The Sun.
London, England, 1870-05-04 00:00:00

THE MASSACRE BY GREEK BEIGANDS.

Sir JAMES ELPHINSTONE asked the Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs whether the withdrawal of the usual
force hitherto maintained in Greek waters, viz., a line of
battle ship or heavy frigate at the Piraeus, and two sloops
on the coast, was in consequence of representations from
the Foreign-office to the Admiralty that the safety of
British subjects and the protection of British interests in
Greece could be ensured without a naval force, and what
steps her Majesty's Government intend to take in conse-
quence of the late murders ; and, whether they intended
to press upon the Government of that kingdom the neces-
sity of making an adequate provision for Mrs. Lloyd, the
widow of one of the murdered men.
Mr. OTTWAY said there had been no communication
from the Foreign Office to the Admiralty recommending
the withdrawal of the forces from the Greek waters.
There was no standing order on the subject of the
nature of the force, and it was always left to
the discretion of the commander-in-chief in the
Mediterranean. The noble earl, the Secretary of Foreign
Affairs, hearing that Sir Alexander Milne was about to
proceed with his fleet to the Pincus had sent an order to
stop him from going there, and receiving any hospitality
from the Greek Government. With regard to the next
part of the question as to what step the Government in-
tended to take inconsequence of the murders that had taken
place, the question was premature. (Hear, hear.) Every
despatch received had been communicated to the House,
and it would be seen from this that the information was
not complete. With regard to the latter part of the
question, there was every reason to expect that the Greek
Government would make ample provision for Mrs. Lloyd
and her child.
THE FOREIGN OFFICE AGENCIES.

Mr. BARNETT asked the Under Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs, to whom application was to be made for
the payment of diplomatic pensions now due, in conse-
quence of the abolition of agencies in the Foreign Office,
where it appears no information could be obtained on the
subiect in answer to inouiries that had been made.

Mr. BIRLEY moved for a select committee to inquire
into the operation of the commercial treaty with France
in all branches of trade which it affects. He disclaimed
any intention of attacking the treaty, but if the ob-
ject were to gain the best possible terms for
the admission of manufactures from this country
into France, then he Was amenable to the charge.
The hon. gentleman declared that it was the opinion of
most persons who had given attention to the question
that we had not been doing the trade in manufactured
goods, &c„ with France which was contemplated under
the treaty. We had now arrived, remarked the hon.
member, at the specified term of 10 years for which the
treaty was contracted, and it was onlynatural that we should
make a proper inquiry into the operations of the treaty,
and ascertain what had been its effects upon our trade.
In common with every member of the House, he deeply
regretted the absence of the President of the Board of
Trade, because no man was more likely to throw
light upon the subject than he. The right hon
gentleman seem t,o him to have sympathised with the
plate glass manufacturers when they waited upon him as
a deputation to represent to him the unfair competition
they were subjected to under the operations of the tariff.
Mr. FIELDEN seconded the motion.

Mr. STAVELEY HILL moved, as an amendment, that the

Select Committee do inquire as to the effect upon
ur commerce and manufactures of our present
treaty arrangements with foreign countries. There was
ground for believing that these treaties were acting inju-
riously upon our commerce and manufactures. The gauge
of good government was the state of the labouring classes,
and there were indications that the working people were
not in that state of prosperity in which they might be. He
referred to the prevalence of pauperism in the metropolis,
and in the provinces. He called attention to the emigra-
tion of our best artisans as an evidence of the depressed
condition of trade. There was, in the words of a petition,
" a grievous scarcity of labour." Various causes had
been assigned for the bad state of trade, and in
the case of the cotton trade the distress was attri-
buted to a deficiency of the raw material ; but
that he denied. Again, it was argued that it was owing
to the drunkenness of the working population, and he
combated that argument. The bad state of trade had
been the result of trades unions, but he contended that
it could not be regarded as an admissible argument. He
held thar the real cause of distress among the English
labouring classes was the treaties with foreign ~ountries,
their textile tariffs, and the great abundance of foreign
manufactures in this country. By the treaty with France
we were bound practically to admit all French goods free
of duty, and we conceded to France that she should im-
pose a duty of from three to thirty per cent upon English
manufactured goods entering her ports. The question was,
were these duties sufficient to exclude English manufactured
goods. He maintained that they were, and that if the
present terms of the treaty were continued, cotton,
woollen, and linen goods would be practically prohibited
from entering the ports of France, and he might say the
same with regard to Prussia, and other countries with

whom we had commercial treaties. He did not wish it to
be thought that ho was speaking against free trade, but
ander the treaty English labour had to suffer heavy

taxation.

Sir T. BAZLEY said the remarks of those who had
addressed the House against the proposal did not attain
the object they had in view. He for one did not believe
that the trade of the country had been depressed by the
treaty, but by other causes ; and it was satisfactory now
to find that the trade of Coventry and Manchester was
improving. It was with some satisfaction that he
found that the principles of Free Trade were
not assailed, because the country was greatly
enriched by the trade it carried on. The hon.
member then referred to the imports and exports of the
country for the last few years, and said he looked forward
hopefully, because he knew that they had the means of
competing with every nation of the earth. There was
nothing that he could see that called for
alarm with respect to the trade of the couutry,
but the American war had necessarily led to
much depression, and if they could only re-
ceive a full supply of the raw material, and with free
intercourse he felt sure the people of this country would
always be able to meet any demand that might be made
upon them. They must, however, not forget that foreign
competition was making its way, but notwithstanding
that the manufacturers of England had nothing to fear
except their own phantoms. There were hopeful signs for
the future, and with better education greater prosperity
was sure to follow.

Mr. LIDDELL alluded to the progress of public opinion
in France on the question of free trade, and expressed his
fear that a committee of the character proposed would
prove antagonistic to the feeling in favour of the treaty.
It might be wise to appoint the committee, if only
for the purpose of shewing the working classes
of this country how erroneous their opinions were
in reference to this treaty. He believed that no measure
had been attended with more advantageous political
results as between the two countries than the commercial
treaty.
Mr. SHAW-LEFEVRE said that anyone looking at
the French tariff, and comparing the returns of
the two countries, could see at once where the
duties at present levied were too high. He agreed with
the last speaker that the appointment of such a committee
as was proposed would chew a want of confidence in the
merits of the French treaty. While he was not prepared
to &ay that during the last few years there had been
great distress among the manufacturing districts, it could
not, he contended, be alleged that there was such a preva-
lence of distress as would justify an inquiry into the
operations of the French treaty.

Mr. S. CAVE, although he did not think that any solid in-
formation would be gained from the appointment of the
committee, supported the motion.
The discussion was continued by Mr. Platt, Mr. Brockle-
hurst, Mr. Newdegate, and other hon. members.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQTJEit then recapitulated
the leading points of the discussion, deprecating its tendency
towards a re-imposition of protective duties on imports. The
French Treaty had been that evening simply used as a stalk-
ing-horse. What was really wanted was a committee before
which the doctrines and principles of free trade might be
impeached.
The House divided, when the appointment of a commit-
tee was refused by 138 to 50 votes.

On the motion of Mr. CALLAN, a select committee was ap-
pointed to inquire into the rules affecting the actual treat-
ment of political prisoners.

GIAIAToNE nominated the select committee on cor-
rupt practices.
The adjourned debate was resumed on the motion of Mr.
T. Humus relative to public schools, which stood adjourned
from April 5.

Mr. GLADSTONE suggested that, instead of passing the
motion of the hon. member for Promo in the terms in
which it stood, they should pass it in a form which would
give the Government the discretion of examining whether
the schools mentioned in his motion did or did not come
within the 17th and 19th sections of the Endowed Schools
Bill of 1869.

Mr. HUGHES then withdrew his original motion, and sub-
stituted for it the motion of the Government.

--------
At this stage, on the motion of Lord GAIWAY, the debate
was.adjourned.

The House adjourned at five minutes to 1 o'clock.

Mrs. ARCHER, who introduced the ladies, presented Mr.
Goschen with a memorial praying for the passing of a
law to allow ladies to co-operate with the Poor Law
authorities, in the charge of pauper children, and to be
made responsible for them in the same way as a guardian
or trustee is of his ward. The other items of the
memorial involved matters of detail, and Ways and
Means.

No set speeches were made as is usually the case
when deputations of gentlemen have interviews with
Ministers, but the ladies offered suggestions as to
the way in which the system might be worked
in answer to observations of the right hon.
gentleman. They adopted the plan of hearing what
he had to say to the memorial first, and did not hesitate
to interrupt him whenever a " point " was to be gained.
They contended in general terms that by the adoption
of such a system, a decided advantage would be obtained,
that it would be greatly for the benefit of pauper children
and would lessen the rates.

Mr. GOSCHEN quoted from the evidence which has just
been published with respect to the plan in Scotland,
where it is very generally carried out. He stated
that he was favourable to such a system in England, if
It could be properly earried out, but he could not hide
from them the fact that it was surrounded with great
difficulties, such as the class of people to whom the chil-
dren would be entrusted, and especially the degree of
supervision which could be exercised over them. It would
never do for it to drift into a mere " fanning out " system.
He did not say that the difficulties were insuperable, but
the matter would require the most serious consideration.
The ladies very politely thanked the right hon. gentleman
for his courtesy.

MAJOR-GENERAL BOXER AND THE WAR
OFFICE.

Major-General Boxer has published a letter, replying
to Sir J. Pakington's speech on Friday last. The sub-
stance of it is contained in the following passage "In
1867 Messrs. Eley informed me that certain parties were
threatening an infringement of the patent and that it
would be necessary to take legal proceedings against
them (which was afterwards done). Now, as
I had given this firm an exclusive licence, I felt bound to
secure to them this right ; at the same time I had an
objection, on account of my official position, to appear
in a lawsuit of this sort. Messrs. .Eley at that time
were not prepared to purchase the patent ; so it was
agreed, under legal advice, that I should make an
absolute assignment to them for a sum which I was to
hold as a security (as the patents became their legal
property upon the assignment), and that we shotild
enter into a private agreement by which I was to
receive a royalty. This, I was advised, was not
an unusual proceeding in such cases, and I had no idea
that there was anything objectionable in the arrangement
which was the only one that could be made under the cir-
cumstances. This assignment and agreement had nothing
to do, either directly or indirectly, with the War Office.
But it may be asked, and fairly asked, why I did not
specially answer the question put to me on the 20th of
May, 1867, and then explain the relation which existed
between Messrs. Eley and myself. After what has been
stated by Sir J. Pakington, some explanation is required
by those who have not had an opportunity of reading my
pamphlet published in February 1870. There were
three reasons why I did not answer the question
Ist. I regarded the matter entirely as a private one,
and that 1. was, therefore, under no obligation whatever to
answer the question put to me by the Assistant Director
of Ordnance. At the time, also, I felt very keenly the
ungenerous treatment I had received from the authorities
of the War Office with respect to my adopted inventions. •
2nd. The matter in question in no way affected the Warl
Office or the public. Messrs. Eley were in possession of an
exclusive right to manufacture and sell my patent cart-
ridges, and 1 had no power to cancel the agreement for ,
three years from the time I gave notice to them. No other
private firm could, therefore, manufacture or sell these
cartridges to the Government except they obtained a
licence from Messrs. Eley and paid a royalty. This I ex-
plained in my letter to the War Office, dated November
9, 1869, and it was, therefore, a matter of no concern!
to me or to the Government whether Messrs. Eley or
other private manufacturers supplied the War Office, so
far as money was concerned. This is a very important
point. And thirdly, Messrs. Eley were a party to the
agreement, and I was not at liberty to inform the War
Office of its existence. Besides, to have done so would
have defeated the very object for which it was Solely'
made."

BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.—In the Court of Exche-
quer, before Mr. Baron Channel, a Miss Hayward
brought an action for breach of promise of marriage
against Mr. Lyons, a jeweller of considerable means in
Birmingham. The plaintiff—a good-looking young woman
of twenty-four summers— stated that she first became ac-
quainted with defendant when she was 12 years old, and since
that time she had lived with him at several places as his
wife. The defendant, who was about the same age as
plaintiff, got married in the summer of last year, excusing
himself to plaintiff that if he had not married he
should have become bankrupt. Plaintiff was so dis-
tressed that she accepted his promise to pay her
expenses to America, which, however, he did not fulfil.
In cross-examination, she admitted that she had lived
with another man, whose name she refused to disclose.
The defendant's case was that the plaintiff was " a young
lady of easy virtue," and that he never promised to marry
her. The jury awarded £l5O to the plaintiff.
ALLEGED FRAUD BY A BANKRUPT.—John Henry Wes-
ton has been indicted at the Central Criminal Court for
having concealed and embezzled a portion of
his estate with a view of defrauding his cre-
ditors. He was a chandelier manufacturer and
gas engineer, and was adjudicated a bankrupt
upon his own petition, saying, in his statement of ac-
counts, that large sums were due to him, and he had
enough to pay 20s. in the pound. It turnedout, however,
that the debts were fictitious, and all that was realised was
a sum of £4OO, his liabilities being £2OOO. He was found on
the premises after the sale having obtained access surrep-
titiously, and he remained there until forcibly removed by
order of the Court of Bankruptcy. Shortly after a quan-
tity of property was found concealed in different parts of
the premises, and it was alleged by the prosecution that
the concealmenti had been made by the defendant. He
asserted, however, that it had been concealed by the per-
sons who prepared the sale, and he was entirely ignorant
of it. The case was adjourned.

AN ALLEGED LUNATIC.—John Henry Jenkins has been.
charged, at Brentford, with being found in an unfurnished
house at Twickenham. The prisoner, who is believed to
be a lunatic, said he had taken an early walk from London,
and went into the house to lie down. He was a
clergyman's son, and his mother had an income
of £6OO a year. A pawnbroker's duplicate
and a shilling were found on him. It having
been stated that the house in which the prisoner was
found was within a few hundred yards of Mr. Bohn's,
where the burglary was recently committed, and also that
at the station he had been incoherent in his replies, the
magistrate decided upon remanding the prisoner.
THE CHARGE OF PARRICIDE IN SHROPSHIRE.—CharIes
Joseph Greene Wilson has been committed for trial,
charged with shooting his father, Dr. Wilson, of Wem
Salop, with intent to murder him.
SUPERSTITION IN DEVON.—AII old man named Philip
Birch, who is nearly eighty, has been charged at
Barstaple with assaulting Mary Stephens. The-defendant
met her in the market-place, and scratched her with a
needle, causing her to bleed. The old man said, in expia-
tion, that he had been told by more than 100 people if he
could draw the woman's blood she could do hun no more
harm, but that he had suffered many ailments through
her power over him for the last five years and had lost
fourteen canaries and fifty goldfinches. He was fined
2s. 6d. and costs.

FINES FOR SELLING SPIRITS WITHOUT A LICENSE.—The
proprietor of the Belle Vue Sporting Grounds, near
Halifax, has been fined £5O for selling spirits, and £2O for
selling beer without a license. It appeared that his
license had been taken from him at the last Brewster
Sessions, and that he had been eighteen times convicted.

A YOUNG GARROTTER.—At the Liverpool Police-court,
James Boyle, a discharged soldier, and Martin Fox, a
lad only ten years of age, were charged with garrotting
and attempting to rob an elderly gentleman named Wade.
The latter was on his way home early on Sunday morn-.
ing, when Boyle suddenly put his arm round his (Mr.
Wade's) neck, dragged him to the ground, and held him
down, whilst the boy made an adroit attempt to rifle his
pockets. Policemen arrived in time to prevent the
robbery. Boyle was sentenced to thrge months' iMpF:l,BQlliv
103.a&t,_511§_kfAir_KM.MLQUiled.

PORTING.—JOHN ROBERTS supplies the
LITES I' EDITION of "THE SUN" as soon as pub
lie ed.
—t, Bath-street, City-road. E.O.

THE "SUN" NEWSPAPER.-(T. R. GLENIE,
.2. Sporting Library, 4, Connaught-terrace, Edgewo,re,road,
delivers the LITE, 1:DITION of "THE SUN " aS Soon as
published.

rrIlE SUN. - LATEST EDITION to he seen
X in the Coffee Room, at the "Southampton Arms," High-
street, Camden-town, where all Sporting and Politica events
are freely discussed,