affairs of the

Cape- of Good Hope ; and if so, whether they will
contain full information as to the views and intentions

of her Majesty's Government with respect to the Orange
River Sovereignty and the eastern boundary of that

colony.
Mr. F. PEEL said it was intended to lay a series of
papers upon the table in continuation of those which
had already been published.

DR. REID.
Mr. COWAN asked the Chief Commissioner of Works

whether an arbitration has been offered to Dr. Reid, on

the part of the Government, in reference to the course
pursued towards him at the houses of Parliament ; and
if so, who were the arbiters and their umpire. If it be
true that any decision has been given in Dr. Reid's

favour, and if what the decision had been. Whether,

in the event of any such decision having been given, it
was founded on legal considerations,. or solely on the

merits of the ease.

Whether the Chief Cominissioner

will agree to the production of all papers and documents
connected with the appointment of any such arbitration,
including the notes of any shorthand writer who may

have attended its proceedings.
Sir W. MOLESWORTH, in reply to the first queg
tion, said that Dr. Reid had been removed from his office
by the late Government, and in consequence of that
removal he had claimed compensation ; that, an arbitra-
tion had been agreed upon, and arbitrators appointed.
In reply to the second question he had to state that Dr.
Reid claimed 10,250/., and that the arbitrators 'bad
awarded him 3,2501. The third question could only be
answered by the arbitrators, but in all probability they
would not answer it, and in his opinion they ought not
to answer it. I-Ie presumed they had made their award

in concurrence with the submission made to them. In

answer to the fourth question, he had no objection to the
production of the submission, and also of the award, but
objected to the printing of the shorthand writer's notes,
which extended over 6,000 folios. (Laughter.)