The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-28 00:00:00

SAVOY AND NICE.

The Marquis of NORMANBY gave notice that on Fri-
day, the 20th of April, he should move the resolution of
which he had given notice, that matters of great public
importance should not be made private letters instead of
public despatches.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bill 3 were read a second time :—Bainbridgo,
Lisburne, and Belfast and Ulster Railways; Belper Water,
Calie Liverpool Corporation Watr.
The following bills were read a third time and passed •—•
Dublin (City) Steam Packet Company, and Dublin and
Drogheda Railway.
___

- MUTINY BILL.
On the motion of Earl DE GREY, this bill was read a
third time and passed.
MARINE MUTINY BILL.
On the motion of the Duke of SOMERSET, this bill
'was read a third time and passed.
CONSOLIDATED FUND (£850,000) BILL.
On the motion of the Duke of NEWCASTLE this bill
was read a second time.
BANKS IN INDIA. „.

Lord MONTEAGLE moved for returns of all correspon-
-411101 between the Secretary of State for India and the Go-
vernment of India, touching the establishment of Govern-
ment banks ; and also for lists of all banks now existing in
India.
The Duke of ARGYLL laid on the table U. e returns
moved for by the noble lord. He did not wish at that mo-
ment to enter into a discussion on the subject, the more so
as several noble peers, who took great interest in banking in
India, were not in their places. His own opinion was
that it was as much the duty of the Government to issue
paper money as coined metal. The doctrine of the noble
lord, that it could not be the duty of the Government to
issue paper money, was in opposition to the opinion of the
highest authorities.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH thought that the
issue of paper money could never be important in amount,
and that the attempt to issue might lead to inconvenience.
He would take that opportunity of asking if the Government
had yet received an account of Mr. Wilson's financial
scheme in sufficient detail to lay them before the house.
The Duke of ARGYLL said he had only received the
document that morning, and was therefore not in a posi-
tion at that moment to answer the question.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Liskeard and Caradon Railway Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The following bills were considered, and ordered for
third reading .—Cardiff Water, Chard Railway, Norwich
Corporation Markets, &c.
The Finn Valley Railway Bill was read a second time.

THE leen LIGHT DRAGOONS.
Mr. PAPILLON asked the Secretary of State for War,
how it happened that the 14th Light Dragoons were sent
home by long sea instead of overland, as intended : what
were the-- circumstances under which the Himalaya
was detained at Alexandria with the two Arm-
strong, batteries of Royal Artillery barracked on
board ; whether the Himalaya, having been further detained
owing to the expected arrival of the 14th Light Dragoons,
will now return empty ; and, what is the probable amount
of-expense to which the country will have been put owing
to these arrangements ?
Mr. S. HERBERT entered into an explanation, which
'•: Was to the effect that telegrams sent by the Government re-
lative to the conveyance of troops from Bombay by Suez
were not received at the former place. Arrangements were
now made in reference to the Himalaya and the conveyance
of the troops in question to this country.
THE ANNEXATION OF SAVOY AND NICE.
Mr. B. COCHRANE asked the hon. member for Bridge-
water (Mr. Kinglake) on what day he proposed to bring
forward his motion respecting the annexation of Savoy and
Nice ? ' •
Mr. KINGLAKE—The declaration of the present views
and future policy of the Government which the house had
heard last night from the noble lord the Secretary- of State
for Foreign Affairs with so much satisfaction, had superseded
the necessity for the motion of which he had given
notice on the 6th of March • last. Ho should not deem
it his duty to call for the interposition of the house in re-
ference to this matter, so long as he believed as he then did
that her Majesty's Government were determined to carry
on their foreign policy in conformity with the opinion of
that house and of the country at large. (Hear, hear.)
LUNACY LAWS.
Mr. TORRENS asked the Secretary of State for the
Home Department when it was intended to nominate the
select committee on the lunacy laws sanctioned by the house
last February ; and whether it was intended, without fur-
ther•delay, to submit reports on the evidence already given
on the lunacy laws before the select committees of the two
peevious sessiens, with a view to legislate for the ameliora-
tion of the condition and treatment of patients confined in
insane asylums.
Sir G. GREY said that the committee previously ap-
pointed on the subject was re-opened this session, on the
motion of a private :member. That committee had taken
evidence, and would report the result to the house.
FORTIFICATIONS.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE asked the First Lord of the Trea-
sury whether it was the intention of Government to pro-
pose any vote in the present year for raising by loan, or
otherwise, any sum for fortifications beyond the sum pro-
posed in the army estimates at present laid on the table ?
• Lord P ALMERSTON—The subject of additional forti-
fications had been the subject of inquiry before a commis-
sion appointed for that purpose, and their report was under
the consideration of the military authorities. The matter
had to be dealt with in reference to the description of ford-
fidationa that might be deemed requisite as well as other
points. As soon as the report has been laid before the
GOvernment they would deliberate on what course they
ought to pursue, and then it would be his duty to bring the
report before the house, and to' state the intentions of the
Government.
'CARDINAL FIE SC 1-1 AND M. TH OU VE NEL.
Mr: BOWYER asked the First Lord of the Treasury
whetheri Lord Cowley had forwarded to her Majesty a
communication from Cardinal Fieechi relative to the note of
M. Thouvenel ?
Lord PALMERSTON considered that notice of the
question should be giVen before he was called on to an-
swerit. • • •
Mr. BOWYER then gave notice that he would ask the
question on Thursday next.
PACKET AND TELEGRAPHIC CONTRACTS.
Capt.:L. VERNON called the attention of the house to
the report•of the packet and telegraphic contracts commit-
ee. The hen. and gallant member contended that Mr.
Churchward had been most unjustly treated, and that the
conduct of the Government in regard to him was calculated
to shake the confidence of the commercial classes in the
justice of Ministers. He went in detail through the cir-
cumstances relating. to 'the contract in question as deve-
loped in the_ committee appointed to inquire into the subject
last ,session. He was at a loss to understand upon what
grounds it was sought to affix upon Mr. Churchward the
charges of obtaining and aocePting' the contract upon cor-
rupt motives. The case had , already been twice tried, by a
select committee and by an election petition, and in both of
these cases the Administration had been exonerated; but
as far as Mr. Churchward was concerned 014 had sought
to sacrifice him upon insufficient grounds. Mr. Church-
ward had found that his political opinions and financial
interests were.in opposition, and he had resolved to act in
accordance with the suggestions of the latter rather than of
the, former opinions. That could not be called corruption.
After having exonerated the Government, it was not, in his
opinion, right, to make a scapegoat of Mr. Murray, a con-
tractor, or such small deer. But if all persons were gibbeted
who were guilty of political inconsistency, Mr. Churchward
might say with Maeheeith
" Since,laws were made. of every, degree,
To curb like in Others,,as well as in me,
I wonder We haven't better company under Tyburn Tree."
In conclusiini, the lion. and gallant member called upon
those members who had been contractors, the present and
past; law advisers of the Crown, and those connected with
commerce, to prevent the breach of the contract which had
been entered into between the Government and Mr. Church-
ward. Theilion. and gallant member concluded by moving
"That this house, having considered the report and tho
evidence presented by the select committee on packet and
..telegraphic contracts, is of opinion that the contract entered
iiato-on t4e :26th day of April, 1859, between the commis-
sinters for executing the office of Lord High Admiral of the
1.3 nited Kingdom-of Great Britain and' Ireland and Joseph
fie lege Churchward; ought to'be fulfilled."
;ir F. BMUNG opposed the motion, and contended that
tree oommittee e ere fully justified in the decision to which
th had arrived. There was not a vote come to by the
COI untittee which did not include among its supporters some
gen tlei nen who sat upon the opposite side of the house, and
he t ho -efore vindicated the decision of the committee from
the chl trge that flick object was to damage the Goveinment.
Then 'e were three points for the house to consi ler—first,
irrhetl ter till)
contract was really a good one and beneficial
pmt to the t el-Hieinterests ; secondly, whether the‘ ct to theee
had con
res committee
had t e: jeaer an unjust decision wit h
contract ; and "thirdly, whether both these points being
decided a gai nst Mr. Churchward, this house was still fiet •
bound in honour to .carry out the contract. With respect
to the tit, 'at of those points, the opinion, of the committee
was, the t thts contract was not for the advantage of the
count?. 7.. As to the prolongation, there were somecircum-
stances p • ihich called for the special consideration of the
house. t'. Mr, Churchward "applied in 1857 for the payment

*lox

........r.....c....../1,11. Id
of certain sums for the discharge of duties which he stated
were not included i'n the terms of the contract. The claim
was refused by the Admiralty of that day. In 1859 he
again applied for yayment, with one exception, of these
very same things, at id the application ended by the Goiern-
nient of that day giving him not only what he applied for;
but they gave him hal% the bargain an extension of the con-
tract. By the satiny/ contract Mrs Phurchward was bound
to keep six steamers for the English aerviee, and he subse-
quently made a coatrast with the French Government to
keep three steamers. He had a double set of
captains and a
double set of colours in every ship, and when 1:111.0 steamer
arrived at Calais he dropped the English colours, tau up
the tricolour, and a French captain took command, am: it
was made a French ship. What was an ample sum for the
payment of six ships, might be very effectively diminished
when the number wtss practically reduced to three. In the
contract which Mr. Churchward entered into with the
French Government he stipulated that in the case of mari-
time war, he was bound. to give two of their ships to the
, French service ; and in file examination by the committee
the Secretary of the Admiralty stated that if he had known
of such a stipulation he woulsl not have sanctioned the con-
tract. Mr. Churchward said that it was quite true that he
had entered into such an arrangement, but he stated that he
never intended to perform it. (A laugh) The contract with
the English Government was thjstit was to pay for six ships,
but by the arrangements subsequently made two of those
ships were to be handed over to the French Government in
the case of a maritime war. The committee had also to deal
with conflicting evidence ; on the one side they had the
declarations of a gallant officer, and on the other the evis
deuce of two gentlemen in direct opposition to them. This
was a most disagreeable part of the duty of the committee,
and he asked the house, at any rate, t a believe that the com-
mittee did not come to a decision without giving its most
anxious and careful consideration to the subject. Some
reference had been made to the acts and character of Mr.
Churchward. So far as his experience was concerned, it
was not very easy for any Government to carry on its busi-
ness without some connection with gentlemen of the press
—(a laugh)—and he must do Mr. Churchward the justis,e
to say that all his articles were generally favourable to the
Administration of the day. (A laugh.) But with respect to
the character of Mr. Churchward, he was bound to say that
he was not altogether unknown to committees of the house.
In the case of the committee on Mr. Mare's election, it was
reported that he (Mr. Churchward) had bribed two electors
at that election ; and another committee had reported that he
had askei for forty places, and had got twenty-five of them.
He thought this showed, upon the whole, that Mr.
Churchward was not a man
,to abstain from using Parlia-
mentary influence to get something good. (A laugh.) Mr.
Murray had denied that the conversation described by Cap-
tain Carnegie had passed,abut had said that Capt. Carnegie
must have had in Fs mind a conversation with him (Mr.
Murray) in which he had made use of such remarks as had
been repeated. That was to say, Mr. Murray talked to
Capt. Carnegie about Mr. Churchward assisting him, and
they had therefore the admission that there was an offer to
Mr. Churchward to take part in the election. But that was
not all : the late Secretary to the Treasury wrote that the
Government were anxious to expedite Mr. Churchward's
matter, and they wanted him to go down to Dover to can-
vass. The reason, then, that the committee recommended
that Mr. Churchward's contract should not be extended
was, that Mr. Churchward thought he got his contract
through his Parliamentary assistance. (Hear, hear.) He
now came to the last question, whether the contract having
been entered into, the house was not bound to perform it ?
Was it to be understood that in every promise of a Govern-
ment, involving a vote of money, the house was bound in
good faith to pay whatever might be demanded ? If so, had
the house any right to enter into any question connected
with the retiring allowances ? If the principle were carried
to its full extent, there was hardly a thing in which Parlia-
ment would be permitted to interfere, but he thought he
could show that the house had never acted upon that doc-
trine. There was a contract entered into by the Minister at
Paris for the purchase of a certain chapel, and part of the
money was actually paid, but the house threw out the vote
and refused to perform the contract ; and amongst those who
on that occasion voted in the majority were Mr. Disraeli,
Mr. Henley, Sir J. Graham, Sir W. Jolliffe, Sir J. Peking-
ton, Mr. S. :Fitzgerald, the present Chancellor of the Ex-
' chequer, Lord J. Manners, the present Judge-Advocate,
Mr. Sergeant KiTsglak e, Mr. R. Malins—in the way of whose
speech, now on the other side, he was sorry to throw any
difficulty—(laughter) --mod the late Attorney-General for
Ireland. Then, again, they had the precedent of the com-
mercial treaty with Loui4 .the Fourteenth, when the house
thanked her Majesty for the' treaty, but threw out the clause
for the reduction of duties; and that was an instance of a
'most solemn contract—a contract with a foreign Power
under the Great Seal of England--set aside by Parliament.
The engagement in contracts such as that now under discus-
sion was worded thus—" We engage to pay out of moneys
to be provided by Parliament ;" and it could not be main-
tained that the Lords of the Admiralty had the power to
make contracts to which the House of Commons were asked
to assent only as a ridiculous form. It appeared to him, in
the first place, that the contract was not good in itself ; that
whether it were or were not a good contract, the conduct of
Mr. Churchward had been such as to render it advisable that
it should not be extended ; and that the House of Commons
. was perfectly free to withhold its sanction from the course
L .which they were now recommended to take.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE was not prepared to argue the
question upon legal grounds, but the right hon. gentleman
who had just sat down had placed the question from begin-
. ning to end upon a totally false issue. What the hon. mem-
ber for Berkshire asked the house to do was not to tie, but
to untie its hands. The committee submitted the question
for consideration, whether Mr. Churchward had not by his
conduct rendered it impossible for the house, with regard to
its honour and dignity, to vote the money necessary for
carrying the contract into effect, and this called for an ex-
pression of opinion upon the subject. All that was now
asked was, that the house should be placed in that positiot
that it should not be fettered :by the decision of the con-
mittee, but should be at liberty to give its opinion frely
upon the vote in committee. In the case of the 'axis
chapel the contractors were about to put up the debt c the
British Government to the lowest bidder, and a vote if the
House of Commons was taken to prevent the discretitable
transaction taking place. This was an instance, hen, of
the inconvenience of too hasty interference with etch bar-
gains, and in the present case, if the house was )ersuaded
that the Government had entered into the contact fairly,
and for the public service, he submitted that itwould be a
most injurious and injudicious course if they repudiated the
engagment upon the ground merely that they considered it
inexpedient. He had stated to the house let year, he had
stated again before the committee, and he vould now state
once more, what the grounds were upon ylich the late Go-
vernment agreed to the extension of the contract. In the
first place, the extension was asked for cn a ground that he
did not think a good one—that. Mr. Clna•chward Lad sus-
tained great and serious losses in the execution of his con-
tract. That was a ground on whichthe contract was extended
by a previous Government, in 1855 ; bat he had refused, so
far as he was concerned, the extension on that ground.
Then it was recommended upon tie ground that Mr.
Churchward was anxious to improso the service—that he
was unable to carry it out so effectively as he ought without
going to considerable expense, an that if was unreasonable
to suppose that he would, go to fiat expense unless an ex-
tension were granted to him. row that was a ground he
(Sir S. Northcote) took, and tock in conformity with prece-
dents set over and over again by Governments ever since
they had had to deal with pactet contracts. There was one
remarkable instance, in a case infinitely more important
than this, namely, the extension of the royal mail contract.
The royal mail contract to the West India Islands involved a
subsidy of £270,000, whereas this involved only £15,000, or
£16,000; that service was very badly done, this was very
well done ; that involved a dead loss to the Government of
£215,000 a year, because the postage revenue derived from
it was very small; whereas in this case the contract produced
an absolute gain by postage of X 60,500 a year. The Royal
Mail Company came forward in 18.57, when Mr. Wilson
was at the treasury, their contract having four years to
trhuan;
they
obtained an extension for two years, on the ground
Proposed to build larger ships. He might be told
that this i
was a case got up with a view to favour Mr.
Churchward, but he contended that the case was most cern-
eioeuvtineufaceveguiry
eouf
bt h3ecextension
apta i
a m ,;i 1 and
wai n
ei 1,1 a proof
very
f). lee quotedtelym
a made
le id
competent and perfectly unbiassed-'
witness
the committee that it would be of advantage: who stated to
if Mr. Church-
ward could put on better beats—that he had not speed for
the contract in bad weather. It might be said that they
ought to have allowed Mr. Churchward to drive out his
contract; and made no attempt to improve the system.
Well, that might be so ; but even those who took that view
would surely acquit them of not hitving acted up to the
best of their judgment. The next ground which had in-
duced them to close with Mr. Churchward was that not
only had he a contract with the British Government, but
likewise with the French Government. Mr. Churchward
had a contract with the British Government by which he
was bound until the year 1863, and one with the French
Government by which he was bound until the year 1870.
As far as the contract with the French Government was
concerned, it was entirely beyond their control, but it so
happened that at the time a correspondence was going on
between the Post-office authorities, the French GoVern-
ment, and Mr. Churchward, with respect to certain im-
provements in the service which had been suggested by
Mr. Churchward. These improvements could only hare
been carried out by the aid of Mr. Clurchward, and, con-
sequently, had he refused it, they must have fallen to
the ground ; and the result had been that the accelera-
tion of the mails, which was so much desired, did take
place, and that the mails which left Dover between
one and two in the afternoon now were to leave it at seven
in the morning. Moreover, Mr. Churchward had accele-
rated the passage between France and England, and instead
of the voyage being performed at the rate of eleven knots an
hour, as u:,ed to be the case, it was new performed at four-
teen knots an hour. And it should be borne in mind that it
was not in the English service that these improvements
had taken place, but in the French szrvice, over which Mr.
Churchward had complete control. He did not mean to
say that Mr. Churchward's conduct, as regarded the dee-
m) or rr
corruption
p wastionat nothingall
it whateverwa
son th
et to ciouuntcacvatstchverything that was proper, but as regarded the
was any ai mr
thetpoufgn.
llaft
e thereGu .

• • •