The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-16 00:00:00

THE SUN, LUNDON, SAITRDAYI EVENING, JUNE 16, 1860.-

valorem duties into specific duties and to settle the amount
of such duties, it was thought desirable to obtain from the
different chambers of commerce and persons representing
the various manufactures and industries likely to be
affected additional information repccting the conversion
from ad valorem to specific duties, and before it took place.
The chambers of commerce were desired by the Board of
Trade to give further information, and it was suggested
that deputations should go to Paris ; but the Board of
Trade merely threw out the idea that it would be better
that the delegates should go to Paris rather than deputations,
in order that they might be able to supply the special infor-
mation which might be required by the commissioners for
the purpose of settling the details of the treaty. That, he
believed, was a course most reasonable and most proper,
and unless it had been taken it would perhaps not have been
possible to convey the necessary special information re-
quired as to the manufactures and industries of this coun-
try, and which the commissioners should possess in order to
settle the terms of the convention. It was therefore not true
that the Board of Trade have pressed gentlemen to go to
Paris to urge on our commercial policy. Gentlemen had
gone to Paris to supply that special and necessary informa-
tion which could only be supplied by persons connected with
the ti ades and manufactures of the country. As to the treaty
being an universally admitted failure, the statement was
entirely new to him. He knew that the negotiators were
succeeding in carrying out, by means of a supplementary
treaty, all the provisions of the original treaty, and it was
his opinion that the practical commercial value of that
treaty had been much underrated. He believed that the re-
sult of the arrangements now going on in Paris would be
to carry it out according to its original design.
SIR C. TREVELYAN.

Mr. KINNAIRD wished to know why the papers con-
nected with Sir C. Trevelyan's recall had not been laid on
the table ?
Sir C. WOOD said that the papers were all ready, but
would net be complete for the judgment of the house with.
out the speeches of Mr. Wilson to which they referred.
Hoping that it would not be drawn into a precedent, he
meant to lay these speeches on the table along with the mi-
nutes, and waiting for them had caused the delay.
NATIONAL DEFENCES.

Mr. OSBORNE wished to know from the noble lord at
the heal of the Government what steps he meant to take
respecting the report of the National Defence Commission,
whether he meant to ask the house for the whole
£11,800,000, and when ?
Lord PALMERSTON—It will be more convenient to
state the intentions of the Government when the subject is
brought regularly before the house.
Mr. OSBORNE—Perhaps the noble lord could name a
day.

Lord PALMERSTON could not name a day at present.
He would name a day when he thought hon. members had
prepared their minds for the discussion. (A laugh.)
FRENCH TREATY.
_ _

Mr. S. FITZGERALD wished to suggest to the Govern-
ment the propriety of taking steps for the enlargement of
the period within which ad valorem could be changed into
specific duties under the French treaty. If care were not
taken to effect that change the French Government would
subsequently have the power to raise their duties at their
discretion.

UNIFORM VALUATION OF LANDS AND
TENEMENTS.

Mr. STANLEY wished to ask the Secretary of State for
the Home Department whether, now that the Reform Bill
was withdrawn, it was his intention to bring in this session
his bill for the uniform valuation of lands and tenements
in England ?
CORPORATION OF LONDON BILL.
Sir J. SHELLEY wished, before the right hon. gentle •
man answered the previous question, to call his attention to
the fact that the London Corporation Bill was fixed for a
morning sitting on Thursday next. There were three im-
portant committees which stood adjourned to that day, the
Thames Embankment, the Poor Removal, and the British
Museum, which would take away the metropolitan members,
who were principally interested in the Corporation Bill.
Sir G. C. LEWIS suggested that the committees named
might be further adjourned, but in any case the Corporation
Bill would not come on on Tuesday morning, as the Irish
Landlord and Tenant Bill would most probably occupy the
whole sitting. With respect to the uniform valuation, he
said hh was quite ready to bring in a bill if the house
wished it, but in the state of the public business, he did not
think it had much chance of getting through.
THE HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.
Col. PATTEN asked the First Commissioner of Works
what arrangements had been made since the death of Sir C.
Barry to complete the Houses of Parliament and the adja-
cent buildings ?
THE CHAIRS IN KENSINGTON-GARDENS.
Mr. E WART wished that the First Commissioner would,
whilst on his legs, inform him whether more seats round
the larger trees in Kensington-gardens and the parks could
be placed there for the accommodation of the public ; also
whether the large piece of ground lately used as a raservoir
for one of the water companies, opposite Grosvenor gate,
could be thrown into the park for the use of the public ;
and whether the unsightly iron railing round that statue of
King Charles I. at Charing-cross might not be advantage-
ously removed ?
Mr. COWPER said that when the country was deprived
of the services of Sir Charles Barry there were still some
works in progress with regard to the Houses of Parliament.
These works were of small extent, but in selecting the per-
son who should act as the architect he thought the right
course was to request Mr. Edward Barry, the son of Sir
Charles, to undertake the direction of them, as he knew his
father's plans and had shown his competence in the erection
of the new Covent-garden Theatre and the Floral Hall. He
proposed that the same remuneration should be continued
to Mr. Edward Barry as had been agreed upon with Sir
Charles, namely, 3 per cent. on the whole outlay of the
work, with 1 per cent, additional on measured work. With
regard to the plans Sir Charles Barry proposed to adopt in
order to enclose New Palace-yard as a quadrangle, those
plans were laid before the house in 1855. In his own office
there were no further details than those contained in the
Parliamentary returns. The design consisted of three
parts. One portion of the building was intended to occupy
the space now occupied by the houses in Bridge-street, at
an estimated cost of £67,000. Another portion extended
from Bridge-street to the courts of law, the estimated cost
a which was £BO,OOO. The third portion embraced the
space now occupied by the courts of law, the cost of which
was estimated at £150,000. When all the houses were
pulled down in Bridge-street the house would probably
come to the conclusion that it would be desirable to occupy
that si'e with a building to give accommodation to the
public offices, and it was also probable that when the courts
of lax were removed arrangements would be made for a
building on that site. (Hear.) With regard to the question
of his hon. friend behind him (Mr. Ewart), it was his de-
sire to afford additional accommodation to the public in the
parks, and orders had been given to increase the number of
seats. With respect to the large and hideous circle which
had hitherto been used..as a reservoir opposite Grcsvenor-
gate, it had lately become the property of the Crown, and it
would of course be necessary to determine sooner or later to
what purpose it should be appli d. He must say that, for
his own part, he should be gl td if the subscribers who were
raising that large monument in Waterloo-place to the me-
mory of the Guards who had fallen in the Russian war,
would remove it to the centre of this large circular space,
because he thought it was rather too large for its present
site, and would look very well in Hyde-park. With regard
to what his hon . friend called the unsightly iron railing round
the statue of King Charles the First, at Charing-cross, he
(Mr. Cowper) must admit that he doubted the necessity for
its continuance. It was of ancient date, and probably put up
at a time when apprehensions existed that some of the bitter
feeling which animated parties during the civil wars had not
quite passed away. The satue of George IV. in Trafalgar-
square was unprotected by any railing whatever, and the
railing round the statue of George 111., in Cockspur-street,
had lately been removed in order to improve its appearance,
and no evil results had followed. He therefore thought the
right course would be to I emove the railing from the statue
of Charles I. (Hear, hear.) In the estimates he had put
on the table there was nothing provided for the completion
of any work in the houses of Parliament. The works now

going on were provided for by votes which had been taken

in previous years.
THE DISTURBANCES IN NEW ZEALAND.
Lord A. CIIURCIIILL begged t • ask the Under Secre-
tary of State for the Colonies to state to the house the infor-
mation received respecting the recent disturbances in New
Zealand, whereby her Majesty's forces had been brought
into collision with the native tribes ; and also what course
her Majesty's Government intended to pursue.
Colonel DICKSON trusted the house would not impute
anything to Colonel Murray for the part he had taken in
the outbreak until further information had been received.
Mr. C. FORTESCUE said that as to the facts of the case
he could add nothing to the accounts which had appeared
in the newspapers. He agreed that it would be premature
to pronounce any opinion on the conduct of Col. Murray,
hut there certainly had been a want of co-operation be-
tween the military and the volunteers which required ex-
planation, and ho had no doubt that explanation would be
received in due time. From the information possessed by
the Colonial••office, he was glad to say that he believed the
New Zealand Government were in the right with regard
to this unfortunate affair, but there was no doubt this was
a critical moment in the history of New Zealand. On the
one hand the colonists were increasing in number and
power, and on the other hand there was this wild land
lying idle, and every acre of it, according to native laws,
the property of some native tribe or family, while a feeling
had grown up among the chiefs against selling their land.

The native chief, however, who had sold this particular

block of land to the Government was desirous to sell it,m-3-c-1

it was his own property. It was admitted even by the na-
tives themselves that the land was the property of the chief

who sold it, and he governor was therefore entitled to buy
it. Though the block of land was not very largo, it involved
a question as regarded the future of great interest both to
the colonists and natives. In consequence of the view
taken of it by the natives, there was nothing for it but to
decide the question by force of arms. As far as they were
aware, the governor acted with great judgment and great
vigour, and they still hoped that the matter might not ex
tend far beyond the scene in which it had originated.
Mr. ADDERLEY said that the occurrence illustrated
the wisdom of teaching the colonists to defend themselves.

There were 1,400 regular troops kept in New Zealand, and
entirely paid by this country, and the very first time they
were called upon, they proved of no use whatever.
(Cries of " No, no.") Nut only were they of no use,
but they had done abs;ilute mischief. They took no
part in the action, and they only created a feel-
ing of bitterness between themselves and the colonists,
having left the brunt of the affair to volunteers. (Cries of
" No, no.") Those volunteers proved themselves most
efficient forces, and inefficient only because they were not
numerous enough. And why not numerous enough I Sim-
ply because the colonists were taught to lean upon English
troops, and as long as that was the case the colonists would
not develop their resources. The case was precisely parallel
to that of Gen. Braddock and the American colonies. There
were only 50,000 natives—men, women, and children—in
that part of the colony, while there were 70,000 English
emigrants. Those emigrants, hail they been allowed, would
have proved amply able to defend themselves.
Mr. C. FORTESCUE said that so far from the success
having been obtained by the gallantly of the volunteers
alone, those volunteers were a mere handful, and in the
opinion of the governor the safety of the lives of those men,
women, and children, depended on her Majesty's troops.
INDIAN LOCAL ARMY.

Sir DE L. EVANS asked the Secretary of State for India
what was the date of his communication to the Indian Coun-
cil on the subject of the abolition of the local European
army in India ; and whether the council collectively de-
clined expressing their dissent, on the ground of its being
too late to do so.
Sir C. WOOD said he would only repeat what he had
stated on a former occasion, that he was in constant com-
munication with the leading members of the Council of
India, though not in their collective capacity, while the
question of the abolition of the local army was pending.
Whether consulted collectively or not the result was very
much the same. What was essential was that in taking
his part in the Cabinet he should be able to state to his col-
leagues what the opinions of the members of the Indian
Council were on such a great and important subject. The
decision of the Cabinet was come to on May 16, and on the
17th he stated to the council what it was. He said—" You
will be sorry to hear that the Cabinet decided last night
against the maintenance of a local army; but he added
that any member of the council would have an opportunity
of expressing his dissent from that decision if he thought
proper. Several members of the Council got up and ex-
pressed their regret that they had not been consulted col-
lectively a fortnight before, but said that the division of the
cabinet having been come to, it was too late to attempt to
alter their determination or to express their dissent from
the determination at which they had arrived. He could
not say how many of the council expressed that opinion ;
but many of them did. They had an opportunity of ex-
pressing an opinion on the subject at that time, but they
declined to avail themselves of it.
THE COMMITTEE ON PRECEDENTS.

Mr. E. JAMES wished to know when it was likely that
the report of the committee appointed to search for prece-
dents with regard to the rejection of the paper duties by
the Lords would be in possession of the house. This was a
matter in which the honour of the house was concerned,
and no unnecessary delay should take place regarding it.
Lord PALMERSTON—The question might be more
authoritatively answered by the right hon. gentleman the
member for the University of Cambridge. the chairman of
the committee ; but in his absence I am able'to state what
I am sure will be satisfactory to the house, that the com-
mittee have devoted the greatest possible attention to the
subject. They have been unremitting in their investiga -
tion, and they have been greatly indebted for the assistance
which they have derived from the officers of this house and
the other house of parliament. (Hear.) I believe I may
state that the right hon. gentleman expects and hopes to be
able to make the report in the course of next week. (Hear.)
SAVOY AND NICE—TREATY OF TURIN.

Mr. KINGLAKE said, as he understood that the noble
lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs was not then in a
position to answer the question which he had put upon the
paper,
h oaunvde
na as
on Tuesdayhe noble
next,lord expected
he
a
from
Al. Tto
postpone
weret in
untilhatquesptoiesnsession of
themfirTsthFourvideanyel,s noteafterth.e go-
vernment Lord J. RUSSELL, in answer to a question of an hon.
member, said that with respect to the commercial treaty
with France, he had been informed by Lord Cowley that
very considerable labour had been employed on the task of
bringing ad valorem duties into the shape of specific duties,
but yet it was not likely that it would be accomplished in
the time proposed by the treaty. Lord Cowley, therefore,
expected that some prolongation of the time would be re-
quired, but he was not able to say to what extent. He
(Lord J. Russell) therefore could not give any more definite
answer to the question, but-as soon as he heard from Lord
Cowley or the French ambassador he would give the house
every information. It was a task which required a great
deal of inquiry and specific information before it could be
accomplished. In answer to a question of an hon. gentle-
man which had been asked from time to time in the house,
but to which he had not yet been able to reply, with regard
to Senor Escalante, who was imprisoned in Spain for dis-
tributing the Bible. That gentleman was imprisoned for a
considerable time, but in a very indulgent way, while his
trial was pending. Tho case was brought before the
superior courts, which decided in his favour, and he was
set at liberty. Another question had been put to him with
respect to the import of unmanufactured corks from Spain.
The Government had had a correspondence on the subject
with the Spanish Government, the result of which was
that the Spanish Minister of Finance stated that he could
not make out that there was any duty on unmanufactured
corks except in one province--the province of Gerona—and
that he was employed very assiduously in endeavouring to
improve the tariff, and to act in the same liberal spirit to us
as we had done towards Spain in regard to the import of
Spanish wines, which he admitted to be a great benefit to
Spain, but he added that there were protected interests with
whioh he felt it difficult to deal, and that difficulty he sug-
gested had been felt even in England in the case of the
of the paper duty. (" Hear," and a laugh.)
Mr. S. FITZGERALD inquired whether the proposed
changes in the Spanish tariff were to be effected by a sup-
plementary convention ?
Lord J. RUSSELL —Yes, it will be done by a supple-
mentary convention.
THE IRISH MAIL SERVICE—HOLYHEAD.
Colonel DUNNE asked the Under Secretary to the Trea-
sury when the new boats would be put on the Holyhead
station, when the piers at that station would bo completed,
and as to overtures said to be made to the Midland and
Chester Railway Companies on that subject.
Mr. LAING replied that the large boats would be placed
on the station on the Ist of August. With regard to the
pier at Holyhead it had not yet been decided whether Mr.
Hawkskaw's plan should t e carried out in its integrity, or
whether the 'permane t structure should be of timber or
stone. The necessity of temporary accommodation had been
urged by the City of Dublin Steam Packet Company, and
a temporary wooden pier, with sheds, so as to afford some
protection to passengers, was to be erected. As to the ar-
rangements with the railway company, they were these
Th 9 railway company was bound by their contract, under
heavy penalties, to make the journay between London and
Dublin in eleven hours ; but those penalties were not to
apply until the requisite accommodation was provided at
Holyhead for carrying the mails direct on board from the
railway without stopping at the station, and this would not
take place for two years. Half an hour's delay had been
allowed in consequence of the company's representation,
but upon the understanding that all parties were to unite
in expediting the service as much as possible; and it was
hoped the time would not be exceeded by more than a quar-
ter of an hour, or twenty minutes.
IRISH POOR REMOVAL.
A question put by Mr. LAN IGAN with reference to the
deportation of an Irish pauper by the poor-law officials of
St. Pancras, led to a protracted discussion, in the course of
which representations were made by hon. members on both
sides of the house of the cruelty of the law of removal, as at
present administered, and of the necessity of an immediate
alteration in that respect. Mr. Disraeli, in urging upon
the Home Secretary the expediency of taking some action
in the matter, expressed a hope that the Irish poor domi-
ciled in England would not be left to the tender mercies
and benignant influences of the metropolitan members.
Ultimately Sir G. C. Lewis promised that an official
inquiry should be institued into the particular case referred
to by Mr. Dinigan.
MEDICAL OFFICERS IN THE ARMY.
Colonel LINDSAY moved an address to her Majesty to
( reconsider the 11th clause of the Army Medical Warrant
of October, 1858, as far as related to its retrospective appli-
cation to the medical officers at that time serving in the
ranks affected, having due regard to the efficiency of tke
public service. He complained that in numerous instances
the warrant operated with great hardship and injustice in
the case of officers who had served for long periods in the
medical department of the army.
Mr. S. HERBERT defended the warrant, although he
admitted that in some cases its retrospective application
might have inflicted a certain degree of hardship.
After a few words from Colonel DICKSON, the motion
was withdrawn.

VOTES FOR DISQUALIFIED CANDIDATES AT

__-
ELECTIONS. :
Mr. BUTT obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend
and declare the law relating to votes given for a disqualified
candidate at parliamentary elections.
SELLING AND HAWKING GOODS ON SUNDAY

BILL. -
Oa the order of the day for the second reading of this
bill,

Mr. DIGBY SEYMOUR rose to call the attention of the
Speaker to a question of privilege. There was a clause (the
11th) in this bill which provided that a certain part of the
penalties which might be imposed should be paid over to
the Receiver of the Metropolitan Police or to the Cham •
berlain of the City of London, as the case might be, and ap-
plied in aid of the expenses of the police. Now he (Mr.
D. Seymour) understood that a considerablo portion of the
cost of the metropolitan and City police was provided out of
thoconsolidated fund, and if that were so the bill was ono
_which would lessen the charges upon the public Exche-
quer. He believed that by resolutions which the house had
passed in the years 1831 and 1849 any measure of that cha-
racter should originate in the House of Commons, and not
in the House of Lords, and he would therefore beg leave to
remind the house that if ever there was a time when they

ought to be jealous of their privileges in matters of this "
kind, it was the time at which they had now arrived. The
resolution of 1831 was to the effect that before the house
proceeded to a second reading of any money bill a com-
mittee should report to the house whether in any such bill
brought to this house from the House of Lords, or returned
by the House of Lords to this house with amendments,
whereby any pecuniary penalty, forfeiture, or fee should be
authorised, imposed, appropriated, regulated, varied, or ex-
tinguished, the ancient and undoubted privileges of this
house had been interfered with, and if so that this house
should originate such provisions. In 1849 it was resolved
that with respect to any bill such as he had referred to this
house would not insist on its ancient and undoubted privi-
leges in the following cases :—First, when the object of
such pecuniary penalty or forfeiture was to secure the exer-
tion of the act on the punishment or preventing of offences;
secondly, where secret fees were imposed in respect of be-
nefits taken or services rendered under the act, and in
order to the execution of the act, and were not made pay-
able into the Treasury or Exchequer, or in aid of the public
revenue, and did not form the ground of public ac-
counting by the parties receiving the same either in re-
spect of deficit or surplus; and thirdly, when such bill
should be a private bill for a local or personal act. He
thought the first of those resolutions apparently removed
the strength of the resolution of 1831 to which he had re-
ferred, but he thought the language of the second resolu-
tion applied to this case. This was a bill the operation of
which would indirectly be in aid of the public revenue, and
therefore the bill should be laid aside, and not entertained
by the house. (Hear.)
The SPEAKER consulted with Mr. Bouverie and Mr. May
for a few minutes, and was apparently in much doubt as to
the question thus suddenly raised.
Mr. BRIGHT said it was very likely that the house
might consider that there was some force in the objection
that had just been made. It was a pity the question had
not been brought under the notice of the Speaker some time
before the second reading of the bill, in order that he might
have looked into the case and been fully prepared to give an
opinion in regard to it. But the hon. and learned gentle-
man was not to be blamed for that ; for his sagacity had
only enabled him to discover the point since the Speaker
took the chair that evening. If it wo&ll be a convenience
to Mr. Speaker and the house he thought it would be bet-
ter not to proceed with the bill then—(tear)—but to ad-
journ the consideration of it for a few days, in order that
the Speaker might have time to consider the matter fully.
He (Mr. Bright) should have no objection to the adjourn-
ment being for three months. (A laugh.) They ought to
be careful lest they should establish a precedent which they
might hereafter havo occas.on to regret. (Hear.) He would
move that the order for the second reading of the bill should
stand adjourned until that day week.
The SPEAKER—I should certainly desire to be correct
in any opinion which I might give upon a matter of this
sort, which appears to me to involve rather a nice dis-
tinction. (Hear.) As it is very desirable that nothing
should be said without due consideration, I should certainly
prefer the opportunity that would.be afforded by an adjourn-
ment. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. D. SEYMOUR said the objection had only oc-
curred to him while the Speaker was in the chair, or he
should certainly have consulted him first. (Hear, hear.)
Lord R. MONTAGU did not object to the adjournment
of the bill, but thought that the objection taken was un-
founded. The fines imposed by the • bill were not made
payable into the Treasury or the Exchequer, or in aid of
the public revenue. At the same time, if the Speaker wished
for time to consider the question, he would move that the
debate be adjourned for a fortnight.
The adjournment was then agreed to.
TITHE COMMUTATION BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
LAW OF PROPERTY BILL.
This bill was considered as amended.
Mr. WALPOLE (for Sir H. CAIE/is) moved the inser-
tion of a clause, the object of which' was to put administra-
tors on the same footing as executors.
After a short conversation,
Mr. PAGET moved the adjournment of the debate.
Mr. WALPOLE hoped the hon. gentleman would not
persevere with his motion. He thought the hon. member
would not succeed in his object by the step.
Mr. HADFIELD said that the charges of crown recog-
nisances on the land were a great injury to the revenue in
consequence of the impediments they placed in the way of
the transfer of the land.
After a few words from Sir G. C. LEWIS,
Mr. PAGET withdrew his amendment.
Mr. WALPOLE proposed two amendments, which
would have the effect of making the provisions of the bill
prospective only as far as judgments were concerned.
Mr. MALINS supported the amendments.
The amendments were agreed to.
TENURE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LAND (IRE-
LAND) BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill.
Clause 1 was agreed to without alteration.
On clause 2, which enacts that the bill should be limited
to Ireland,
Colonel DUNNE said it was usual to put this clause at
the end of the bill, and he moved that the clause be post-
poned.
Some discussion ensued as to whether the clause should
be inserted at the end of the bill.
Lord NAAS was of opinion that it would be the most
convenient course that this clause should be put at the be-
ginning instead of the end of the bill.
The clause was then agreed to, as were also clauses up
to 7.

Clause 7 was, after much discussion, in which several
hon. members took part, agreed to.
Clauses 8 and 9 were agreed to. and
The CHAIRMAN reported progress.
THE LOCAL BOARDS OF HEALTH, &c., BILL.
This bill as amended passed through committee, and was
reported to the house.
The Local Government Supplemental Billpassed through
committee.