The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-22 00:00:00

TELE

. -
. The Bill is consequently lostry
Mr. HINDLEY gave notice that on the 4th of April
he should draw the attention of the House to the state
of the industrious classes of this country.
Mr. F. MACKENZIE gave notice that one day this
week he should move that a new writ be issued for the
borough of Harwich.
Mr. HUME gave notice that on Monday next, on
the second reading of the Income-tax Bill being moved,
he should move that it be referred to a Select Com-
mittee up stairs.
AYLESBURY ELECTION.
Mr. R. PALMER brought up the report of the
Aylesbury Election Committee, declaring Lord Nugent
to have been duly elected, and Mr. J. P. Deering to
have been unduly elected.
NEW WRIT FOR BEWDLEY.
Mr. F. MACKENZIE moved that a new writ be issued
for the borough of Bewdley.
Mr. TATTON EGERTON said he did not rise to
object to the motion, but he wished to draw the attention
of the House to the fact that the Committee to whom the
Bewdley Election petition was referred reported specially
to the House, and he would ask the House whether, under
such! circumstances, it would not be better to postpone
this motion?—(Bear, hear.) The circumstances under
which the Committee reported specially were these: the
Committee found that a vexatious system of carrying
away voters, treating, and making them drunk,
was carried on at the last election, and at the
previous election of 1841, and he put it to the
House whether it would not be as well if this motion
were postponed till some steps had been taken to pro-
tect the voters themselves in their exercise of the elective
franchise?
Mr. HUME proceeded to read several extracts from
the report of the Committee, showing that a system pre-
vailed in the borough of Bewdley of keeping open nearly
all the public-houses during the time of elections.
The motion was then withdrawn.
EJECTIONS IN GALWAY.
Mr. P. SCROPE gave notice of his intention to ask
a question to-morrow on the subject of the forcible and
cruel ejectment of a large number of persons from
various estates in the county of Galway.
DISMISSAL OF ENGLISH SERVANTS.

In answer to a question put by Mr. B. COCHRANE,
Lord PALMERSTON said that he had received no
notification whatever tending to corroborate the state-
ments that the dismissal of English servants in Paris
had taken place at the request of the Provisional
Government.
COMMISSIONERS OF THE NEW HOUSES OF
PARLIAMENT.
In answer to a question put by Mr. DUNCAN,
Lord MORPETH said that the number of Commis-
sioners appointed by the Government to superintend the
erection of the new Houses of Parliament was throe, one
of whom was Earl Grey, another Mr. Greene, and a third
Sir John Burgoyne.
RECEPTION OF THE ROYAL FAMILY OF
FRANCE IN THIS COUNTRY.
In answer to a question put by an Hort. MEMBER,
Lord PALMERSTON stated that there was no
foundation whatever for the statements which had ap-
peared in the newspapers, to the effect that tho Marquis
of Normanby had waited upon M. Lawartine to
apologise to the Provisonal Government for the
reception by this country of the Royal Family
of France. No communication of any kind had taken
place between her Majesty's Government and the Pro-
visional Government of France, through the Marquis of
Normanby or any other channel, on that subject. It was
quite true that the Marquis of Normanby had addressed
to him (Lord Palmerston) a private letter, stating that
misapprehension or feelings of jealousy might be ex-
cited in the Government of France with respect to the re-
ception that might he given not to the Royal Family, but
to the late Ministers of the French Government. He
had, in a private letter addressed to the Marquis of
Normanby, requested him, in case any such teelinge
should arise, to state that the reception given to those
persons was, and would be,a reception which in thiscountry
was always given to men who, from any unfortunate cir-
cumstances, were obliged to seek refuge in this country—
the reception of hospitality suitable to the country, and
that the French Government might rest assured,
that in the dealings of this Government with France,
they would act firmly, honourably, and quite
openly, and that under no circumstances should
there be the slightest ground given for imputing any-
thing like intriguing in any hostile manner against the
interests of the French Government.—(Hear, hear.)
In answer to a question from Lord DUDLEY
STUART,
Lord PALMERSTON stated that no communication
whatever had been received by the Government of this
country from the Provisional Government of France with
respect to the discovery of any correspondence affecting
the Duke and Duchess of Montpensier, and relating to
very peculiar and extraordinary circumstances. No
imputation or communication of any sort or kind
had been submitted to them and with respect
to their departure, it was entirely the result
of their own choice, and so far from its being in accord-
ance with any communication made by the Government,
the House would at once perceive that there were many
reasons why the Government should have desired that
these personages should have stayed in this country in-
stead of going away.
STATE OF AUSTRIA.
In answer to another question from the same NGBLE
Loan
Lord PALMERSTON stated that he had received
a dispatch from Vienna, dated the 14th instant, inform-
ing him that Prince Metternich had ceased to be Prime
Minister of Austria. Beyond that he had no information to
give with reference to the state of Austria.—(Laughter)
BRAZIL.
Lord PALMERSTON, in answer to a question from
Lord George Bentinck, said that he could not
hold out any hope, from the feelings that the Bra-
zilians entertained upon the subject, that any commer-
cial treaty could be retained with Brazil.
SPANISH TARIFF.

Mr. BANKES wished to know when the dispatch from
the Court of Madrid with respeekt to the tariff would be
laid on the table of the House.
Lord PALMERSTON had not yet received the dis-
patch ; when he did he would lay it on the table.
THE CASE OF MR. RAYSON.
Mr. M. MILNES then rose to bring under the
consideration of the House the iajuries alleged to have
been suffered by Mr. Rayson, an English merchant, from
the Austrian authorities at Constantinople. The claim
of Mr. Rayon was not upon the Austrian Government
as such, bat his complaint was, that ho had been de-
prived of his rights, and had not been permitted to
bring his case before the Austrian Courts. All he
asked was to be enabled to state his case before an Aus-
trian tribunal, and to obtain the same justice as if be
had been an Austrian subject. In 1834, Mr. Rayson,
then a wealthy merchant at Constantinople, had a
dispute with a Jew named Monk who was an Austrian
protected subject. The super-arbiter decided the suit
in Mr. Rayson's favour, and Mobil brought his claim
before the Austrian internuncio at onstantinople, who
combined in his own person the powers exercised by
tne English Consul General and the English Ambassa-
dor respectively. The Austrian internuncio took it upon
him, quite illegally, to decide the case against Mr.
Rayson, who protested: against the decision, and de-
manded in vain that his opponent should be compelled to
give security for the (property in question, while the
matter remained in dispute, and in the event of Mr. Ray-
son succeeding in proving the Jew's conduct to have
been illegal. In 1833 Mr. Rayson, being unable to ob-
tain justice from the Austrian internuncio at Constanti-
nople, repaired to Vienna, and obtained the assistance,
first of Sir F. Lamb, and afterwards of Lord Beauvale,
the British Ambassador at that Court. From 1335 to
1838 Mr. Rayson's case was met with a series of
evasions, but after those three years the Austrian
Government was compelled, by the pertinacity of Lord
Beauvale, to issue an order declaring the decree of the
internuncio unjust and invalid. The decree was re-
versed by the Imperial and Royal Supreme Court of
Vienna, but no communication of the decision was
made to Mr. Rayson, who was in that capital, or to
Lord Beauvale. When he heard of the decision, he
hastened to Constantinople, and demanded from the in-
ternuncio that security should be given to him upon the
goods of his debtor, Most. This, however, was refused,
and he afterwards heard that the man Mose had been
claimed as a Turkish subject by the Turkish Govern-
ment. Upon application to the internuncio that func-
tionary informed Mr. Rayson that the man, having
been so claimed, he had no longer any power over him.
Now, if a transaction of this kind was to be permitted,
there was an end to commercial faith, and our mercan-
tile affairs in. the Levant could not be carried on. Mr.
Rayson went again to Vienna, and again his case was
zealously seconded by Lord Beauvale. Legal advice
was taken, and a petition entered in one of the courts at
Vienna. For a long time no answer was given to that
petition. Lord Beauvale applied to Prince Metternich,
who promised to see what could be done in
the matter. In 1839 the Court issued a de-
cree deciding that it had no jurisdiction, but
Mr. Rayson's papers were not returned to him, and
without his sanction the case was transferred to the
Chancery of State, which was the Foreign-office of
Vienna, or, in fact, was Prince Metternich himself.
Lord Palmerston then took up the matter, and wrote a
dispatch, stating that wrong had been done to a British
*abject, that the case had become a question between
her Majesty's Government and the Government of Aus-
tria,n
ganiand,
d appealing for redress. Mr. Rayson then came
tole but Lord Palmerston was just then going
out of office. Nevertheless, he attended to the case, and
probably recommended it to his successor. Lord Aber-
deen did not seem at first to take the same view of the
matter as his predecessor, and he as much as said that
Mr. Rayson had done wrong in bringing his case before
the Courts at Vienna.
An HON. MEMBER here moved that the House be
counted.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and forty Mem-
bers not being found present, the House stood adjourned
at Seven o'clock.

SOUTIIASIFTON, MARCY 21.—The Lady de Sau-
marez, Captain Wrightson, with nearly 200 passengers,
arrived here at eleven o'clock this morning, alter
a very rough passage, from Havre, which place she
left last night at nine o'clock. She reports
that affairs wore a still more gloomy aspect than
ever. At Havre, Rouen, and their neighbour.
hoods, the English workmen have met with shock-
ing treatment, being turned out of their houses,
their furniture being destroyed, and in some cases
they have been personally attacked and severely mal-
treated. A popular outbreak was feared last night at
Havre. It is reported that at Rouen the mob waited on
the authorities to ask permission to have two days'
pillage, and were only restrained by the prompt inter-
ference of the National Guards. The Lady de Saumarca
brought passengers and dispatches to the Washington,
which left for New York at twelve o'clock, with about
thirty-seven passengers, mail, and general cargo. The j
Royal West India mail-ship Dee, from the West Indies,
is hourly expected.