The Sun.
London, England, 1856-07-23 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 23, 1856;

verament were disposei to make any inquiry during the
recess into the state of the judicial establishments in
Westminster-hall, particularly into the present number
of judges, especially taking into view the immense relief
and diinution of busineA in Westminster-hall, which
had been brought about by the establishment of County
Courts.
Sir G. GREY said that from information he had ob-
tained he found that the civil business in the Superior
Courts had not decreased as was anticipated, nor had it
diminished on circuit, except in one or two instances.
The question of reducing the number of judges was one
requiring grave consideration, because in addition to
civil business they had the criminal business of the coun-
try to attend to, and he had received several commu-
nications from Glamorganshire, complaining of inconve-
nience from one judge only being sent there on circuit
business. At present there was but one learned judge
in town, the others being fully occupied on cir ncuit. He
would consider the matter during the recess.
Several verbal amendments were agreed to in the bill,
and clauses added.
Mr. HADFIELD moved the addition of the follow-
ing clause :—" Clerks articled to attorneys or solicitors
may, after serving two years under articles, and with
consent of their masters, appear as advocates ;
the clerk to any attorney or solicitor who has
already been, or who hereafter shall become'
articled to such attorney or solicitor, and who may have
served two years under his articles with such attorney
or solicitor, may appear as advocate on behalf of any
party to any proceedings in the County Court, on pro-
ducing to the'registrar of the court his articles, and also
a certificate from his master that he consents thereto ;
and the attorney to whom such clerk is or may be arti-
cled shall be entitled to the same fees as if he had per-
sonally attended the said court, provided that the clerk
shall be subject to the same rules and regulations as
I attorneys now are or hereafter may be subject to."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL resisted the clause
on the ground that these courts ought not to be dealt
with as schools for professional education. In no—court
of law were persons who were qualifying themselves for
a particular status allowed to exercise the functions of an
advocate. The courts of law exercised control over ad-
mitted attorneys, but they had no control over attor-
neys' clerks. Under all circumstances, he thought it
desirable that this clause should be rejected.
Sir J. GRAHAM opposed the clause on public
grounds, and as regarded the interests of the public, and
not with reference to the educational part of the
question.
After some remarks from Mr. Stafford, Mr. Glad-
stone, Mr. Craufurd, Sir E. Perry, Mr. Mullings, and
Mr. Fitzroy, in the course of which it was stated that
agents, not professional men, were allowed by the judge
to attend in these courts for plaintiffs or defendants, but
tbat they had no power to award him a fee as in the case
of an attorney.
The clause was ultimately withdrawn.
Mr. HADFIELD then moved the following clause :
" Any attorney may act for another attorney concerned
in any plaint or action, or in advocating in court for him
in case of illne.s, absence from home, distant residence,
and other special grounds or reasons."
Mr. ROEBUCK opposed the clause. It was intended
to do away, by a side wind, with the interference of
barristers. If it was desirable to do that, let it be done
openly, and not in this covert manner.
After some discussion, the clause was negatived with-
out a division.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved there-insertion
of the clause permitting a registrar or assistant clerk to
reside out of the district under special grounds and by
consent of the Lord Chancellor ; or, when the district
is within the Duchy of Lancaster, by the consent of the
Chancellor of the Duchy, but his office to be within the
district. He thought the house ought not to call
upon the registrars of populous districts such as
Shoreditch and Be,imal-green to reside within them.
After some discussion the clause was negatived with-
out a division.
Mr. ROEBUCK complained that the clause referring
to the retiring allowance to be given to County Court
clerks had Leen altered since the bill passed through
committee, from one-fourth to one-third.
The SPEAKER said the alteration could be made
without not;ce.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM—Then the matter being
now paese.i, i 4 beyond our control.
Mr. WILSON wished to explain.
The SPEAKER—It cannot now be discussed.
SirJ. GRA_LIAM—Then I cannot sufficiently express
both my surprise and sorrow, that so important an alte-
ration should bare been made without previous notice.
The SPEAKER—The hon. member can refer to it on
the question that the bill do pass.
The remaining elauses, after some discussion on vari-
ous amendments, principally of a verbal character, were
agreed to.
On the question that the bill do pass,
Mr. WILSON entered into a detailed statement with
reference to the position of the clerks in the Government
getting rid of the plurality of courts, and stated that the
vested interests of the clerks in these courts, considering
they had resigned their private practice on taking these
offices, and the justice of the case, demanded that the
retiring allowance should be one-third instead of one-
fourth. The increase in amount would be small, but
would not increase the existing charges which were paid
I out of the fees of the courts.
Sir J. GRAHAM said if it had not been too late he
should have moved the reduction of the amount one-
fourth, tmlic ring that a suffioiont retiring alb:wanes.
He deprecated the change that had been made, and con-
sidered it contrary to the rules of the house.
The SPEAKER said that in accordance with the
rules of the house the amendment had been irregularly
introduced into the bill, and he cancelled it accordingly.
The retiring allowance was then altered to one-fourth,
as agreed to in committee.
The bill was then read a third time and passed.
VICE-PRESIDENT OF COMMITTEE OF COUN-
CIL ON EDUCATION BILL,
On the mo,ion that this bill be read a third time
Mr. HENLEY moved that it be read a third time
that day three months. He saw no object to be gained
in the appointment of a new functionary before a gene-
ral system of education was proposed.
GL ADSTONE supported the amendment, and
condemned what appeared to be a growing evil in that
house, viz., that of creating offices before defining the
daties to be performed. By adopting the bill the house
would be sanctioning a bad precedent, because the new
functionary would be lightly worked and very much
overpaid. Instead of its being a department with one
responsible head there would be two Privy Councillors
working cheek by jowl with a divided responsibility.
Sir G. GREY supported the third reading of the bill.
It was introduced at the request of the house, and in
accordance with the promise of the First Lord of the
Treasury, to meet the view of the house on the necessity
of their being a minister for education in that house.
The objections of whether that minister should be known
as a privy councillor or a secretary, or paid 2,0001. per
annum, or 1,5001., were details which could be altered
in the next session of Parliament.
Mr. NAPIER was in favour of the appointment of a
responsible minister for education in that house, but he
objected to the provisions of the present bill, which
would have the effect of widening the breach between
the two countries.
Mr. H. VERNON considered it would be sufficient
to appoint a secretary, because the officer referred to
would have to carry out the wishes of Parliament and
not devise some brilliant scheme of education. If the
hon. member for Oxfordshire went to a division he (Mr.
Vernon) should support him.
Mr. HADFIELD opposed the third reading of the
bill.

Mr. V. SMITH said there appeared to be a wrong
impression existing with reference to this bill. It was
not introduced for the appointment of an officer to carry
out either of the many schemes discussed this sesiion
that might have been adopted by the house, but for the
creation of an office in connection with education, the
holder of which should be a member of the house, and
carry out their views on that question.
Mr. A. PELLATT objected to the bill on the ground
that it was inexpedient to appoint an officer before the
duty of his office had been defined. He called on the
house to reject the bill.
After some remarks from Mr. NEWDEGATE and Mr.
HEYWOOD,
Sir J. GRAHAM said nothing but necessity should
induce them to consent to the addition of paid servants
of the house. He looked with extreme jealousy on
these additions, and regretted that during the last ten
years they had greatly increased. He should support
the amendment.
The house then divided when the numbers were—
For the second reading
Against it 35
Majority for the third reading
Mr. HADFIELD then moved that the duties of this
office should be extended to Ireland.
Sir G. GREY said that if the amendment was carried
it would be inoperative, because by the present law pro-
vision was made for the supervision of education in
Ireland.
The amendment was negatived without a division.
The bill was then read a third time and passed.
PROCTORS IN ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS
BILL.
This bill, which was introduced last night by Mr.
HADFIELD, and read a first time, was, after a short dis-
cussion, rejected without a div!sion.
The house suspended its sitting at half-past 3 o'clock.

The sitting was resumed at six o'clock.
Mr. H. F. BERKELEY presented a petition from
the Bristol Chamber of Commerce against the Sound
Dues.

Mr. T. DIINCOMBE presented a petition from
Blackwall against the Lords' amendments to the Metro-
polis Improvement Bill.
The following petitions were also presented :--By Mr.
GREENE, from medical officers of St. Margaret's and St.
John's, Westminster, against the grievances under
which they labour; by Mr. OTWAY, from the Natives'
Association of Madras, on the subject of torture ; from
the Ranee Themsi, complaining of the seizure of her ter-
ritories by the Government of India ; by Dr. MicluELL,
from 78 inhabitants of Wadsley, York, and also from
Jersey, that the VacciHEßnationALLOT. Bill be repealed.
T

Mr. H. F. BERKELEY gave notice of his inten-
tion early next session to submit a motion to the house
on the subject of the ballot.
AMNESTY TO POLITICAL EXILES.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE asked the Secretary of State
for the Homo Department whether, under the recent act
of amnesty granted by her Majesty to all political exiles,
orders have been given for the liberation of the following
ten prisoners convicted of high treason at the York as-
sizes of September, 1820, and transported to Van Die-
men's Land by the ship Lady Ridley in 1821—William
Comstive, William Rice, Richard Addy, Joseph Frith,
Charles Stansfield, John Birkenshaw,B;njamin Rogers,
Joseph Chapel, Benjamin Hanson, and Michael Pg

lag ? The hon. member observed that the parties to
whom his motion referred, along with several others,
pleaded guilty on the second day of their trial on condi-
tion that their lives should be spared. Ten of them were
transported for life, and the others were imprisoned or
transported for various periods. When an amnesty was
proclaimed in favour of Frost, Williams, and Jones, an
application was made to him to inquire whether that
amnesty would be extended to these men. On applying
at the Home-office he found there was no record of
their conviction, and his object in now asking the ques-
tion of which he had given notice was to proclaim to
these men that they had received her Majesty's pardon.
Sir G. GREY said the offences of which these parties
had been convicted were of a similar natare to those for
which pardons had been granted, and instructions
would be sent out to the colonies for their liberation.
BILLETING IN SCOTLAND.
Sir A. AGNEW asked the Under Secretary for War
whether her Majesty's Government were disposed to re-
lieve private families, as much as possible, from the in-
convenience of the present system of billeting in Scot-
land, by making other arrangements for the accommo-
dation of recruiting parties, and of the permanent staff
of the militia ?
. Mr. PEEL said the number of the permanent mi-
litia was very limited, and the Government would con-
sider whether some mode could not be adopted of ac-
commodating them without inconveniencing private
families. With regard to the recruiting parties he was
unable to give any answer.
MAILS TO THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.
Mr. H. BE RKELEY asked the Chancellor of the
Exchequer if he bad received tenders for carrying the
mail to the Cape of Good Hope, and whether he had
any objection to lay those several tenders, if decided on,
upon the table of the house ?
Mr. WILSON replied that several tenders had been
received for the conveyance of these mails. These ten-
ders were under consideration, and he hoped that in the
course of to-morrow a decision would be come to on the
subject. After that there would be no objection to lay
the tenders on the table.
LESSEES OF CHURCH LANDS.
Mr. INGHAM asked the right hon. member for the
University of Cambridge if it was the intention of the
Church Estate Commissioners to act on the recommen-
dations of the committee on ecclesiastical commissions,
as to the consideration to be shown to the lessees of
church lands for their beneficial interest in settling terms
of enfranchisement ?

Mr. WALPOLE said it was the intention of the com-
mission to act bona fide on the recommendations which
had been given. Indeed they bad already begun to con-
sider and act upon those recommendations.
FINANCE ACCOUNTS.
MICHELL inquired why the finance accounts
which were laid on the table on the 15th June had not
yet been delivered ?

Mr. WILSON replied that the delay had arisen from
the peculiarity of the accounts of the land revenues of
Scotland.
OUR DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH THE
UNITED STATES.
Mr. M. GIBSON wished to put a question to the noble
lord at the head of the Government with respect to our
diplomatic relations with the United States. ,Five or
rig weeks ago the noble lord informed the house that the
post of British Minister in the United States had become
vacant, and furnished the house with papers and expla-
nations of the circumstances which caused Mr. Crampton
to take his departure from the United States. The noble
lord also stated that the amicable relations between the
two countries had roto been disturbed, and that the
diplomatic intercourse between the two Governments
would be continued. Ha would now ask the noble lord
whether her Majesty's advisers contemplated the early
appointment of a Minister from England to the United
States?
Lord PALMERSTON said it was by no means an
unusual circumstance that a mission should for a time
be vacant. That frequently happened from a variety of
causes. With regard to the particular mission to which
the right hon. gentleman referred, her Majesty's Go-
vernment had as yet came to no decision on the subject.
THE BIBLE.
Mr. HEYWOOD then rose to move for an address to
the Crown praying that she would be pleased to issue a
commission of learned men to examine into the alleged
defects in the translation of the Bible, and to report the
amendments which they may be prepared to recommend.
Tie went at some length into the history of the autho-
rised translation, and cited several passages to show that
the translators had rendered the original carelessly and
inaccurately. He anticipated opposition from the Bible
societies of the country, as a new translation would ren-
der their stock valueless ; but the work would not be
done in a moment, and he thought they would have
plenty of time to dispose of their present stock before
the new translation was ready. He was anxious to bring
public opinion to bear upon this question, and therefore
he had thought it proper to bring the matter before the
house.

Mr. W. BIGGS seconded the motion.
Sir G. GREY admitted the importance of the ques-
tion, bat reminded the house that it would be unwise on
their part to take up a subject to which public opinion
was in decided opposition. There were, no doubt, cer-
tain errors and inaccuracies in the authorised translation,
but as a whole it could not be denied that it was justly
entitled to the respect and reverence of the English
people.
The motion was then withdrawn.
MEMBERS' SPEECLIEE3.

Mr. WILKINSON proposed a resolution to restrict
the length of speeches. He cited himself as a model of
short speaking, and pathetically lamented that he had
incurred reproach for so doing, as he had received an
anonymous letter imploring him to make longer speeches,
and adding—quite gratuitously of course—let them be
on subjects which he understands. The reading of this
letter excited great laughter.
Mr. T. DUNCO MBE seconded the motion.
Lord PALMERSTON rose amid cheers and laughter
to reply to it. He admitted that the resolution in the
abstract must have the assent of every member, but he
could not agree to restrain the freedom of speech.
Mr. M. MILNES opposed, and Sir W. BIGGS supported,
the motion.
Mr. FOX suggested that much would be done if the
leaders on both sides would speak early in the course of
a debate, by which mean-i the subject would be exhausted,
and other members would not for shame stand up to
reiterate that which had been better said before.
Mr. HADFIELD supported the motion. He thought
time might also be saved in the present management of
the business of thri house.
After some remarks from Mr. WILKINSON,
The house divided, when the numbers were—
For the motion 3O
Against it
Majority —27
SPANISH BONDS.

Sir. J. FITZGERALD, in moving to submit the just
claims of certain numbers of persons, her Majesty's sub-
jects, on the Spanish Government, for an honourable set-
tlement of the Spanish Committee Certificate of Coupons
not funded, said, in submitting this motion for the pur-
pose of persuading her Majesty's Government to take an
interest in a question which most materially affects the
rights and property of her Majesty's subjects, and,
in this instance, of those who, depending on the faith
of nations, have on such grounds advanced their
money on loan to the Spanish Government at a
fr asupda h,ebry
aMajesty'os f
sseutbujiencgt s t h bye d e
bt ht
se
Government
certain rate of interest ; and when an attempt is
male
todeof
thus contracted with her Majesty's subjects by confiscat-
ing part of the interest due upon that debt, I do think
the British creditors of Spain have full right to appeal
to their Government to protect them from the effects of
such an arbitrary and unjust decree, by a remonstrance
to the Spanish Government. In 1851 there was an
arrear of ten years' interest due on the capital debt of
Spain to British creditors, when the Spanish Govern-
ment passed this arbitrary decree that the Five per
Cent. Stock should be converted into a One per Cent.
Stock, gradually to increase in the course of nineteen
years into a Three per Cent. Stock. Thfe converted
Stock now goes on the Exchange under the name of
New Deferred Stock. This arbitrary decree left no op-
tion with the British creditors of Spain, but enacted that
they must accept these hard terms or get nothing, and
tinder this cempnlsion the Spanish bondholders' commit-
tee took what they could get, and issued ther certificates
for the confiscated over-due interest, which it is now
sought that Spain should acknowledge and pay. How
has the Government of Spain settled the ten years' in-
terest due to the British creditors (which is considered
the most sacred portion of all debts) I Can it be believed ?
But so it is. Five years only of the ten years' interest
of 5 per cent. is acknowledged and capitalised into the
One per Cent. Stock, and the other five years' interest
due absolutely confiscated. Why, sir, if we bad been
guilty of treason towards the Spanish Government the
British creditors could not be worse treated than by con-
fiscating what property the Spanish Government might
have of theirs in possession. Whereas it is notorious
that the money so lent materially contributed to establish
the present constitutional Queen and Government in
Spain. Here is a splendid statement of facts, and, let me
ask, have not the subjects of the British Crown a full
right to appeal to her Majesty's Government to endea-
vour to seek redress against such an act of spoliation,
and in addition to which the British creditors of Spain
are informed, if those hard terms are not accepted that no
acknowledgment whatever of the debt due to them would
be made to those who declined accepting the terms
proposed. A noble lord, now no more, but whose me-
mory is still revered in this house, I mean Lord G. Ben-
tint*, when a member of the House of Commons,
brought forward this question, seeking redress from the
Spanish Government towards the British creditors, when
the noble lord now at the head of her Majesty's Govern-
ment stated " That though at that period he could not
press the subject on the Government of Spain, neverthe-
less a time might come when her Majesty's Government
would and must interfere." Sir, Ido think there could
not be a moment more propitious than the present, when
Spain herself, on the very grounds which I now repre-
sent, actually equips an armament against Mexico for
the purpose of obtaining redress and compensation for
Spanish subjects who have claims on the Mexican Go-
vernment. Here are the orders issued to the officers
commanding the armament proceeding to Vera Cruz to
enforce the rights of Spanish subjects—" M. Alvarez
has been instructed by Gen. Zabala to notify to the
Mexican Government on his arrival in the Bay of Vera
Cruz, that he was ready to present his credentials pro-
vided the bonds taken from the Spanish creditors were
restored, the interest due on them paid, and the legit's,
many of the debt, already sanctioned by a treaty, again
acknowledged. Should the Mexican Government agree
to pay and restore the bonds, M. Alvarez will land and
immediately deliver his credentials; i f.iot, he will return
to the Havana, on board one of the steamers, arid leave
the three other ships in observation before Vera Cruz."
In conclusion, it may be stated that it appears a treaty
existed between Spain and Mexico regarding Clio question,

whereas the Government of this country was no party to
the transaction between the British creditors and Spain.
True ; but, sir, is it not incumbent on all European Go-
vernments to act strictly up to their engagements with their
creditors ? and if they should by deviating from them for-
feit their faith and national honour, and thereby defraud
the subjects of any other power, have not the subjects of

these powers sought the protection of their representative
Government against such wrongs? Have not the United
States alwaysacted upon this rule; has not France followed
the same rule ; and can it be supposed that a power like
Great Britain should be an exception when the rights of
her subjects are assailed? Portugal, a small country
compared to Spain, had done the same injustice to her
creditors ; but finding her national credit thereby im-
paired, has justly and prudently, acknowledged the
claims she had repudiated. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON said that the course pursued
by the Spanish Cortes had been one contrary to fairness
and justice. The money was advanced when the Spanish
nation was struggling for liberty, and when the Spanish
Government were unable, from pecuniary circumstances,
to wage a contest in its support, and it was only by the
money advanced to them by different individuals they
were enabled to accomplish the objects they had in view.
It was contended by the Spanish' Government that they
had not received the whole amount of the capital for
which they became liable. That was necessarily the
case ; for when a government was in difficulties, its
credit small, and its duration uncertain, because they
might he superseded by the opposite party, who might
disavow their engagements, they must expect to pay
dear for the accommodation given them, and therefore
it was not just to say to the creditors that for every 1001.
indebted they bad received-but a portion of it. The ques-
tion before the house was one of expediency, viz., what
course this country would pursue to obtain justice under
the circumstances under which these loans had been
contracted. It was not advisable for the British Go-
vernment to interfere officially, because there loans were
advanced on the discretion of private individuals, and
without any interference of the Government. The bond-
holders could not claim the interference of the Govern-
ment similar to that of Spain on Mexico, because that
was a violation of an arrangement entered into between
the two Governments ; and he thought it undesirable to
make this question an international grievance. The Bri-
tish Government had made friendly applications to the
Spanish Government relative to these claims, but un-
fortunately they had not attended to them. He thought
the Spanish nation would consult not only the national
dignity and the national honour by acknowledging these
claims, but by making them good.
After some remarks in explanation from Sir J. FITZ-
GERALD, the motion was withdrawn.
GENERAL BEATSON.
Mr. ROEBUCK rose and moved the following reso-
lution :—That the Under Secretary for War having ad.
mitted that, upon anonymous information, a secret in.
quiry had been ordered into the conduct of a genera]
officer, this house feels itself bound to express its repro
bation of such a proceeding. He stated he was induced
to make the motion in consequence of the following
statement made by the Under Secretary for War, in an-
swer to a question put to him on a former occasion by
Col. Dunne:—Mr. Peel said that the hon. and gallant
member had correctly stated the nature of the employ-
ment which had been given by the Government to Gen.
Beatson. That officer was instructed to raise a body of
irregular cavalry in Asia. Minor, Syria, Bulgaria, and
Albania, and to take the command of the men when
raised. This force first came under the command of Gen.
Beatson in the month of June, and in the September fol-
lowing it was deemed expedient that it should form part
of the Turkish Contingent under Gen. Vivian, and that
another body of irregular cavalry should be placed under
Gen. Beatson. The charges brought against Gen. Beatson
were connected with this transfer of his command to the
officer who succeeded him. They were to this effect—that
he had instigated some of the commanding officers of the
regiments under him to decline to serve under any other
officer than himself, and had sought to induce the natives
of the force to prefer remaining under his command ra-
ther than that of any other person. These accusations
were sent anonymously to Gen. Vivian, who forwarded
them to the War Department. Further inquiries are
ordered to be made for the purpose, if possible, of verify-
ing the charges thus anonymously preferred : and certain
questions were put to the commanding officers of the
regiments formerly under General Beatson, at
Schumla, the answers to which bad been sent home
by General Smith, the successor to the accused. These
inquiries were still pending, and the correspondence on
the subject was not yet closed. The inquiry WM neces-
sarily secret, because it was merely a preliminary one,
and instituted to discover whether it was a prima facie
ground for taking further proceedings' against General
Beatson. It was only right to add, that the statements
received from the commanding officers of the regiments
aid not confirm the anonymous charges above described.
For these reasons it would be improper to publish the
correspondence." He appealed to the house if any men
of honour was safe under such a system, and he fear-
lessly appealed to a British House of Commons to pro-
tect the service from its operation. (Hear, hear.) The
hon. and learned gentleman having- commented on the
anonymous information on which the inquiry was made,
and the term " accused" being applied to General Beat-
son [Mr. F. Peel dissented], said the honourable gentle-
man must give him credit for believing his ears. (Hear.)
He protested against the use of such terms, under the
circumstances, and said that after he had placed this
motion on' the paper, he bad received a letter from the
Earl of Ellenborough, highly laudatory of the gallant
general's conduct as a soldier and a man of honour. It
was desirable that the house should know that it was a
man who had thus served for thirty years who was now
accused of wanting his troops to mutiny. General Beat-
son entered the Indian army in 1820. He was a Major-
General in the British and a Lieutenant-General in the
Turkish service. The circumstances under which he
was employed in Turkey were no follows. It appeared
that in the late war the government found that the army
was in want of irregular cavalry to meet the Co-sacks,
and General Beatson was appointed to collect to-
gether and organise a body of irregular horse.
He was appointed by the Duke of Newcastle, and
persons appointed by him seldom found favour with
his successor. Many obstacles were thrown in his way,
and it was not until June, 1855, that he found himself
at the head of a body of troops when he established
his camp on the Dardanelles. On the 28th July he
offered his resignation, which was not, however, ac-
cepted ; but he was soon after placed under the com-
mand of General Vivian, and on the Bth of September
he resigned again, and this time his resignation was ac-
cepted by Lord Panmure. Having received that letter
General Beatson withdrew ; and what occurred I On
the 26th of April, 1856, he received a letter, purport-
ing to have been signed by General Vivian, and for-
warded to the War-office by General Smith, then in com-
mand of the Osmanli Irregular Horse at Schumla. In
that letter General Vivian states that, in consequence of
circumst inces that had come to his knowledge in con-
nection with the recent inspection of that force, he con-
sidered it was important that certain charges involving
the character of General Beatson should be investigated.
These charges were stated to be that when General
Smith arrived at the Dardanelles for the purpose of su-
perseding General Beatson, the latter assembled the
commanding officers of the regiments and tried to per-
suade them to raise a mutiny in their regiments, where-
upon two of them, Lieutenant-Colonel O'Reilly and
Major Shelley left the room, saying that they were sol-
diers and could not listen to such proposals. It was
added that General Beatson had a round robin drawn up
by the interpreter and circulated amongst the troops,
containing a declaration that they would not serve under
any one but himself. The letter thus sent to General
Beatson from the War-office was certified by Mr. Ram-
say to be a true copy, but in a subsequent copy which he
procured two additional paragraphs appeared, and he
(Mr. Roebuck) therefore charged Mr. Ramsay with having
falsified the document. He now came to the result of
the inquiry made at Schumla by Brigadier Smith • and
let hie say that he did not think it consistent with ho-
nourable conduct on the part of the Government to have
instituted this inquiry without letting General Beatson
know ; and if he had, as a soldier, been ordered to con-
duct such an inquiry, he would have replied that he was
a soldier, and must therefore obey, but that be did so
deeply groaning in spkit, that a Minister of War should
give him such instructions. With respect to the first
point adverted to in General Viviam's letter, General
Smith said that when he waived in the Dardanelles Col.
O'Reilly and Major Shelley came to him, and stated
that they understood that some officers were about to
resign their command, but that they were ready to serve
under him. With respect to the second point, none of
the interpreters stated that they had prepared a paper
of the kind described, but they added that they had
heard that such a paper was sent round by some one at
the time, and that they did not think that the soldiers
had got it up voluntarily. These men were not even on
oath. And he must say that he did not think that on
anonymous information of this kind a general officer
should have been subjected to this kind of secret inves-
tigation. That the information on which the investiga-
tion was founded was anonymous was admitted by the
hon. gentleman the Under-Secretary for War on a pre-
vious evening. He appealed again to the House of
Commons to protect our gallant soldiers from conduct
like this. He charged the Government with having in
this case broken through all the rules that should dis-
tinguish a liberal Government. They had done much to
shake the faith of the army in those who rule it, and, in
so doing, they had done their utmost to endanger the
safety of the country. The hon. gentleman concluded
by moving a resolution censuring the Government.
Mr. F. PEEL said it was quite possible he had been
misreported on a previous evening, when he was re-
presented to have said that General Vivian had in this
matter acted on anonymous information. If he had said
so he had, however, stated what was incorrect, because,
although he did not know it at that time, Gen. Vivian
had acted upon information derived from a source on
which he was justified in placing reliance. After repu-
diating the idea that Lord Panmure entertained any
hostility to Gen. Beatson in consequence of his having
been appointed by the Duke of Newcastle, the hon. gen-
tleman said that soon after the irregular cavalry first
began to assemble at the Dardanelles in June, 1855,
disputes and difference arose between Gen. Beatson and
the local authorities, who complained that he did not
lend them as effectual aid as he might do in preventing
the irregular troops coming armed into the town, where
they created disturbances and riots. It was in cense-
sequence determined to make the irregular horse a part
of the contingent under the command of Gen. Vivian.
Gen. Beatson on this resigned his command, and his re-
signation was accepted by Lord Panmure, but before the
acceptance got out to Turkey circumstances occurred
which, in the opinion of both the ambassador and Gea.
Vivian, rendered it necessary that Gen. Beatson should
be at once superseded, and accordingly Gen. Smith was
appointed to the command. Gen. Beatson then joined
the Contingent at Sertch, while Gen. Smith went to
Schumla with the Irregular Horse. He soon after fell
ill, and the command devolved on Gen. Smith, Some

time afterwards Gen. Vivian considered that the Os-
manli cavalry should be inspected, and he directed Gen.
Shirley to undertake that duty. In the course thereof
that General heard certain circumstances, which he com-
municated to Gen. Vivian, and there was therefore not
a shadow of foundation for saying that the latter general
acted on anonymous information. Surely, then, having
received such information, he could neither suppress it nor
could he send it home without taking steps to ascertain,as
far as could be done in the East, how far the accusations
made against Gen. Beatson were well founded. It might,
however, be said that he should have let Gen. Beatson
know what was going on. But as all official relations
had ceased between Gen. Vivian and Gen. Beatson,
and as the latter officer was then in the East, it was im-
possible for General Vivian to communicate with him
except through the War-office, and therefore the proper
course for him to take was the one he actually did take,
in apprising the Secretary of War of what was going on.
When General Vivian's first letter arrived at the War-
office, finding that it would soon be followed by onefrom
General Smith, the Government did at once communi-
cate with General Beatson, but waited to see whether
the letter from General Smith afforded a foundation for
judicial proceedings or not. About the beginning of May
that letter was received, and the War-office immediately
wrote to General Beatson, and requested his answer.
General Beatson, in reply, expressed his perfect readi-
ness to enter upon the investigation ; for he said that he
should be able to prove not only that the charges were false,
but that they were got up with malicious intent by the
same parties whose intrigues led to his resignation in the
September previously. He requested, however, that a
little delay should take place, as he had not all his papers
at band, and some of his friends were out of town. In
the meantime, the Government communicated with Gen.
Smith, in order that he might ascertain whether the
statements of Col. Reilly and Major Shelly were corro-
borated by other officers. He did not know what other
course the Government could have taken. It was the
usual course to collect evidence before coming to a final
decision as to the desirableness of instituting a formal in-
quiry. But in the meantime General Beatson was ac-
quainted with what was going on. The hon. gentleman
said that Gen. Beatson was an officer of merit. No doubt.
And it was very painful that charges should be made
against an officer of that description, and every one must
desire that they should turn out to be unfounded. But
when they were made, and there was a prima facie
case for inquiry, it was the bounden duty of the Govern-
ment not to suppress them ; but to take such proceed-
ings with regard to them as might enable them to decide
whether it was desirable to proceed further. That was
the course they had taken.
Mr. I. BUTT said that the hon. gentleman had said
that the War-office had a prima facie case against
General Beatson. Why, then, had he not been placed
before a court-martial ?
Mee PEEL did not say that there was a. prima facie
case against General Beatson.
Mr. BUTT was bound to accept the hon. gentleman's
denial ; but if he did not speak the words he had imputed
to him, he must believe that some one else spoke them
out of his mouth. The hon. gentleman had said that
General Vivian had not acted on anonymous authority,
but on that of General Shirley. He wanted to know
whether the statements in the letter from General Vivian
to General Smith were made on that authority ? He
was in hopes that the hon. gentleman the Secretary for
War would have cleared up these matters, but he re-
gretted to say that, instead of doing so, he had put
General Shirley in a bad position, and General Vivian
in a worse. The hon. gentleman had quoted from a
document which emanated from the War-office and yet
he said that the War-office was not responsible for it,
but that document was signed "E. W. Ramsay," who
was the private secretary to Lord Panmure, the Secre-
tary at War. Colonel Beatson had written over and
over again to the War-office, requesting to be informed
who was his accuser, and he received in reply a letter,
in which Lord Panmure stated that he did not know
from what source the lieu' • ant-general derived his in-
formation. Here, then, was an officer like General
Beatson, high in the service of his country, accused
upon anonymous information, that anonymous informa-
tion being acted upon by Lord Panmure, and yet no in-
formation forthcoming as to the author of that inform*.
Lion, or as to whether the Government believed the
charges made against him had been disproved. What
he (Mr. Butt) charged upon the Government was this,
that the writer of the information was still withheld from
the person he had slandered. He did not deny that the
information was gi ;en to General Shirley, and that he
communicated it to General -Vivian ; but he complained
that the man who had been cruelly wronged was still
deprived of that information to which he was entitled.
Toe Minister of War, when he got the report ought to
have consulted General Vivian upon the matter, Gene-
ral Vivian being at that time in England ; but now he
had been five months under the imputations that had
been cast upon him, and no intimation had been con-
veyed to him from any of the authorities whether or not
these charges had been disproved. Hitherto, the army
had been looked upon as the eoul of honour, but these
things, which the honourable gentleman (the Under-
Secretary for War) ha 1 stated were usual in the army
were inconsistent with that honourable spirit of fair play
which he believed to have been the characteristic of the
English army, and which he was sure was the charac-
teristic of English gentlemen. (Cheers).
Colonel FRENCH wished to make an appeal on this
subject to the noble lord at the head of the Government
who was always ready to supply the (=legions and to
atone for the faults of his colleagues. Nothing had
been said exculpatory of General Beatson, and he
wished to know whether the Government would allow
matters to remain in that state ? He thought it would
be but common justice on the part of the Government to
state whether or not the charges which had been made
against General Beatson had been disproved. As to
the War-office itself, he thought it had proved a serious
impediment to the successful working of the noble lord's
Government.
Lord PALMERSTON said he thought it must be clear
from the discussion that the resolution which had been
proposed by the hon. and learned gentleman the mem-
ber for Sheffield (Hr. Roebuck) could not be adopted,
because it did not apply to the case. The facts which
had been adduced appeared ne him (Lord Palmerston) to
exempt from blame those who bad been parties to them.
(near.) It appeared that when Gen. Shirley went to in-
speet the fort at Shurnla, representations of a grave cha-
racter were made to him in reference to the conduct of
Gen. Beatson, and it would have been highly blameable
on his part if, as a general officer receiving such informa-
tion, he had concealed it, and not given to the officer
concerned an opportunity of refuting it. (Hear.) With
regard to Gan. Beatson, her Majesty's Government knew
full well the circumstances of the distinguished career he
had run before he was employed upon the service in which
the present question arose, and it was with sincere regret
that her Majesty's Government found, from circum-
stances that occurred, that it was impossible to continue
him in the service he held. He resigned that post, as of
course he had a perfect right to do so. Gen. Shirley was
informed of charges against Gen. Beatson, which it was
of course his t uty to make known to Gen. Vivian.
What was Gen. Vivian to do I Was he to put them aside
or to to content himself with sending them to the War-
office in England 1 As he was in communication with
the officer in command at Shumla, he was perfectly
right to order an inquiry in order that the result
might be made known to the War-office at home. It
had been said that General Vivian should have made
a representation to General Beatson, but the honour-
able gentleman the Under Secretary for the War
Department had given due reasons why that course
should not have been adopted. The honourable
and learned gentleman opposite (Mr. Butt) bad stated
that when the War-office considered that a prima
facie case against Gen. Beatson had been made out, they
should have brought him to a court-martial. He (Lord
Palmerston) disputed that proposition altogether. They
might have a prima facie case against an officer, and still
find that it would be very wrong to bring him to a court-
martial. They should undoubtedly ascertain first whether
there was sufficient ground for such a course. (Hear.)
Nothing was better known in the service than this, that
when there was a prima facie case against an officer, in-
quiries were made for the purpose of ascertaining whether
or not there should be a court-martial. In this case it
was impossible to summon a court-martial when General
Beatson was in England, and it was absolutely necessary
to make further inquiries at Shumla. Although he made
allowances for the nice feelings of honour that influenced
General Beatson in repudiating what he conceived to be
an unjust imputation, and allowances also for those
friends of his who would not wait for the result of the
official investigation, but called upon that house to inter-
fere pending the result of the official investigation that
was going on, yet he did not think that the impatience of
General Beatson's friends, or the natural feelings of Gen.
Beatson himself, were sufficient grounds for that house
to go upon. The house, he thought, would agree with him
that it would be but right to wait until the Mar-office
had ascertained whether here were sufficient grounds to
proceed further against General Beatson, or whether the
War Minister should be satisfied that no further steps
should be taken upon the anonymous intormation that
had been received. (Hear, hear.) Supposing the accusa-
tions to have been entirely anonymous, it would have been
the duty of those to whom they were communicated, out
of respect for General Beatson's character, to bring the
matter under the consideration of the authorities at
home. But it had been distinctly stated by the Under-
Secretary for War that in this case the accusations were
not anonymous, because they proceeded from General
Shirley, an officer high in the service, and that General
Vivian, who received them from General Shirley, con-
ceived it to be his duty to forward them to the War-
office. As far, therefore, as the War-office was concerned,
the accusations were not anonymous, for they came from
two officers high in the service, and upon those repre-
sentations the War-office was bound to act. The War-
office received the accusations from two responsible offi-
cers, transmitting them in the order in which they them-
selves had received them. (Hear, hear, hear.) The
matter was then put in train in the only way in which
the War-office could proceed, and there was, therefore,
really
no charge against the authorities. The hon. and
gallant gentleman opposite (Colonel French) had stated
that the War-office was a mortification to her Majesty's
Government. He (Lord Palmerston) could say, with-
out any hesitation whatever, that he felt exceedingly
obliged to Lord Panmure for the zealous manner in
which he had performed his duties ; and it would be
sufficient to contrast the state of the army when it went
out to the Crimea with its condition when it returned,
to show in how admirable a manner that noble lord had
discharged his duties. (Rear, bear.)
Colonel LINDSAY thought the speech of the noble
lord was a premium upon anonymous slander. If these
anonymous attacks were to be listened to no one would
be safe.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
the gallant gentleman who had just spoken had mieun-
deretood and unintentionally misrepresented what had
fallen from the noble lord. The theory of anonymous
letter writing was not in any respect applicable to the

case which was now under the consideration of tie
house. He believed that the general practice of public
departments, when anonymous letters were received,
was to take no notice of them ; but there might be pai-
ticular cases in which it might be the duty of the autho-
rities to make some inquiries. An anonymous letter
might indicate facts so special as to show knowledge on
the part of the writer, and then it would be their duty
to take steps to ascertain whether they were right. It
was, ho thought, impossible to 'lay down any general
rule with regard to anonymous letters. In this case, as
had been properly stated, the information was not ano•
nymous, having been received from two officers high in

her Majesty's service.
After a few words in reply from Mr. ROEBUCK,
the house divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment
Against it —
Majority
The resolution was consequently negatived.
FLOGGING IN THE ARMY AND NAVY.
On the motion of Mr. W. WILLIAMS the following
returns were ordered :—Return of the number of per-
sons flogged in the army in each of the years 1854 and
1855 ; specifying the offence, the regiment, the place
of station, the time, the sentence, and the number of
lashes inflicted (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper
No. 294, of session 1854). Return of the number of per-
sons flogged in the navy is the years 1853, 1854, and
1855 ; distinguishing each year, specifying the name of
the ship, the offence, the sentence, and the number of
lashes inflicted, and stating the highest and the lowest
number given in each class (in continuation of Parlia-
mentary Paper No. 552, of session 1853).
FOREIGN TROOPS.
Mr. MURRO UGH said he bad given notice of the
following resolution :—" That a Govt rnment which in
the time of peace retains foreign troops embodied in this
country is unworthy the confidence of this house." After
the statement of the noble lord at the head of the Go-
vernment ~esterday, he did not wish to press it, but he
might express a hope that these foreign troops would be
sent out of the country as soon as possible.
EAST INDIA COMPANY'S REVENUE
ACCOUNT.
The report was brought up and agreed to.
LEASES AND SALES OF SETTLED ESTATES

23
71
- -48