The Sun.
London, England, 1856-04-04 00:00:00

with the mayors of these places, and he hoped shortly
to be able to take such measures as would obstruct
similar proceedings for the future. (Cheers.)
METROPOLIS LOCAL MANAGEMENT ACT.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS asked the Attorney-General
whether he intended to proceed with the bill to amend
the Metropolis Local Management Act • and if not, to
ask Sir B. Hall what means he intended adopt to re-
move the difficulty caused by conflicting opinions re-
specting the provisions in the said act as regards the
election of parish officers !
Sir B. HALL, in the absence of the Attorney-Gene-
cal, answered the question. That hon. and learned
gentleman introduced this bill on the representation cf
certain members of that house, with relation to this

question. As soon as he did it objections were
taken to it, and it was not now his inten-
tion to proceed with it. The hon. member
for Lambeth had asked him (Sir B. Hall) if he intended
to take coy steps to remove the difficulty that was said
to exist relative to conflicting opinions as to the election
of parish officers. The object of the Metropolis Local
Management Act was to supersede all existing vestries at
the time of its passing, and to do that he copied into the
bill a clause from Hobhouse's Act, and which clause the
hon. member for Lambeth supported. .He (Sir B. Hall)
suggested that an amicable suit (if he might so call it)
should be taken to the Court of Queen's Benah for the
decision of the judges on the difficulty complained of,
and that then,if the decision of the judges was contrary to
what be inteaded, and he believed was the true construc-
tion of the clause, on any representation being made to
him to that effect he would consider the case, and would
introduce a bill to settle the question.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE condemned the conduct cf the
Government with reference to this act, and the conduit
of the right hon. baronet in recommending litigation to
the various parishes in the metropolis. He described
this act as most unpopular, and called upon the house
not to let the learned Attorney-General withdraw the
bill now before the house.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL charged the hon.
member for Finsbury with condemning this bill when it
was introduced as an interference with popular rights,
and finding the parishes of the metropolis concurred
with him, he (the Attorney-General) had decided on
withdrawing the bill. The object of this bill was to
enable the new vestries to interfere with the poor and
the Church, and so he framed this bill. If the
honourable member for Finsbury would bring in
a better bill to solve the difficulty complained of and
save, litigation, he (the Attorney-General) would be
happy to support him.
After some remarks from Mr. WILKINSON, tie
subject dropped.
CENTRAL AMERICA.
Viscount GODERICH asked the First Lord of the
Treasury, whether a document, which had recently ap-
peared, purporting to be a despatch written by the Bri-
tish Minister at Washington to the ,Secretary of State
of the United States, on the 27th day of February last,
with reference to the disputes between this country and
the United States on the subject of Central America wen
authentic. The hon. viscount having read the despatch
which had reference to the arbitration relative to the
Clayton-Bulwer treaty,
Mr. GLADSTONE before the question was answered
called the attention of the house to the position the
house was placed in with reference to the Central Ame-
rican question, in the course of which he referred to the
first correspondence between the two Governments en
the subject, and what had occurred in that house
relative to the production of the correspondence.
lie Lad no wish to interfere with the discretion of pro-
ducing certain documents ; but although the noble lord
had informed the house in February the papers should
be. produced, they had not yet been laid on the table of
I the house ; and the last excuse was that the Foreign-
office bad been so much engaged they had not been able
to get them ready. That ought not to be an excuse for
their non-production, and he urged on the noble lord the
injury likely to result from it. He believed the present
American Minister in this country was armed with suf-
ficient power& to carry out the intentions of his coun-
try. He hoped, however, that nothing would occur to
prevent the present kindly relations between the two
countries.
Lord PALMERSTON said the right hon. gentleman
knew the constitution of the various departments of the
Government sufficient to know that they could not be
augmented momentarily to meet temporary pressure.
The right hon. gentleman had spoken lightly of the ira-
portant duties that had engaged lately the attention of
the Foreign Department.
Mr. GLADSTONE said he bad not done so.
Lord PALMERSTON said he begged the right hon.
gentleman's pardon, but he bad. (Laughter.) After
detailing the amount of business that the Foreign-office
had had lately to discharge, he said he should not then
enter into the question, but wait until the correspon-
dence had been laid on the table of the house, which he
hoped would be in a few days.
THE CRIMEAN COMMISSION REPORT.
Mr. PALK asked if the officers of the Commissariat
Department who considered their conduct inculpated by
that report might appear before the Military Board of
Inquiry nosy sitting, and defend their conduct as well
as those gallant officers whose names bad been so pro-
minently put before the public by that report.
Lord PALMERSTON said yes.
Sir J. GRAHAM then rose and addressed the house
with reference to the charges that had been made against
him, especially in a letter signed by Sir Charles Napier,
and inserted a short time since in the public papers,
which latter were such as net only to impeach his vera-
city, but attributed charges against him of the darkest
character. The right hon. baronet then entered into a
defence of his conduct during the time he had been offi-
cially connected with the late war.
(LEFT SITTING.)