The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-16 00:00:00

POOR-LAW ADMINISTRATION BILL.

Mr. BORTHWlCKinquired,in the event of the Bill
coming down from the other House with any alterations,
if the Government would fix an early day for their con-
sideration.

Sir G. GREY said the Bill would no doubt come
down from the House to-night, and he proposed to take
the Bill either to-morrow or on Monday.
Mr. HINDLEY said he was not satisfied with the
reply. Would the Government stand by the resolution
of the Hon. Member?
Sir GEORGE GREY could state nothing more than
he did the other night.
Mr. BORTH WICK said he shonld feel it his duty to
maintain the clause he h4d proposed, and which was
carried, with respect to the separation of old couples, in
all its integrity.
LOANS TO IRISH LANDOWNERS.
In reply to Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated
that the money was voted long ago, and he was not
aware that any delay had taken place in making the
grants when applied for.
.IiILITARY KNIGHTS OF WINDSOR—PRIVI-

LEGE.

Mr. B. CABBELL 'Tile Right Hon. Baronet the
Secretary of State for the Home Department was repre-
sented in the public journals to have raid, with reference
to this subject, that be (Mr. B. Cabbell) had entered
ieto an arrangement to furnish the law officers of the
Crown with papers on the matter. He wished it to be
distinctly understood that he gave a direct negative to
such a charge.
DEANERY OF MANCHESTER.

Mr. HOUSMAN inquired if the Rev Mr. Bowers,
who had been recently appointed to the deanery of
Manchester would be allowed to retain the post of rector
of St. Paul's, Covent-garden.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated that he bad consulted
the Duke of Bedford on the subject of the Rev. Gentle.
man's relinquishing the office which he held in St.
Paul's, Covent-garden. He said he had given the ut-
most satisfaction, and that he was a very proper person to
appoint to the vacant office, but as it might take a
short tme to fill up the office, as the parish was a
difficult one, he inquired if any inconvenience would re-
sult from his performing his duties for a short time until
his successor could be appointed. He (Lord J. Russell)
consented, as there was no immediate urgency for the
Rev. Gentleman to enter upon his new duties._. (Hear.)
Mr. HINDLEY said he bad been acquainted with the
Rev. Gentleman for some time, and he believed his ap.
pomtment would afford the utmost sat'sfaction.
PERTH, FORFAR, AND ABERDEEN
POST-OFFICES.

Mr. T. DUNCOM BE wished to ask the Chancellor en
the Exchequer what was the reason that the mails from
the populous counties of Perth, Wrier, and Aberdeen
were detained at the Post-office of Inverness for sixteen
or seventeen hours daily, when on their way to the
inhabitants in the fishing stations, on the sea coast of
the large counties of Ross, Sutherland, and Caithness.
where the people were very sparingly employed and ie
great poverty and distress, but which the delays and bad
management of the Po=t-office tended to aggravate.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER com-
plained that the Honourable Gentlemen had not con
tined his question to a specific matter, instead of blaming
parties who were in truth not to blame. The fact was
this : the! Aberdeen mail went across the country to
Inverness in order to be carried on by the northern mail,
and the same was the case with the Perth mail ;
they were carried across the country by means of a
cross mail ; but the opening of railways east and
west cans, d th' se mails to be missed, and they had
e,msequently to be carried on by the mails next day.
Hence the delay. He admitted that the parties had good
reason to complain, but as soon as arrangements could
be made the evil would be remedied. The Hon. Gen-
tleman must be aware that all the cross mails could not
be dovetailed to meet the main mails at a certain time,
but nothing would be left undone to remove all reasonable
cause of complaint.
CONSOLIDATED CANAL. UND BILL. - ARGYLE

Oa the motion for going into Committee on this Bill,
Mr. S. WORTLEY regretted that the Governnien%
had felt called upon to withdraw so great a public work
as the Argyle Canal, as he believed it would have been
of the utmost advantage to that portion of Scotland
which it would traverse.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCIIEQUER thought
the work advisable, but a, the Government considered
that the Bill could not be carried this session, they
had felt called upon to withdraw it.
Mr. E. DENISON said, 2,000,0001. had been voted
for the purprise of enabling proprietors of land to meet
the difficulties that might arise from an alteration in the
core-kws, by improving their land for the purpose of
producing corn; but out of this large sum Scotland had
received 1,600,0001., whilst but 400,000/. had been devoted
to this purpose in England. He wished the House to
bear this in mind before they consented to any addi-
tional grants.
TREA IY BETWEEN GREAT BRITAIN AND
THE NETHERLANDS.

Lord G. BENTINCK called the attention of the

House to the iutract;on, by the Dutch Government, of
the treaty of commerce contracted in 1827 between
Great Britain and the Netherlands, in respect to the
trade and commerce of the eastern territories of both
countries, and to ask Lord Palmerston if any remon-
strance has been made to the Government of the King
of the Netherlands.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he was unable to answer
the question, but perhaps the Noble Lord would defer it
till his Noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foriegn
Affairs was in his place.
Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said he would readily
do so.

THE
T. DUNI
cIEOABI
BRlTeloSulHplatUedSEtbUatMa.
return which
be had moved for,
r, relating to the appointment of officers
in the British Museum,and MO had been laid upon
the table of the House
with the terms of the order of the House.
Now no appointment was valid unless signed
by
the trustees—the trustees being the Lord Chancellor,
the Speaker of the House of Commons' and the Arch.
bishop of Canterbury ; but this return did not specify
whether this appointment had been signed b) all the
trustees or not. A Commission had been appointed to
inquire into the management
hoped this Comm o
iesi - point of inqui • n would make a
into the reasons why this return had not been mede in
the way the House had ordered it, and that they would
ascertain whether the appointment h adbee n made le-
gaby or not.
Sir R. H. INGLIS was understood to say that the
appointments had been signed by the principal trustee,
ffi
and that was quite sufficient in • law to make them legal.
Mr. HUME said the return was certainly not in strict
compliance with the order of the House. The Commis-
sten alluded to by his Hon. Friend had only met twice
to arrange their mode of proceeding, but he had no doubt
the Commission would not lose sight of the mature
mentioned by his lion. Friend.
CONSOLIDATED FUND BILL.
The House then went into Committee on this Bill.
The whole of the clauses were agreed to, and the
House having resumed, the Cuatitereee reported pro-
gress, and the report was ordered to be brought up to-
morrow.
TREATY BETWEEN GREA.T BRITAIN AN
THE NETHERLANDS.
On the question being put for the third reading of the
New Zealand Bill,
the attention or the Noble Lord the Secretary of
Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said he wished to call
Sette for Foreign Affairs to an
ulleged infraction
of the treaty of the 17th of March. 18.24, signed by Mr.
Canning and the Right II•ne Charle4 Welkin Williams
Wynn. The treaty provided that, with regard to their
Indian possessions and the southern Archipelago, this
country should be placed upon a looting with the most
favoured nations. Such being the treaty of 1824, it
was alleged by a commercial firm of the highest re-
spectability in Manchester, geeses. Butt,-rworth,
Brooks, and Co., that an iufraction of the treaty
had been committed by the King of the Nether.
lands, to the great it jury of the commercial
interests of Manchester and this empire at
large. It was alleged by them, that on the 20th of
August, 1846, a treaty was contracted betwNetheen theerland King
of the Belgians and the King of the s,
affording advantages to the Belgianson which wared
deniask
ed
to British subjects ; and the questi he she to
his Noble Friend was, whether his attention fe,cl been
called to the infraction of the treaty of 1824, and
whether he bad made any remonstrance, to the Dutch
Government, and whether it was his intention to
make any, or to obtain redress for B
matters
subjects ?
Lord PALMEILSTON said the to which the
Noble Lord referred had been some time under the
consideration of the Government, and at the present
moment it formed the subject of a negotiation between
the Netherlands and her Majesty's Government. It was
perfect • ly true, as was stated by the Noble Lord, that a
treaty was come to in 1824 of the na
hae tso ar \ur mention( by
the Noble Lord, and it was quite cle t long es the
advantages granted to Belgium were eithheld from
British subjects, the provisions of the treaty would be
unfulfilled. In fairness, nowever, to the Netherlands
Government, it should he stated list a coun:er demand
had been m ida by that Gevernmen:, founee(! open the
treaty of 1837. They deinatided ter be admitted to the
same pritileges which were greeted to Hanover.
That was still the subject of to gotiation be-
tween the two Governments, and he trusted
that the honourable feelings which he was sure animated
the British Government, and he had no doubt inspited
that of the Netherlands, would insure the conclusion of
these negotiations upon a footing compatible with the
interests of both nations.—(Hear, hear.)
The subject then drowed.
RELIGIOUS PERST:CUTION IN SPAIN
„it 1,71)
PORTUGAL.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said he wished to put a question to
the Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs with
reference to the treatment of British Protestants in the
, dominions of Spain and Portugal. It would be remem-
bered that Dr. Kelley was unjustly expelled from
Madeira because he was a follower of the Protestant
faith ; and as a cerrespondence had taken
place upon
the subject b?t,wee n her Mejt sty 's Gove-.
i,, ,teient and the
authorities of Spain and Povugal, he wished to know t.f
• the Noble Lord had any objeetion to lay that . 1
coirespon-
' de .r , li'^ table of the House ?
_11( , 0,1 l<, •
Lord PALDIERSTON said the subject mentioned by
• his Hon. Friend was one of great importance and no less
' delicacy; but there could be no doubt. that Dr. Killjoy