The Sun.
London, England, 1867-05-17 00:00:00

PERSONAL EXPLANATION.

Several orders of the day and notices having been dis-
posed of,

Mr. LAYARD rose and said—Mr. Speaker, I have a
very painful and disagreeable duty to perform. As I was
passing through the lobby just now I was addressed by the
hon. member for Marylebono in terms so disgraceful that I
do not venture to repeat them. Tho observations were
entirely unprovoked. He came up to me and addressed
me in language which, for the sake of the house, I will not
repeat, and I trust that no gentleman in this house, except
the hon. member, would be guilty of using such words.
He not only addressed those words to me once, but he re-
peated them. The only course is to appeal to you and ask
you what, under the circumstances, I ought to do. I did
not address the hon. member, and his attack upon me was
entirely unprovoked, attributing to me wilful falsehood.

Mr. H. LEWIS—I am not at all sorry that the hon.
member has brought the matter of which he complains
before the house. I should be the last person in this
house to offend against the law of what I conceive gentle-
man-like demeanour or proper conduct with regard either
to the hon. member for Southwark ur any other member
of this house, but there is such a thing as trying the
patience of members of this house beyond what they can
endure. And when the hon. member for Southwark says
that the observations which I addressed to him were un-
provoked, possibly in.his idea, and accustomed as ho has
been, as the house knows, to make use of very violent if
not slanderous language, he may not think that the words
which he uses are or can be offensive to gentlemen of
sensitive feeling or honourable principles. I was deter-
mined not to take any notice of the language which the
hon. gentleman used at a meeting of his constituents
the other evening, on which ho called a number of gentle-
men, members of this house, who had conscientiously en-
deavoured to discharge their duty to their constituents
.and their jleuntry, traitors. I do ul.tt knonwhether such
language is pat liamentary. According tollie- -WWI- of -the
hon. gentleman it may be perfectly right, but I hope that
there is no member of this Rouse, except himself, who
would speak of others in such terms when they have no
opportunity of answering him. As I was going through
the lobby a few minutes ago after the division the hon.
gentleman addressed me. I had not the most remote idea
of speaking to him, because I thought that if 1 did I might
possibly make some reference to what I considered the
very slanderous remark that he had made with respect to
myself, because I think that to call any one a traitor is
about as slanderous a remark as can well be made. 1
suppose that the hon. gentleman thinks that any one who
takes the liberty to think for himself, or to vote against his
party, as the hon. gentleman himself has done before now,
or indeed to do anything except that which would suit the
hon. member for Southwark, is a traitor, I do not know
what his definition may be, because I have not read his
speech, but these words were reported to me. Accord-
ingly, the hon. member, in going through the lobby asked
me whether I was afraid of secondary symptoms.
(Laiighter.) [Mr.LAYARD: "No, it is utterly untrue]
He said to me, " Are you afraid of secondary symp-
toms ? " LAYARD: "In the lobby ? "] Yes, in
the lobby; whereupon I did take the opportunity of stat-
ing that I was not afraid of the particular symptom to
which the hon. gentleman referred, and I also then ex-
pressed my opinion of the remarks which he made to his
constituents, and which, as applied to me, were certainly
words of which in Saxon English I expressed my opinion.
I have no other explanation to offer. I am wholly in the
hands of the House, but I think I could do no less than
repudiate, in the strongest language which I could possi-
bly use, the very injurious imputation which the hon. gen-
tleman was pleased to cast upon me and a number of other
gentleman who conscientiously endeavoured to discharge
our duties.
Mr. LAYARD—I feel bound to rise in explanation. All
I can say is that the hon. member must be dreaming. I
never in the lobby said anything like the words he
has attributed to me. I never dreamt of doing so. [An
Has. MEMBER—" Did you call him a traitor ? I never
asked him whether he was afraid of I won't mention
what. This is utterly and entirely wrong, and he must be
dreaming. There were other members with me in the lobby,
and it is the most extraordinary hallucination I ever heard
of in my life. -As regards the other matter, of which the
hon. member thought that I had said anything offensive,
it was his duty to have asked me whether I had been
rightly reported, when I should have been most happy to
have given him the fullest explanation, and if I had said
anything offensive, to have made that apology which one
gentleman is bound to offer to another whose feelings he
may have hurt. The other day 1 was making a speech to
my constituents iu Bermondsey, and, without my think-
ing of saying anything offensive--(a laugh)—some one
cried, " Why do you not turn the bill out ?" I replied,
"How can we turn the bill out? How can you meet an
opposing army when you have 50 traitors in the camp ?"
It was a mere jocular allusion. (Rear.) No man has voted
against his party more than I have myself in former days,
and if I have said anything offensive to the hon. gentle-
man I bog to offer him my humble apology. It was merely
a joke of the moment, and, perhaps reported nakedly, ap-
peared stronger than I meant it. If the hon. gentleman
had addressed me upon the subject I should have been
happy to have explained it ; but nothing that I have said
couldjustify him in using the language which be employed.
Mr. H. LEWIS—As the hon. gentleman has said that he
meant nothing offensive to me or any other gentleman, and
that if I had asked for an explanation of his words, he
would have made any apology which would have been satis-
factory to me, I can only say that I regret very much that
I did not take that course, which would have given the hon.
gentleman the opportunity of doing what he has now
done. Not having done that in the first instance, of course
places me in the wrong ; and after the handsome way in
which the hon. gentleman has explained the words of
which he made use and the interpretation be has put upon
them - the jocular 'manner in which he spoke—l have not
the slightest hesitation in withdrawing the words of
which I made lye, whioh I hope will be equally satis-
factory to the hon. gentleman.
Mr. LAYARD—I think I have a right to ask the hon.
gentleman to withdraw the statement that I addressed him
in the lobby in the terms that be has mentioned.
Mr. 11. LEWIS—That is impossible.
Mr. DISRAELI—Having listened very impartially to
what has taken place, I think the account of the hon.
member for Southwark appears to be the right interpreta-
tion to put upon the affair, and that the hon. member for
Marylebono was dreaming. Looking at the clock—(it was
now a quarter-past 2)—it does appear to me that halluci-
nation is the only term we can apply to the narrative of
what has taken place. But it seems after the mutual ex-
planations that have taken place that this matter need
never have been brought before the house at this hour of
the night when time is very precious. It appears that be •
twoen the two hon. gentlemen feelings of reciprocal respect
still prevail— (laughter)—and I do not know what more we
can 0640, wa are, I am sure, all anzioug not to culti-

Yesterday a meeting of tine Common Council
was held at the Guildball, the Lord Mayor presiding.
The special gas committee presented a report,
with a petition to Parliament against the Metropolis
Gas Bill.

The report was adopted, and the Sheriffs of Lon-
don were requested to present the petition at the
bar of the House of Commons, attended by the
Remembrancer.

The CHAIRMAN of the Local Government and
Taxation Committee (Mr. La'wley) brought up a
report on the City of London Municipal Elections
Amendment Act, the effect of which the committee
said would be to increase the constituency of the
City by upwards of 6,000 voters, and as the limits
of residence within seven miles of the City hitherto
imposed by law had also been removed.by the act,
the effect of the extension of the franchise would be
in the direction of bringing within the municipal
constituency very many of the mercantile and com-
mercial classes, who by their residing in the suburbs
had not hitherto been included in the lists of voters.
The report was agreed to, asd ordered to be
printed.

Mr. LAWLEY also presented a report from this
eseammemcitotmee of themittee Houseon the
of Commonssecondreporton h
of thete selectloeal
government and the local taxation of the metro-
polis. It was a lengthy document, conveying to
the Common Council the opinion of the committee
on the general scope and aim of the resolutions
adopted by the Commons' committee. The ten-
dency, they said, of the more important of those re-
solutions, if carried into effect, would be :-1. The
extension of the county of the City of London,
which it is proposed should be included in a county
of the metropolis ; the abolition of the elective
magistracy of the City of London, and a similar
interference with portions of the metropolitan coun-
ties of Middlesex, Surrey, and Kent, and the autho-
rity vested in the justices. 2. The elevation of the
Metropolitan Board of Works, originally created
principally for the main drainage of the metropolis,
into a governing municipal counbil for the whole
of London, to be appointed partly by justices of.
the peace, by the Crown directly, partly by the
•governing body of each district, and partly by direct
representation of the ratepayers ; and such council
to exercise the power now possessed by the Metro-
politan Board, to which are to be added supervision
over water and gas supply, railways, &c. 3. The
existing divisions of the metropolis to be readjusted,
and existing boundaries obliterated at the will of
the Government. 4. The local bodies, such as ves-
tries and district boards, to be merged throughout
the metropolis, and the Common Councils ; such
councils to elect annually each a chairman and
deputy chairman. 5. The police force to be one for
the whole metropolis. And 6. That, so far as
necessary to the carrying out the resolutions, all
local acts to be repealed. The corporation commit-
tee submitted that the recommendations alluded to
would have the effect of undermining municipal and
representative government in the metropolis and
elsewhere throughout the kingdora ; and that to
reconstruct the local government of London on such
a rinciple would not only be inexpedient and un-
just as regards the ancient City of London, but
would disappoint the expectations of other districts
of the metropolis, who naturally look for free muni-
cipal institutions similar to those given to towns
which had been recently incorporated under the
Corporations Act of 1835, as well as to those 208
ancient corporations which under that act were ex-
tended and regulated.
The court adopted the report of their committee
without a dissentient, and was referred to the com-
mittee to be printed, and for them to take such
steps as they might think desirable.
On the motion of Mr. Finlay the court unani-
mously resolved to contribute 100 guineas towards
the fund now being raised for the erection of a
statue within the City of London in honour of Mr.
George Peabody, and in grateful recognition of his
munificent gift to the poor of the metropolis.
The court next proceeded to consider a report
from the improvement committee, presented by the
chairman, Mr. Deputy Fry, recommending a contri-
bution of £30,000 towards the cost of the improve-
ment in Mansion-house-street, effected by the Com-
missioners of Sewers.
To that an amendment was proposed by Mr.
Deputy De Jersey, to the effect that the whole cost
of the improvement, amounting to £44,944 odd,
should be borne by the corporation.
The subject underwent a good deal of discussion,
and in the result the amendment was lost, and the
report of the committee recommending a contribution
of £30,000 adopted, with a reference to the coal,
corn, and finance committee to consider and report
out of what fund the money should be paid.
The rest of the sitting was occupied with a matter
of little public interest.

THE PILCHARD SEASON OF 1866.—We are now in
possession of facts and figures which show the work
of the past season. The total number of hogsheads exported
from Cornwall were 14,294, or exactly six under the ave-
rage of the past 10 years. The fish were not in good quality
and were irregular in size. 5,700 hogsheads were cured in
Mount's Bay ; 2,944 east of the Lizard ; and 5,650 at St.
Ives and North of St. Ives. These were exported in lots
varying from 30 to 7331 hogsheads, between the 3d of
October and the sth of February, to the following places :
—To Genoa, 4,017 hogsheads; to Leghorn, 2,5851; to
Civita Vecchia, 998; to Naples, 8,490; to Ancona, 529} ;
and to Venice, 2,674. The average prices paid the fisher-
men for 1865 and 1866 are unknown except to the expor-
ters. Those from 1850 to 1864 are stated. They ranged
from as low as 30s. to 50s. a hogshead in 1852, to 60s. and
80s. in 1860, when only 3,920 f hogsheads were sold.
Within the last 17 years the sales have varied from 3,145
hogsheads in 1859 to more than 26,000 in 1861 and 1863.
Cornish Telegraph.
THE PARK-LANE IMPROVEMENT.—At the meet-
ing of the vestry of St. George's, Hanover-square,
held yesterday at tho Board-room, Mount-street, the rev.
the Rector in the chair, the reply of the First Commis-
sioner of her Majesty's Works was read, in reference to the
resolution of the vestry as to the making of the road. The
Government, it was stated, could not undertake to do the
work at the public expense. Admiral Duncombe, M.P.,
pr,posed that their representatives at the Metropolitan
Board should be required to take the whole of the corre-
spondence to that Board, with the view of its carrying out
the work, it being a metropolitan and not a parochial im-
provement, and that then the parish would take to the
road. Mr. Westerton said the Metropolitan Board would
probably give a portion, but certainly not the whole of the
money required. The surveyor disapproved the line as
drawn on the Government plan, as it would bulge out be-
tween Stanhope and Grosvenor-gates, and hoped a wider
space might be given. In answer to questions the sur-
veyor said the expense of laying down the road would not
.xc ,ed £3,000. The resolution was carried. Dr. Appletou
moved another resolution to the effect that the vestry
should forward plans, with as little delay as possible, to
the First C.mnissiouer, and as ho cannot recommend the
by the
.m
work to be done at the public expense, the vestry Will un-
dertake to do the necessary work should the Metropolitan 8
Board decline to contribute to what the vestry deem
public improvement, that there may be no delay in makine,;
theeo grounddedw with
ouctho
rtehadeipauesbs and public use,
liberalitywhich had been.
Go-
vernment. The amendment was lost—five voting for it
to 33 against. r

FADVERTISEHErr:I—HoIIoway's Ointment and Pills.
Low Spirits, Despondency.—Sickness soon weighs down
the most buoyant spirits unless they be maintained by the
hops of speecty recovery. This salutary hope may safely
be based on Holloway's world-esteemed remedies, which
are the safest and most effective curatives of all diseases
affecting the exterior or interior of the human body. They
raise every organ to its natural standard by purifying the
blood, stimulating the nerves, and dislodging any obstruc-
tions in the vessels or glands. In skin diseases and
children's complaints Holloway's medicaments are invalu-
able. in all the maladies to which females are liable
these remedies are particularly useful in rectifying and
strengthening those organs, upon the due peFforeutuce
which the health depencle,