The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-20 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, APRIL 20, 1860.

Several private bills were read a first time.
PETITIONS.
Several petitions were presented in favour of and against
the Wine Licensing Bill ; against the Highway Bill ; in
favour of certain alteratiDns in the Attorneys, Solicitors,
and Conveyancers' Bill; against the abolition of chnrch-
rates without an equivalent for that impost ; against the
present mode of paying irremoveable power ot of
the common fund ; in favour of the total abolition
ition
of church-rates; praying that the jurisdiction of bank-
ruptcy courts may be extended to county courts ;
in favour of a change in the mode of national
education; for affording additional facilities to Roman Ca-
tholic soldiers and sailors to attend places of divine service ;
in favour of increased remuneration to medical officers at-
tending the poor ; in favour of the total suppression of the
sale of intoxicating liquors; against legalising marriage
with a deceased wife's sister, &c.

little citadel of freedom that had so long shared with Eng-
land the honour of having afforded a refuge to the perse-
cuted and proscribed of other nations—when she had de-
clared herself ready to send forth her little band of heroes
and patriots with a devotion not surpassed in history, to
fight for the cause which the great and good of all times
had said was the first possession a people should have—
was England to stand aloof, to forget her word, to forfeit
her honour, and to leave those territories which she had
sworn to defend, to be the scene of a tragedy that must
darken the age in which we lived, and make the name of
England to be dishonoured in after times ? (Conservative
cheers.) He knew it would be said we could do nothing
without the combination of other Powers. He did not
know what communications might have passed between
our Government and that of foreign Powers on that
subject, but if we were true to ourselves, we were sure
of Prussia and Switzerland, and in the case. of Switzer-
land, those allies were quite sufficient, with the help of
England, not to make, but to prevent a war—(cheers)—for
the Emperor of the French would not dare to make a war
i in the case of Chablais, for he would be overwhelmed by
the public opinion of Europe. In the late war Austria was
the wrong-doer, and public opinion condemned her; but in
the case of Chablais it was different. France was entirely
in the wrong. It was not needed for the security of France ;
it was an act of pure aggression, and he was confident that
France would not endure that her men, her money, and her
commerce should be sacrificed in such a cause. Still it was
said that we ran the risk of a war by such a course as he
recommended, that war was always terrible and costly, that
Chablais was far off, and that it was no concern of England.
Those who said so would say that the Rhine was no con-
cern of England—that Belgium was ne concern of England
—and that if the counties of Kent and Sussex were invaded
they were no concern to the manufacturing districts of Eng-
land. (Great cheers and laughter from the Opposition.)
Such advice ought not to be listened to. There was a maxim
which said that men indifferent to the liberties of others
would never defend their own. (Hear, hear.) The inte-
rests of England were not territorially affected, but her
trade and commerce were more than ever affected by the
aggrandisement of France. They knew that France would
support the Emperor so long as our hesitation made his
policy successful ; but we had good reason to knew that she
would abandon him if once he were opposed. The question
was, should we oppose him in Switzerland, or wait until he
had subjugated it, partitioned Germany, overrun Belgium,
and had only England left to deal with ? He asked whe-
ther we should oppose him now, when the voice of all
Europe was against him, or wait until Europe, humi-
liated and disgusted, turned against us ? (Conservative
cheers.) He answered that question by saying that no gen •
tleman in that house had the right to arrogate to himself
the monopoly of a hatred of war, or of a love of peace, and
those who had the least right of all to do so were those
advocates and supporters of the Emperor of the French,
who, he believed, was at this moment the greatest enemy
of peace that walked the world. (Conservative cheers.)
He (Mr. Horsman) begged to say that there was a state of
peace that was even worse than a state of war, and that was
the mere adjournment of a war to a more convenient season,
when the enemy who was determined to make it might
strike with the most deadly effect. (Conservative cheers.)
He granted that the Minister who pronounced the word
" war" incurred a fearful responsibility, but he incurred a
responsibility surely more fearful who, when conscious of
impending danger, hesitated to meet it like a man, shrunk
from his duty, and in a degenerate and craven spirit be-
queathed to his country the increasing difficulties of an un-
settled question, the dangers of which might be aggravated
by his timidity, and its disasters increased a thousand-fold
by his delay. He did not believe that the noble lord the
Secretary for Foreign Affairs was the man to do that. He
lad been called on to conduct the foreign policy of this
country at a most critical period, and it was his (Mr. Hors-
man's) solemn conviction that the next few years, or even
perhaps months, might be the most memorable in the his-
tory of England, and might leave their mark, for good or for
evil, on succeeding generations. He had heard speeches
from the noble lord in that.house which would indicate that
he was not insensible to the danger, and he (Mr. Horsman)
felt that in this conjuncture he would not shrink from his
duty. (Cheers.) The noble lord bore a noble name—a name
associated with the past greatness of England—and he
(Mr. Horsman) trusted he would never allow it to go down
to posterity linked with the darkest hour of her dishonour
and disgrace. (Cheers.)
Mr. DUFF considered that this country was not pro-
perly represented in Paris by Lord Cowley, and suggested
that ha should be removed. (Laughter.)
Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, I do not quite understand what
the purpose of the right hon. gentleman is in the speech
with which he has just addressed the house. (Hear.) It is,
no doubt, sir, the privilege of the right hon. gentleman to
address us upon any point of our foreign or domestic policy.
At the same time, it must be recollected that this privilege is
accompanied with a deep responsibility; and I must say, I
think the right hon. gentleman has not suffieiently weighed
the importance of that responsibility when he made the
speech which we have heard delivered this evening. For in
the first place, I must say, before I advert to the ques-
tion to which the right hon. gentleman alluded, that while
he appeared to be preparing the house for war, while he
seemed to be endeavouring to arouse the feeling of this house
in favour of a contest against the Government of France,
he never laid down what was the object for which that war
was to be carried on. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentle-
man seemed to suppose that Chablais and Faucigny were
parts of the Swiss territory, and that the French Govern-
ment were about to invade that territory and to take posses-
sion of it, contrary to the rights of Switzerland. Well,
whatever dangers we may have to encounter, whatever
may be the position of our affairs upon the Continent, that,
at all events, is not a fair description of the present state of
affairs. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman asks me, what
is the present state of the Savoy question, and in order to
explain that portion of the subject—for my duty forbids me
to go into detail as to what has recently passed and is now
passing—l must state that the question of the cession of
Savoy by Sardinia to France,'and the question of the neu-
tralised portions of Savoy, and their relations first to Swit:
zerland and next to the great Powers of Europe, are two
totally distinct questions. (Hear.) The right hon. gen-
tleman says that we did not protest against the cession of
Savoy to the Emperor of the French. There may be cases
in which it is right to protest. Ido not think there are
many such cases, but undoubtedly there are some. For in-
stance—where any treaty has, in our opinion, 'manifestly
been violated—such as the case of Cracow. But when we
do not think that our interest and honour are so much con-
cerned as to induce us to take up arms such an occasion is
one for a protest. Then there are other cases, such for in-
stance as that in which the Grand Duke of Tuscany and the
late Duke of Modena, protested. They found their territory
violated and taken possession of, and another sovereign
claiming the right to rule over them. Under these eircum-

stances, their interest in the matter not being an inferior
one, but finding themselves without the power to recover
what they had lost, they very properly protested, merely
saying that they did not, admit right in what had been
done, and reserving to themselves the right to recover
their' possessions if an opportunity should ever be af-
forded for their so doing. The subject was in that case a
very proper one for a protest. But what has been our posi-
tion with regard to Savoy ? When we first heard of the an-
nexation, that it was a matter which it Was not at that time
intended to carry out, though circumstances might arise that
would make such a step be decided upon, We stated that we
thought any such transfer would be attended with injuri-
ous consequences to France and to the general peace and
tranquillity of Europe. But we were not entitled to say to
the King of Sardinia, "You shall not yield your territory to
Franco ;" nor were we entitled tp say to the Emperor of the
French, " You shall not accept the territory which the
King of Sardinia is ready' to yield to you." So much is
that the view of the courts of Europe, that the Emperor of
Russia has, through his ambassador said, " It is a matter
which entirely concerns the two sovereigns. The Emperor
of the French had a right to ask for the cession, and the
King of Sardinia had a right to make it ; so that with re-
gard
question."
to the pure cession there can be no further
I do not understand that any of the powers
of Europe have
said so much as we have said on this subject. They have
considered that the Emperor of the French might have this
territory if it was yielded to him. tSome of them have
con-
sidered it a most injurious example and pregnant with future
consequences of evil ; but they hetace not said that they
entitled to protest on the subject. So fart think WC were
have
acted in conformity not only -with •tile law of nations, but
with the general sense of --the other powers of Europe.
There is a question of some complication. It has been
partly discussed and 'must be further discussed, and which
at this moment occupies the cabinets of Europe. In 1815
it was agreed that certain portions of Savoy, viz., Chablais,
Faucigsy, and a part of the Genevois, should in case of war
between neighbouring powers have all the benefits which
belonged to Switzerland itself ; that the kingdom of
Sardinia should have power of withdrawing his troops
-through the Valais' and the neutral territory of Swit-
. zerland ; and that the only military authority which
hould b! the tr oops
should have power in that . dis trict s
of the Swiss Confederation. (Hear, hear.) There has
been a discussion, and. some of the despatches on the
subject have appeared in the newspapers. There has been a
discussion as to the object,4 the particular provision which
is contained in the 92d article 4 thetreaty 9f Vienna, and
in the guarantee of Switzerland, dated the' 20th of Nov.,
1815. The French Government have contended, in more
than one very able dispatch, that this provision was in-
tended for the benefit of the, King of Sardinia, and for the
protection of his troops in case of war. It has been con-
tended on the other side that it was intended for the gene-
ral benefit of Switzerland ; but whatever be the issue of that
discussion, the view which her Majesty's Government takes
is that it is a provision which conduces to the general
security of Switzerland, and the safety of 'that neutrality
which was declared to be a part of the general policy of the
European powers. But that being the me, a new question
arises, with regard to the change that has lately taken place.
The Emperor of the French and the King of Sardinia have
lately concluded 'a treaty by an article of which the future
possession of parts of Savoy are transferred to 'the Empe-
ror of the Freneh", lint' ins' declared that the neutral ter-
ritory is transferred with the same conditions by which it
was formerly held by the King of Sardinia. That provision
naturally gave rise to demands for explanations, and it has
) been said most frankly) as I think, by the French Govern-
.

ment and the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the King of 1
Sardinia, that the meaning of that article is that the Em-
peror
of the French takes that territory, not merely with
the engagements as to neutrality to which the King of Sar-
dinia was bound, but takes it, to use the phrase of Count
Cavour, with obligations of an "efficacious neutrality for
Switzerland." (Hear.) In consequence of the transfer
by the King of Sardinia to the Emperor of the French, it
became a most interesting and most important question how
that neutrality is to be efficiently maintained in the sense in
_ .

- -
Which the powers of Europe wish to establish it. (Hear.)
But that is a question, let me rem;nd the right hon. gentle-
man, which is not at all like that of the French Emperor
seizing on the territories of an independent state. It is a

question upon which you may argue that the change of con-
dition is such that the neutrality of Switzerland cannot be

placed in as secure a position as it was, no matter what pre-
cautions you may provide ; but that is a question to be care-
fully examined and considered; and so far from being a ques-
tion of war, it is one which deserves to be considered by the
coolest heads—by men of the greatest experience and of the
most mature judgment with regard to the provisions of the
treaties which hold the nations of Europe together. (Hear,
hear.) Well, sir, there has been no objection by the French
Government to the examination of this question. It is in
general terms stated in the Treaty of Turin that the Em-
peror of the French will come to an understanding with the
European powers on this subject. The Swiss Confedera-
tion, through their Federal Council, have asked that there
shall be a conference on this subject. The French Govern-
ment, through their minister here, through their charge
d'affaires, have more than once said to me that they had no
objection to make to that conference. The powers which
may be called to it, the manner in which they should be
called, the place where they should meet, and the time at
which they should assemble, may be matters of friendly
consideration and discussion ; but as to the conference itself,
and the principle upon which it should meet—etantely, re-
conciling the Treaty of Vienna, by which that guarantee
was provided, with the present state of things and the
treaty lately concluded between the Emperor of the French
and the King of Sardinia—to that principle they make not
the slightest objection, but declare themselves perfectly
ready to enter into it. (Hear, hear.) Therefore I say that it
depends not merely on England, nor upon your boastful de-
claration, that we are at any time ready to go to war. It is
necessary, I must observe, that the powers of Europe should
be in a certain manner agreed as to the guarantees which
they should require, as to the precautions they should take,
in order to give Switzerland an effective guarantee for her
neutrality. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) Of this the right
hon. gentleman may be assured, that without speaking of
other powers, and what may be their regard for the interests
of Switzerland, her Majesty's Government of Great Britain
feel the utmost desire to preserve to Switzerland—that
free and independent nation, the refuge of the politically
proscribed, the old and classical land of liberty—every-
thing that can guarantee, everything that can secure the
maintenance of that independence and that freedom.
(Cheers.) The right hon. gentleman asks me what course
we intend to pursue with regard to our treaty engagements
with other Powers. That is so general a question that I
should be a good deal embarrassed were I to go over several
treaties with different parts of Europe, and say what course
I should take with regard to each of them. It is enough to
say that we have now a very critical question before us ;
that we are about to enter, and have half entered, into ne-
gociations on the subject with the Powers of Europe,
namely—with the eight Powers who were parties to the
treaty of Vienna. I should, therefore, think it not only
unwise, but a dereliction of my duty, to go into further de
tails. The right hon. gentleman seems to think that our
position is one of disgrace ; that this country is the slave
of France, and that we are too cowardly to stand by our
guarantees. If that be the opinion of the house the pre-
sent Government must be unworthy of the confidence of
Parliament and the country; and it will be the duty of
the right hon. gentleman to call for some more decided line
of policy, and to take the management of public affairs out
of hands which have made the country a bye-word to the
Powers of Europe. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman
proposes no such thing as that. He makes a speech to
which, as far as I can see, there is no practical end. The
right hon. gentleman represented this country, and espe-
cially all those who were concerned with its manufactures,
as being bribed by the advantages to be derived from the
commercial treaty. (Hear.) It is not six months ago
since I heard the right hon. gentleman allege that wewere
complete dupes in that treaty; and that all the benefits of
it went to France, and all the losses to England. But now
it appears that it is of such advantage to us as to amount
to a bribe; so valuable as to induce us to forget the inde-
pendence of all other nations and the honour of England. I
do not think there is much consistency in the arguments of
the right honourable gentleman on the point—(hear, hear)
—but I am of opinion that while those matters—which con-
cern the nations of Europe, in whose independence we
must take a great interest—while there are other questions
regarding the independence of Switzerland and other
nations, which, no doubt, require our immediate atten-
tion, yet I am of opinion the existence of the commercial
treaty will be a very great advantage to both France and
this country. I think that such commercial relations as
those established by this treaty bring nations together, and
make men ask themselves when a case of political difficulty
presents itself to them—not " shall we sacrifice our hon-
our ?"—not " shall we forfeit our good faith?"—not " shall
we sanction mossures which shall deprive, othe....tions et
their liberties ?" but a question such as this—" whether a
-solution cannot be found for the settlement of our differ-
ences by peaceful, but at the same time, conclusive means ?"
(Hear.) I believe that alliances between the peoples of na-
tions are stronger than any which princes or kings can
make. (Hoar, hear.) The right hon. gentleman asks me
whether we have given any answer to M. Thouvenel's last
despatch. The despatch of her Majesty's Government was
one stating our reasons for not agreeing with the arguments
of the French Government in favour of the annexation. M.
Thouvenel did not answer that last despatch, but took no-
tice that it was not a protest. There was no further argu •
ment. We have stated ourcase, we have gone fully into it,
and there was no reason for prolonging the discussion. Our
opinions naturally differed from those of the French people.
They thought—l believe they thought with their Govern-
ment—that the annexation of Savoy would be of advantage
for the defence of France, and were glad to see their Go-
vernment make a claim to it, and to find that that claim
was acceded to by the King of Sardinia. The people of Eng-
land could not agree with them. (Hear, hear.) With re-
gard to the future this is not the time to enter into it. If the
house leaves us to conduct the negotiations, I trust we shall
not be unmindful of the honour of England or of the inte-
rests of Europe, and that the right hon. gentleman will find
when the papers relating to the negotiations are laid on the
table that we have acted in a manner that becomes us as
English statesmen and as representatives of an important
portion of the community of European nations. (Hear,
hear.)
Mr. CLIFFORD observed that the observations made by
an hon. member on Lord Cowley were undeserved.
Lord P ALMERSTON—Sir, I am not going to add any-
thing to what has been said on that subject which. has been
dealt with so fully, so ably, and, as I think, so satisfactorily
by my noble friend ; but I must advert to those remarks
which an hon. member behind me has made with regard to
the character and conduct of Lord Cowley, our ambassador
at Paris. (Hear, hear.) I must take leave to say, having
known the noble lord for many years, having followed his
course of duty in the various situations in which he has
been placed, and having had the honour to be his superior
in office during a time of great difficulty, and when the
duties which he had to perform required all those qualities
which an ambassador ought to possess—that the attack
made on Lord Cowley by that hon. gentleman was founded
on a complete mistake, and in the greatest ignorance of the
character and conduct of that noble lord, and conveyed as
unjust a censure as ever was passed on a meritorious public
servant. (Hear, hear.) Lord Cowley has, on all occasions
on which he has performed his duty as ambassador from
England, combined in a most remarkable degree that spirit
of personal conciliation which is so necessary to the per-
formance of diplomatic duties with the greatest regard to
the dignity, the honour, and the interests of his country.
(Hear, hear.) There are on the other side of the house
right hon. and hon. gentlemen who also have had an oppor-
tunity of marking the conduct and examining the manner
in which Lord Cowley performed his duty, and I am sure
they will concur with me in bearing that testimony which
he so fully deserves to have borne to his transcendent me-
rits as the representative of England at one of the most im-
portant of the foreign courts. (Hear, hear.)
Mr KINGLAKE said that a protest was rather an in-
dication of weakness than otherwise, and he was not one
of those who would press upon Government that course.
He did not by any means acquiesce in what had been
done, but he thought that if a protest had been made by
the British Government, it would be just what the French
Minister wanted, and he would have construed it as bring-
ing this question to an end. He thought that existing
tlproreroadvt
that
use
ae didts
rtoe notFhra France
ue justifyeo
ruigo
hr St ad rti tad] i nghi
aao
au
rr
dr eiunn
iidtahe r ia
theundg forbidnoble these
ticoncuron
Sardinia
the •
cession by her of these territories t,o France,
and he
thought we had a right to remonstrate wi •th the Emperor of
the French for accepting them. The noble lord was
in endeavouring to attribute to his right hon. friend wrong
(Mr.
Horeman) inconsistency
because he had formerly said that
the treaty with France was a bad bargain. It was quito
consistent to say that the treaty had conciliated many
con-
nected with trade and commerce, while it was not generally
benefieial benefieial to the country. Ho wished to say a word upon
what had bean done by the French Emperor since. The
Emperor said he intended to consult the other Powers of
Europe, and in pursuance of that declaration a despatch
had been written by M. Thouvenel. The noble lord
answered that communication with great force, whereupon
the French Minister replied that the continuation of the
discussion could produce no pr tctical effect. Now, if Eng-
land was still a great Power, the reply should have been
something other than that. He denied that the Emperor of
the French had fulfilled his promise. He denied that he
had consulted the great Powers of Europe, if this was to be
the and of this affair. Then the Emperor said he would con-
sult the populations of Savoy and Nice, and ascertain their
wishes as to the proposed annexation. When the question
was first raised they were amongst the most contented popu-
lations in Europe. He believed there was no question as to
the authenticity of the 12,000 signatures in Savoy against

annexation with France, and, if they vere to be Soparat ed
from Sardinia, in favour of annexation to Switzer;and. In
Nice the feeling was still stronger, and five-eighths (Jf the
population were opposed to absorptiot in the Fre x,ch em-
pire. An attempt had been made to gel up a demon Istration
in favour of France, but he was inforned by a g antleman
who was present that he did not seo on; hat raised to the
Emperor, or hear one single cheer fran the •populations
upon the entry of the French troops on the Fst of April.
On April 2d, a Provisional Governmelt was formed, and
that was one of the basest contrivances for shifting the

allegiance of a loyal people that was ever reseerted to. The
officers were chosen by France, although they were said to
be in the Sardinian service, and Cotnt Cavour assured
them that their posts should be penman( mt if the people
would agree to this annexation. Was tb .ere ever a more
cruel abandonment by a Sovereign of a loyal people. Ho
actually appealed to their loyalty towa ds 'himself to induce
them to renounce their allegiance. But this was not the
utmost of the wrong the Emperor of the French had per-
petrated. He had added the somblante of consulting the
populations, whereas anything like flee choice or free elec-
tion was utterly impossible. That was how the French Em-
peror had performed his two promises. But there was also
a third promise, which was made it very distinct terms,
that Chablais and Faucigny and Genevois should be an-
nexed to Switzerland in case Savoy and Nice were included
in the French empire. That promise was made to Lord
Cowley on the sth of February, and it w as made on the per-
sonal word of the French Emperor. And how had it been
fulfilled ? He forbore to say anything fi irther, because he
learned from the noble lord that it was the subject of nego-
tiation which he (Mr. Kinglako) hoped would be conducted
with a due sense of its immense importance, believing as he
did that it involved the neutrality wad integrity of Switzer-
land, and the independence of Europe for many years to
come. (Hear, hear.)
THE BANK RETURNS.
Mr. Alderman SALOMONS nished to ask the right
hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer a ques •
tion; but before he did so, it would be necessary for him
to say a few words in explanation. On the 19th of January
last, when the rate of discount was di per cent., the reserve
in the Bank of England was £8,000,000, whereas on last
Thursday, when the rate of interest had increased to 8 per
cent., the reserve was under £5,000,000. Now, much
curiosity had been excited in the mercantile world in con-
sequence of this great fall in the amount of the reserve, and
it was alleged that the cause was the withdrawal of nearly
£2,000,000 of notes from circulation. Now, a charge of
that description was so disparagiag to the Bank of Eng-
land, that he felt it his duty, being himself connected with
a banking establishment, to place his question on the paper.
He wished also to know whether this withdrawal of notes
to se large an amount was the effect of a concerted action
between parties to keep them out of circulation, and place
them in a strong box. Another rumour had been in circu-
lation that day, that they were again put into circulation,
and the question he wished to ask was, whether his atten-
tion had been directed to the Bank of England return, pub-
lished in the Gazette of Friday last, in so far as regards a
diminution of notes in the hands of the Bank, and an addi-
tion to those in circulation, and whether he can give any
information as to the report that this has not been produced
by the ordinary requirements of trade, but by some con-
certed action on the Bank's reserve, to produce a disturb-
ance in the currency of the country.
SURETIES FOR INCOME TAX COLLECTORS.
Sir S. NORTIICOTE, before the right hon. gentleman
replied to the question just put, wished to know whether
persons who may have become sureties for income tax col-
lectors at a time when the rate of the income tax was sd. or
7d. in the pound, are liable for any default made by the col-
lector when the rate of the income tax is 9d. or 10d. in the
pound ; and, if they are not, whether in the event of a col-
lector _making default the taxpayer will be held liable to
make a further payment to cover the deficiency. He also
wished to know how the Government intended to proceed
with the business before the house, and when the Wine
Licensing Bill would come on for dismission ?
Mr. HADFIELD asked what the right hon. gentleman
intended to do respecting inland bonding ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed
that as regarded the last question, his hon. friend was aware
of the position in which the bill then stood, and as soon as
it was passed by thq house, which he hoped would be very
soon, he would inform him of what were the views of the
Government on the subject. With respect to the liabilities
of sureties for collectors of the income tax, the house must
be aware that the appointment of these officers was not
under the control of the Executive Government, but of the
local authorities. Nor were the sureties entered into nor
the appointments permanent, but had to be renewed every
' year, aid fresh bonds entered into. The liability of sure-
ties, therefore, extended only for a year, but the question
was under the consideration of the Government whether
that system should net be altered. He believed it was a
question the house would have to consider during the pre-
sent session, because with respect to the liability of the tax-
payers in cases where frauds had been committed, it was a
very serious question. Then, as to the manner in which
the Government proposed to go on with the business, he
hoped to have the Customs' Bill in committee by eleven
o'clock, and, if not, would proceed at a later hour with the
bill, for a repeal of Sir James Barnard's Act, which he did
not think would meet with any serious opposition. As to
the Wine Licensing Bill, he was net then in a position to
move +hu+ 44,--Ase of Oho any rpail in nrder to have it
. postponed, but he would place it on the paper for Monday,
and he would then fix a day for the adjourned debate, as
the second reading of the Reform Bill stood for that day.
As to the question put by the hon. member for Greenwich
respecting the return of the Bank of England, published
in the Gazette of Friday last, his attention had been directed
to the matter, because in a case where the interests of the
whole country were so deeply concerned, it was the duty of
one filling his position to see to the cause. The principal
facts were very clearly traced out in the papers the honour-
able gentleman moved_ for, and any one who thought fit to
refer to them, could see at once what were the material
facts. The cause of the great diminution in the reserve
could be seen in the first column of the papers, and was
caused by the withdrawal of a number of one thousand
pound notes, so that the reserve, on the 11th of April, was
no loss than three millions. That diminution, he was bound
to say, did not arise from the ordinary requirements if
trade ; and as to concerted action, he was not prepared to
give an answer. He did not think, however, there was any
combination among parties to bring about such a result. In-
deed, there was hardly any need of concealment, nor of stat-
ing that it was owing to the operations of a single house of
great business and respectability. As to whether it caused
any disturbance in the currency, it would be going beyond
his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) duty to give
any answer on that point, because it would not be
becoming in him to say or do anything which would inter-
fere with the freedom of action of a great mercantile house.
Such an establishment may commit a prudent or an impru-
dent act, which would have the effect of injuring the com-
mercial interests of the country, but every man was at li-
berty to do what he pleased with the balances ho had at his
banker's. Ho had seen the governor and deputy-governor
of the Bank of England, and Mr. Overend, a partner in the
great commercial establishment to which he alluded, and
who put himself in communication with him. They stated
to him all the facts of the case, and their views with respect
to its effects on the Bank of England, as well as the public
at large, and he certainly did not see there were any grounds
for censure. The proceedings of a private commercial house
may have been imprudent or injurious ; but it was not for
him, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, to censure an act
which was a private transaction, and in the exercise of a
power which every mercantile house possessed, and had a
right to exercise. The fact was, that after the crisis of 1857,
when the. Bank of England was greatly embarrassed, and
put to great inconvenience, and when the law of the land
had to be suspended, they adopted a rule which had refer-
ence to the exclusion of a certain class of traders, in order
to prevent such a circumstance again taking place. The
parties thus affected by it thought the rule had an injurious
effect on them, and that it threw legitimate business from
their hands into the Bank of England, but altogether there
were grave matters for consideration connected with the
whole subject. They went into the whole question of the
policy of the present law, but it ought to be said, in justice
to the Bank of England, that the authorities behaved with
the most perfect propriety. Neither had Mr. Overend the
slightest objection to give the matter publicity, because he
acted in the matter according to his own judgment and dis-
cretion.
THE NEUTRAL PROVINCES—SWITZERLAND.
Mr. S. FITZGERALD said, with reference to the ob-
servation which fell from the noble lord at the head of the
Government, that, the statement of the noble Secretary for
Foreign Affairs would give satisfaction to the house and to
the country, he wished to ask that noble lorcione question.
The question he wished to put was, that as the Swiss Con-
federation required a conference of the European Powers to
settle the question of theneutral provinces, no French army
should in the meantime be allowed to occupy them ; that
until a decision was come to on the subject their neutrality
should be perfectly secured. Unless a satisfactory answer
was given to that question, he did not believe the statement
of the noble lord would be approved of by the country.
THE 'COAST-GUARD SERVICE.

Sir C. NATI ER rose to call attention to the discrepancy
which existed between the Secretary of the Admiralty and
himself with respect to the number of men in the coast-
guard service. Ile put them down at 9,500 men. The offi-
cers numbered 567, the seamen 9,000 and odd, and the boys
655. Now, the decision of the Maritime Committee was,
that 70,000 meS, as a naval reserve, were necessary for the
defence of the coast of this country, and yet, in the face of
that, the Government had but a few thousand men for
that service. The hon. and gallant admiral then referred to
those discrepancies in the naval estimates, of which he had
on a previous night spoken, and concluded by hoping that
the noble lord the Secretary to the Admiralty would give
some explanations on the subject.
Lord C. PAGE'P was enabled to say that the force being
raised for the sea service of the country was progressing
in a most satisfactory manner. For the satisfaction of
the gallant officer he would inform him that a return had
been made by the Comptroller-General of the Coast
Guard, that the men at present available for the sea ser-
vice amounted to 6,862 men and boys. That return ap-
plied to the Coast Guard and Royal Volunteers.
He did not think there was any necessity for alarm,

either in this house or out of doors, as to tha failure

of thuscherae- for creating a reserve—(hear, hear)—and
so far was the progress encouraging, that he was inclined
to think there was much reason for congratulation. There

was, in the last week, a fair increase in the number of the
men. Before that their training ships were not in a state

of preparation for the reception of the men, who know very I
well they could not come up for training until the blgin-
ning of April. They began by enrolling 30 or 40 per week,
and they were now enrolling 100 per week ; and if they
could only keep up at that rate, they should do very well.
He thought it very unreasonable in the hon. and gallant
Admiral, to be going on in the complaining manner in
which he latterly indulged in his speeches. They had en-
tercel no less than 11,000 men in the present year, and there

was no difficulty in their getting able seaman. (Hear) He

had been visited daily by gallant officers of the Channel
fleet, and they said to him, " Can't you induce Sir Charles
Napier to cease making speeches in the House of Commons
which are very discouraging to the men ?" He was bound
to tell the gallant admiral that his brother officers were of
that opinion ; and he did not think that tho continual com-

plaints which he was making about the men of the fleet not
having sufficient leave were prudent. Whether there was

less leave now than ,formerly he was not prepared to say
but there was latterly a continual system of breaking leave
yet., he begged to state to the house that the fleet was never
in a more healthy or more satisfactory state than at the pre-
sent time. (Hear, hear.) He could assure the house that
there had been sad cases of insubordination which arose out
of those cases of "leave ;" but as to the fleet generally, he
was enabled to say that it was in a most healthy state. The
gallant admiral also complained that the petty officers of the
navy were insufficient. Now, ho thought that, under the
circumstances, it was natural there should be a paucity of
petty officers. The sea-going fleet was of course not of a na-
ture to encourage petty officers to join; but when the fleet
came home they entered the Coast Guard service, in which
they received encouragement, and he thought that was
right. He therefore thought those complaints on the part
of his gallant friend were equally without foundation. The
gallant admiral would lead the country to believe that the
men were overworked. Now that was not the case.
Sir C. NAPIE R—l complain of the system, and not of
the quantity. •
Lerd C. PAGET—The question was, what was the dif-
ference between system and quantity. He that very day
happened to have a visit from a captain of the Channel
Fleet, and he bad shown him that the greatest amount of
drill during any one day was two hours, and that, taking
the week, it did not amount in the average to one hour a
day. Now, no one would say that was excessive drill for
young men. (Hear, hear.) He believed it was the wish of
the gallant admiral to improve the condition of the seamen;
but he also believed that the speeches which the hon. and
gallant admiral delivered were calculated to do the greatest
mischief. With regard to his hon. and gallant friend's re-
marks in reference to what he (Lord C. Paget) stated last
year about ship building, he never made a statement in his
life of which he felt it was more his duty to express his
opinion than on that occasion.
Mr. DIGBY SEYMOUR said that it was the opinion of
all the naval officers with whom he had had communica-
tion, that the establishment of naval school ships would
prove a most valuable means of providing for the manning
of their navy; and he would suggest that twelve such
schools be established for: the accommodation of 2,400 boys,
and by that course of training they would in a couple of
years have four-and-twenty thousand men added to the
volunteer force. (Hear.) There was an article in that
day's Times on the question, and he really never read an
article more to the purpose. The best course would be to
know where they were to get young men. He was sorry
to see that the estimates did not contain any provision on
the subject ; but he thought a supplementary estimate
might be added to meet the case; and, if he might be
allowed, he would himself bring forward a motion on the
subject. He might be called a "landsman" and a "sea-
lawyer," but he spoke with the best authority upon this
subject. He was authorised by the Peninsula and Oriental
Steam Packet Companies to state that they made a pro-
posal to her Majesty's Government, that in the event of
any seaman leaving their service and going into the navy,
they would not deprive them of their month's pay, but
would allow it to go on for the month ; and he was farther
in a position to say, with regard to the port of Southampton,
with which he was connected, that port would be prepared
to pay half the expense of a school-ship, if the Government
would pay the other half. (Hear.). It appeared to him that
the educational results of such a system to the navy would
in 12 months furnish them with a large supply of lads for
the navy. One condition of the proposal of the port was,
and he thought a fair and reasonable one, that the Govern-
ment when furnished with lads from those school ships,
should charge themselves with the whole of the cost, and
refund to the port the expenses it had incurred for the inte-
rest of the service. Such a course would contribute very
much to carry out those experiments successfully, and he
hoped the noble lord would take it into his consideration, and
prepare a supplemental estimate on the subject.
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE looked upon it as the foundation
of this scheme that if it were carried on simultaneously,
such a course would take away half its difficulty. He quite
agreed with the hon. and learned gentleman that it was de-
sirable the Government should give encouragement to those
who proposed their readiness to pay half the expenses, and
if, by the system, they could get 5,000 or 6,000 boys it
would be very encouraging, He would say ono word on the
subject of breaking of leave, which was some proof of an
uniumat elate of fooling on the part of the seamen of the
fleet. A sailor landed at the Hard of Portsmouth, where he
was allowed to got into a labyrinth of vice that was perfectly
disgraceful, and had to return to his ship as he could. He
hoped the Government would take some resolute step in this
matter, and have a proper police to watch where he went
and bring him on board if it were necessary. The work of
the seamen was trifling, and he ought to be better kept in
hand.

Mr. WHITBREAD said that when the experience of
the first training ship was known they would be able to say
what could be done for the boys.
Mr. JACKSON here intimated his intention of postpon-
ing his motion for a general inquiry into the dockyards
until Tuesday, in order not to stop supply.
SUPPLY.

The house then went into committee of supply on the
navy estimates.
The first vote proposed was one of £174,000 to defray the
salaries of officers in her Majesty's naval establishments at
home.

Mr. WILLIAMS complained of the item of £642 for
temporary clerks, which last year amounted to £9l. He ob-
served, too, that an officer, called an " assistant superinten-
dent," had been appointed at Portsmouth and Devonport,
at a salary of £BOO a year, and one called an "acting ac-
countant," at Devenport, at a salary of £5OO. These offices
did not exist the year before, and there were other appoint-
ments equally objectionable, considering that they were
made for the first time. The whole increase on the vote was
£24,700, which, at such a moment, was altogether unjusti-
fiable. If the house were not so thin, he should certainly
divide it upon the vote, but at any rate he hoped to hear
some satisfactory explanation on the subject.
Sir M. 'SEYMOUR observed that if the officers of the
dockyards had asked for assistance, it would be a good
ground for giving it to them, otherwise the contemplated
step alipeared to be somewhat unjustifiable.
Lord C. PAGET said it was true the officers of Ports-
mouth and Devonport dockyards had not asked for as-
sistance, but as the number of men in those yards were
doubled, and there were many more clerks employed there,
it was not reason4ble to expect the superintendents to be
equal to their increased duties. Their correspondence was
immensely increased, and but for that it was probable
they would have been able to prevent the embezzlements
which had occurred of late. It was a piece of economy in
that point of view; but as the Admiralty felt that an in-
quiry must take place shortly into the whole question of
dockyard management, the board proposed not to make the
appointments until aftor the result of the inquiry was known.
He proposed therefore that they stand in the estimates for
the present, subject to that understanding. With regard
to the employment of temporary clerks, he would say that
were the business of our dockyards to continue upon its
'present scale of magnitude, it would be necessary to in-
crease those establishments enormously. He hoped however
that much of it would before long cease, and in the mean-
time the present temporary arrangement had been made.
Mr. BRISTOWE and Mr. JACKSON urged that the
vote should be reduced by £1,600, the amount of these sa-
laries; to which Lord C. PAGET assented.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY wished to know how many new
appointments would be made under that estimate ; and, if
the appointments were made, whether they would be entitled
to superannuation ?
Lord C. PAGET said that the two assistant-superinten-
dents were tho only now appointments made in the vote,
and the holders of them would not be entitled to superan-
nuation.

- After some conversation,
Mr. Alderman SALOMONS inquired upon what princi-
ple it was that men were discharged from the dockyards,
and whether promotion was by serimity oeby ability?
Lord C. PAGET said the dismissals and promotions were
entirely under the control of the superintendents, who were
the best judges of the comparative merits of the men. He
must say that there never had been an application to him
for promotion in the dockyards, and he was determined
that politics should have nothing whatever to do with this
department of the public service.
Mr. JACKSON objected to the constant changes which
took place in the offices of superintendents of dockyards.
The plan adopted in mercantile business was not to dis-
charge a man when he had learnt his duties, but to keep
the man and give him increased remuneration.
Mr. A. SMITH thought that system was one of the
main causes of the inefficiency of that department.
Sir J. ELPHIN STONE complained of the want of pro-
per provision for the services of Presbyterian ministers to
officers and men belonging. to that denomination in those
departments.
Lord C. PAGET said that no application had been made
'to the Admiralty, which, if there had been any large num-
ber of persons having ground of complaint, ho thought
would have been the case.
The amendment was withdrawn and the vote agreed to.
The next vote was £30,953 for salaries of navy officers and
expenses of establishments abroad.
Upon the vote of X 1,400,000,
Mr. LINDSAY drew attention to die extravagant cost