The Sun.
London, England, 1867-02-16 00:00:00

STORM SIGNALS.

Col. SYKES asked the President of the Board of Trade
whether the storm signals, as hitherto practised by the
late Admiral Fitzroy, were to be continued ; and whether,
if to bo discontinued, it would not be prudent previously
to invite the chambers of commerce of the kingdom to
express their opinion on the subject ?
Sir S. NORTHCOTE said on the death of Admiral Fitz-
roy a committee was appointed to inquire into the meteor-
ological department, and the report had been received,
which stated that much more attention had been given to
forecasts than to scientific observations. The department,
however, had been improved, and scientific observations
Would be more particularly attended to. Sue h informa-
tion would be supplied to those who desired it, and then
they would bo in a position to make forecasts themselves
if they felt so disposed. The last Government decided
against continuing the issuo of forecasts, and the present
Government had come to the same determination.
THE CATTLE DISEASE.

Mr. READ asked the Vico-President of the Council if
the Government intended to compensate the owners of
cattle suffering from cattle plague which were slaughtered
by the order of the Government inspectors previous to the
passing of the Cattle Diseases Act of February, 1866 ; and
if so, at what rate compensation would be granted, and
over what period it would extend ?

Mr. CORBY said arrangements had been made to pay
compensation for cattle slaughtered between the 26th of
August and the 23d of November, at which period the
authority for enforcing the slaughtering of animals was re-
voked. The rate at which compensation would be paid
was one half the value of the animal slaughtered, also the
amount received from insurance or sale of carcase.

Mr. DUNLOP asked from what fund it was proposed
to take the money to pay the compensation'
Mr. HUNT said a supplementary estimate of £25,000
for the purpose would be proposed.
Mr. GLADSTONE asked that ample notice would be
Oven of the moving of that estimate.

SCOTCH BUSINESS.
Mr. BAXTER said, by request, he would postpone
giving the notice of the Scotch bills to be introduced,
and who Was to take charge of them, the Lord Advocate
not having a seat in that house, until next Thursday.

VACCINATION.
Mr. BRUCE asked the Vice-President of the Committee
of Council on Education whether it was his intention to
re-introduce the Vaccination Bill, as amended by the se-
lect commit►.ee last session,
Mr. LORRY said it was his intention to introduce a bill
on the subject, but it would not be a measure identical
with that prepared last session.
ELECTION OF GUARDIANS.

In reply to Mr. A. PEEL,
Mr. HARDY said his attention had not been called to
the subject. He was not prepared to propose any alteration
of the law on tho subject.

THE REFORM BILL.
Sir A. BULLER asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer
whether, upon Monday, the 25th February, he would
give any explanation of the measures which the Govern-
anent were prepared to propose for the more effectual pre-
vention of corruption at elections.

The CFIANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
on Monday, the 2-50, Moro moving the resolution of
which h 3 bad given notice, be should make a statement
which would meet that and other points involved in the
two other questions which stood on the paper for thateven-
ing as to plurality of votes and the reduced qualification
for counties and boroughs.
THE INSURRECTION IN CRETE.

Mr. GREGORY, on the motion for going into committee
of supply, moved! for an address for copies of any cor-
respondence between the Foreign Office and foreign
governm,mts on the subject of the insurrection in Crete
and the Turkish fortresses in Servia, and of any reports
from our consular agents on these subjects.
Mr. B. COCHRANE seconded the motion.
Mr. LHIYARD regretted that the hon. member for 04-

way had brought the question before the house, the more
especially as, according to the last information, the special
commissioner who was sent to Crete had succeeded in bring-
ing about a better feeling, and because representatives of
both the Christian and Mahometan population were pro-
ceeding to Constantinople to state their grievances, with a
view to their redress. Still more was it to be regretted
that the hon. gentleman should have used the language
which he did. Instead of being beneficial to those in re-
ference to whom it was spoken, and whom it was intended
to serve, it would have rather the opposite effect ; because,
encouraging them with the hope of intervention, it was
calculated to lead them into fresh disaster and fresh suffer-
ing. (Hear.) But, however that might be, the question
which the house had to consider was this-, -whether the
grievances under which it was alleged they suffered were
so serious as to justify a civil war ? What were those
grievances ? The first grievance the Cretans complained
of was a vexatious system of tithes. Another grievance was
the mode of election to the municipal assemblies. The
Christian population were the sole representatives, and if
they allowed themselves to be bribediL was their own fault.
At all events it was no justification for rebellion. What
were their other grievances as stated in their address to the
Sultan ? They stated they were so oppressed with taxa-
tion that they had little or nothing left for themselves.
The next was that there were no roads in the island. But
the want of roads was owing to the Cretans themselves,
who, when the Turkish Government sent Mr. Woodward
to construct roads, refused to contribute the necessary
amount of labour. A further grievance was that the mode of
electingpopular assemblies was defective. The fourth griev-
ance was that the oil sellers were also money lenders, and
that there were no banks. The fifth, sixth, and seventh
were more important. If it were true that Christian
evidence was rejected, that was owing to the neglect
of the Turkish Government in carrying out their
promises to the Christian population ; but the Turks, in
order to remedy the grievance, established over the coun-
try tribunals composed of Greeks and Mahometans ; and
in these tribunals Christian evidence ought to be as accept-
able as any other evidence. With regard to the preparatory
schools the matter rested with the Cretan; but the state
of education among the Turks was as good as that of the
Christians under the Government of Greece. In many
cases liberal grants were given by the Turkish Govern-
ment, the Sultan himself being often a contributor. Dot
it was obvious that those grievances did not cause the re-
bellion. (Hear, hear.) The Cretans acknowledged as much
to the Greek Consul. The various European Governments
were of the same opinion, with the exception of Russia;
but even Baron Brunnow had recently come to the same
conclusion. It was not for the purpose of obtaining the
redress of those grievances that the Cretans rebelled, but
in order to bring about a reaction of the European Powers
in favour of the Greeks. In order to understand the ques-
tion it was necessary to go a little farther back, and he
hoped the noble lord would lay on the table the reports in
the Foreign Office relating to the state of the island of
Crete in 1858. At that time a rebellion was threatened in

Crete, and some grievances were set forth. Sir henry
Bnlwer sent Mr. Longworthy, a gentleman well acquainted
with the language and habits of the people, to wake in-
quiries, and the result of the inquiry was that the griev-
ances had nothing to do with the threatened rebellion, and
that, so far from the Cretans having any cause of com-
plaint against the Turks, the Turks had reason to com-
plain of the Cretans. There was an intrigue going on in
Crete at the time, and the head-centre of rebellion
was the Greek Consul. Mr. Longworthy's report
satisfied not only the English Ambassador, but
the French and Russian Ambassadors, and the result
was that the exequatur of the Greek consul was re-
voked. For eight years the island enjoyed peace. But
last year there was a great war in Europe, and it was
thought a fitting time to revive the Eastern question, and
invite the Cretans to revolt, and endeavour to obtain their
independence. Such was the origin of this rebellion. It
was instigated at Athens, it was directed from Athens, and
it was supplied by volunteers from there ; and but for this
support the rebellion would have long since ceased. He
had read with great satisfaction the correspondence which
took place between the Foreign-office and Greece. The
noble lord took a wise and statesmanlike course through-
out, and the only course which a responsible Minister
should take. The noble lord had urged upon the Porte
the removal of all just complaints, and the prevention of
the effusion of blood in suppressing the disturbance ; at the
same time he had entered his protest against the course
which Greece had taken, whose object was not to promote
the welfare of the Cretans, but with the view of gaining
additional territory. It was gratifying that other Powers
had come round to the same opinion. Whatever might be
urged against Turkey, it could not be denied that she
acted a good neighbour towards Greece. Turkey might
have aimed a severe blow at Greece, but instead of doing

so she acted a friendly part, and never broke her engage-
ments with that Power. The Turks were not fairly
treated. They were charged with not making concessions
to their Greek subjects, but when they were given only
led to revolt or insurrection. The real object of the Cretans
was to dispossess the Mussulruans of their land, and the lan-
guage held by the Greeks and Servians showed that their
object was to drive the Turks out of Europe. That system
bad been carried out in Servia, where no Mussulman was
allowed to remain. It was most unjust to deprive these
people of their homes, whohad as good a right to them as the
Greek population had to theirs. The question at issue was
not a political but a religious question ; and if the Greeks
could possess sufficient power, they would expel the
Catholic population as well as the Mussulman, unless
they conformed to the Greek Church. It was not to bo
supposed that the Mahometans would surrender their
lands and sacrifice their wives and children without a
desperate struggle, and causing such a massacre as the
world never saw. This country had a large Mahometan
population in India, and if the doctrine were put forth that
Turks were not fit to govern Christians they might come
to the conclusion that Christians were not fit to rule Maho-
metans. And anybody looking into the origin of the In-
dian mutiny would see that it was largely influenced by
events which happened in Europe. The only true principle
to observe between Greeks and Turks was to endeavour as
far as possible to have equal justice done to them. Suppose
the Cretans had obtained what they wanted—annexation
to Ofeece—would they have improved their position one
bit ? The despatches of the noble lord, as well as those of
Mr. Ersldne, who had taken rather an unfair view against
the Turks, show that if the insurrection had not been sup-
ported from Greece peace would long ago have been re-
stored, and that the cause of the revolt was the bad feeling
which had arisen between the natives and the volunteers.
If this be so, how can any one wish for the extension of
that painful rule in: this unhappy island ? As for the talk
about the insecurity of life in Crete, there is no complaint
that the whole country is overrun with brigands ; but is
Greece a man can scarcely leave the gates of Athens with-
out meeting them. The island of Zante is kept in a state
of terror by M. Lombardo, that great regenerator of the
lonian Islands, who has men going about the island mur-
' dering any one who does not support his plans. Men aro
assassinated openly in the streets and in the coffee-house;
and nobody, :not even the police, dare to interfere. To
say, therefore, that Crete would gain by annexation to
Greece is to say that which can hardly be proved. The
great difficulty is to find some form of government which
will deal fairly with both Mahometans and Christians.
There are from 70,000 to 75,000 Mahometans who hold
land in Crete, and whom it would be manifestly unfair to
put under Christian rule. You have to deal with two
barbarous races. The only difference is that the Chris-
tians are more barbarous in their own territories. The
Turks never justify those acts, but itttempt to punish
them, while there is scarcely an instance in which the
Greek Government does not defend them. Fifteen

Turks who were taken by the Christians in Epirus wero
dipped in pitch and sot on fire. Children were carried off
from school, and their ears were cut off and sent to their
parents, with an intimation that unless ransom were paid

their heads would follow. They violated women, they
ransacked, robbed, and pillaged. Our consuls enter into
correspondence as soon as a Tark kills a Christian; but
when a Christian kills a Turk we hear nothing about it.
Yet the number of atrocities committed by Christians on
Turks is unfortunately greater than tho number of those
committed by Turks on Christians ; while the hatred of

he Christians to the Mahometans is such, that if they had

them in their hands a massacre would occur such as the
world has rarely seen. You can never expel the Turkish
population without the general acquiescence of the Euro-
pean Powers; and until these are prepared to intervene,
it is only doing the Christians incalculable mischief to
interfere in this way. They are increasing in wealth and
intelligence, and are daily improving their position. The
Mahometans are improving also, under the influence of the
public opinion of Europe. The difference in Turkey is
incalculable. Some years ago a Christian could not ride a
horse through the Streets of any town. Now the people
are beginning to find that the rights of property must be
respected; and it is quite certain that, through this gradual
development, the time will come when some measure will
be found to reconcile the interests of both Turks and
Christians in proper and honourable representation.
Mr. DARBY GRIFFITHS said—l agree with the mem-
ber for Southwark that the true policy of this country is
to endeavour to reconcile the conflicting and almost irre-
concilable interests of Servia and Turkey, by making the
action taken in the case of Wallachia an exemplar of the
course to be adopted. The present position of things is
that Turkey holds: as the last remnant of her rule in Ser-
via, certain fortresses along the line of the Danube. In
all other respects Servia enjoys perfect autonomy. But
these emblems of domination, though entirely useless to
Turkey, are the cause of the greatest irritation and an-
noyance to the Servians, and remain a grave obstacle to
European peace. The demands and tho desires of Servia
for the liberation of their country from such possible con-
tingencies as the bombardment of Belgrade in 1862 have
now raached a climax, and if some agreement is not shortly
come to there will be an outbreak, which may very likely
extend to other quarters. It is to be hoped the Secretary of
State
for Foreign Affairs will take example by the course
of France in the affairs' of Wallachia, and give the advice
sutoltthtehePworitsehweshoicfhthweaspogip t
ahna
dt
yoi ce d
toon
their t co n
rea-
sonable
-
uvleant i nn,
demands.

Mr. GLADSTONE said—l should be sorry if, with re-
spect to Turkey, we were not to preserve a desire to treat
her with the respect due te any Power ffilich is respon-

siblo for any extended government. The circumstances of
her provinces and general concerns have placed her in
such a position that we are entitled to entertain questions
relating to her internal relations and to her people, such as
it would be impertinent to entertain with regard to almost
every other country. There is much sense and justice in
what has fallen from the hon. member with regard to the
case of Servia. We cannot expect Turkey to conform to
our opinions—all we can expect is that where she has con-
tracted either literal or moral engagements she should ful-
fil them—that when she has contracted any engagements
she will lend a willing ear to counsels which may be judi-
cious, and aim solely at the promotion of her own inte-
rests. To the issue how far the retention of the interests of
Servia can serve the interests of the Ottoman Govern-
ment, it seems impossible that any but one answer can be
given, and that answer in the negative. 1 am not aware
of any conceivable purpose of utility, whether of police
at home or of defence against foreign Powers, which
Turkey can gain from the military possession of Servia ;
while, on the other hand, the considerable financial
burden which it entails, and the painful points of
contact which it opens between the suzerain autho-
rity and the people of Servia, constitutes a constan-
political danger. The greater part of this interesting dis-
cussion has been spent upon a question which has great
demands on the sympathy and attention of this house—
the still continuing disturbances in Crete. lam hardly able
to subscribe to the proposition that grievances in the
island of Candia have not any concern whatever in the
production of the recent insurrection.' On a former occa-
sion I ventured to express a hope that, when her Majesty's
Government laid papers on this subject on the table, those
papers would show to the house and the country that the
Ottoman Government had fulfilled its engagements— I do
not say its written or literal engagements, but its moral
and substantial engagements—to Europe, in regard to its
Christian subjects, which were contained in what is known
as the Humayouu of 1856. I am not able to say, from read-
ing these papers, that those engagements have boon ful-
filled. If the noble lord (Stanley) were able to state, as a
Minister of the Crown, with his more extended and ac-
curate knowledge, that Turkey has on the whole com-
pletely and fully complied with the engagements into which
she has entered, I should receive that assurance with great
satisfaction ; because upon that depends the question
Rhothcr :te7 put thm ut am responsibility of these isuieet-
able occurrences in Crete lies at the door of the persons
who have been themselves immediately concerned in the
outbreak, or at the door of Government. After the speech
to-night of my hon. friend (Mr. Layard) I do not think it
can be said that the rights and claims of the Turkish Go-
vernment are insufficiently urged or insufficiently appre-
hended in this house. The case of Turkey as against
Crete has been better stated by him than in the documents
of the Turkish Government itself in the blue books;
but I should not hesitate to admit that along with
those grievances which turn mainly on the non-exe-
cution of the Humayoun— assuming such grievances to
exist—there has been the disposition to give scope and
effect to the strong Hellenic feeling which pervades the
majority of the population. I therefore feel what has
been stated with great force by my hon. friend (Mr. La-
yard) and the hon. gentleman (Mr. Gregory), namely, the
extraordinary responsibility which is incurred by those
who in this house deliver sentiments which, going forth—
it may be in a garbled form—to other countries, may be
made the means not only of fomenting disturbances, but,
where they have already arisen, of encouraging the pro-
longation of efforts which, whether right or wrong, arise
out of questions with which wo have but little direct con-
cern. For my part I will not venture to say a word which
can have such an effect. But I may state that, so far as
regards the stipulations of the Ilumayouu, wo are not only
entitled to advise Turkey in connection with her own in-
terests, and appeal to her mercy, her humanity, her sense
of dignity, and her desire to be considered a civilised
European Power, but we are entitled to say to her, that the
fulfilment of these stipulations is a matter of moral faith
and obligation which she is absolutely bound to obey, and
that, failing to fulfil them, she must undergo disgrace in
the eyes of the civilised world. Beyond that, I must say,
in justice to the noble lord (Stanley), that he, so far as I
am able to gather the policy of the Government, has been
directed by a spirit of discretion and fairness in the course
he has pursued throughout this matter. I entirely agree
that he was right in determining to enforce an observance
of the laws of neutrality with regard to Candia, even al-
though there might seem to be a. call of humanity the other
way. That call of humanity was a feeling which it was
his duty ;to repress, and he has done so. He was right
and wise in saying that he would not be responsible for

-any endeavour to separate Candia from Turkey ; but he
has also been wise in pointing out to Turkey, as ho has
done in the despatch of the 17th of January, that the true
policy of the Ottoman empire—the only policy by which
it can ever hope to maintain its power in Europe satisfac-
torily to itself, let alone what it may bo to others—is
that of doing full justice to its Christian sub-
jects, and allowing them to feel that, though under the
nominal sway cf a Mussulman Power, they are in the en-
joyment of perfect religious liberty. (Hear, hear.) I can-
not help adding that the conduct and policy pursued by
tko Ottoman Porte, after some brief delay, in the question
of the Danubian Principalities, may I hope become the
basis of that policy of that Government throughout its
European provinces. Tho difficulty that arises in Candia
may not be met by arrangements applicable elsewhere, be-
cause the circumstances are different; but I am quite sure
that from the firm fulfilment of her engagements we may
hope for the success of such a policy; because I trust we
are justified in saying that Turkey has sot an example of
what we may perhaps call her spontaneous, at any rate her
deliberate and conscientious, adoption of arrangements
with the Danubian Principalities, which tend to promise
in the future the existence of relations between those Prin-
cipalities and the Turkish Government as conducive to
the happiness of both as circum stances will permit. (Hear,
hear.)
Lord STANLEY said—lt is not my wish nor my duty
to take any part in the controversy on the merits and de-
merits of the Turkish and Greek Governments, nor am I
desirous of entering on the foreign policy which England
has in former times pursued. Every generation has its own
policy. It is not even now necessary for me to state the
course which the present Government have thought it
their duty to take. Two questions have arisen—one with

regard to Greece, and one with regard to Servia. As to the
latter my answer will be brief, but I hope it will not be
unsatisfactory. We have, after much deliberation and in
concert with the other Powers, pressed upon Turkey to
make such concessions to what appear to us the natural
and reasonable wishes of the people of Servia, as we hope
may servo to bring about a good understanding. We have
done that in the interests of the Turkish empire, because
it is impossible to doubt that a serious outbreak in Servia
at the present moment would be as great a misfortune as
could possibly befal the Turkish Government. We
have endeavoured to offer that advice in such a man-
ner as to leave to the Porte itself, to whom it most
properly belongs, the initiative making those concessions
which we consider necessary; because it is obvious they
would lose much of their grace and value if they seemed to
be made at the dictation of any foreign Power. The re-
presentations we have thought it our duty to address have
been made in a spirit of moderation and good sense—in a
a r
spirit fair, friendly, and conciliatory. (Rear, hear.) I hope,
t r has
correspondence not been i
s
the houseineffective
a s e e
agoing
therefore, that these representations will not bo wholly
Pthastitwivheiale h ns w
ee
on, and the negotiations still pending, it would not con-
duce to the objects we all have in view if the papers were
laid on the table. When the matter is settled I will pro-
duce them. As to the larger and more urgent question of
Crete, it is less necessary to explain the views of the Go-
vernment in detail, because they have been fully stated in
the papers on the table. The question has been asked,
what we consider the real origin of the insurrection. A
more difficult question it is impossible to put on answer. It
is very hard to get at the truth. The impartial witnesses
are few, and the statements from the two sides are not
merely divergent and conflicting, but absolutely and flatly
contradictory. Local grievances haw, to some extent, in-
duced it. The administration of Candia has been what we
consider a good one. What is the precise magnitude of
those local grievances I am utterly unable to answer. But
they have not been the sole causes. From the moment it
became a serious disturbance, it has been a movement,
not for the redress of local abuses, but of a religious and
national character, in favour of total separation from
Turkish control. (Hoar, hear.) Such feelings were not
unnatural. The Hellenea—for no doubt the central
movement is in Greece—have seen success attending
other movements for nationality. They have seen Italy
made a nation and Germany to a great extent united; and
it is not unnatural they should think their time has come,
and the excitement has reacted uppn them. As to acts
of cruelty and barbarity, I am afraid there have been
many on both sides, and that it will always happen
where a country is semi-barbarous. Where there are
wars of religion and of race, it is impossible such acts of
atrocity • should not occur. I fear the blame must be equally
divided, but pass no judgment upon the matter. One must
not trust all native report from the interiorof Crete. These
scenes have been very seldom witnessed except by the com-
batants themselves, who are sot in a frame of mind to
send impartial reports. The story of women and children
being allured to the shore by Turkish vessels hoisting the
British flag and then fired upon is entirely denied. (Rear.)
It is not much worse than what happened in the Pincus—
the attack of the mob ou their own volunteers, because they
returned unsuccessful, in which several lives were lost and
injured.
men
Whatever acts of cruelty may have been com-
mitted by the irregular troops—and where Albanians are
employed these are sure to happen—there
is no evidence
that they have been sanctioned, or even tolerated, by the
Turkish Government. Prisoners who have fallen into the
hands of Turkish officers have been humanely treated.
After the indulgent criticism of the house on the policy of
the Government, any vindication is unnecessary. With
regard to the decision of the Government when requested
to send ships of war to take off the refugees, we never
made a decision with more reluctance ; but never with a
clearer conviction that it was right, and the only rational
course. It is impossible to know the eagerness with which
the slightest symptoms of an armed intervention of the
Western Powers was looked for by the insurgents; or the
readiness with which any act that could be distorted into
an act 9# intervention Tate caught up by them. (Rear) The

assistance desired would have been considered a symptom
of armed interference and would have prolonged ahopeless
struggle, and indirectly caused ten times the injury that has
been inflicted. (Hear, hear.) And there are such things as
duties of neutrality. No one would overstrain those duties
where humanitycomes into consideration. Still there is the
obligation. To send troops in the rearof an insurrection to
take off non-combatants, or the families of those in arms,
is to give aid and comfort to one of the belligerents, and it
is a breach of neutrality. (Hear, hear.) It would not be
allowed in a war between two strong Powers; and we
should not have one rule for stronger and another for
weaker Powers. (Hear, hear.) On the general question
there were only three alternatives. One was to let the
whole matter alone, and carry out the principle of non-in-
tervention in the strictest and most literal sense. That
may be dismissed at once. Another was to advise the ces-
sion of the island to Greece. The state of the Greek king-
dom is not at present satisfactory. That alone should not
have stood in the way. The Greeks are a most intelligent
and patriotic nation, who labour under immense difficulties,
and have had a very limited time for exercising their un-
fettered energies ; and we should not bear too hardly upon
them. But the advice would not have been listened to by
the Porte. The Porte would not surrender any part of
its dominions except under coercion, which was not the
policy of this or any other European Power to employ. If
wegave advice to the Turks, we must look at the question
from a Turkish as well as a Cretan point of view. The
Porte might fairly say whether or not it would be an advan-
tage to be rid of this one disaffected province—the prece-
dent would be almost fatal to the Empire ; because if in-
surrection were to be the signal of a recommendation to
cede a province, there would in time be further disaffec-
tion and dismemberment of the empire. The right hon.
gentleman opposite hinted that the advice might have been
more strongly pressed, and mentioned the treaty rights of
1856. Ido not deny the treaty obligations. But in re-
commending a separate administration for Candia we were
asking a great deal more than could be claimed under the
treaty—(hear)—and could be offered only as advice. There
was a double danger, that of advising what was only to
satisfy our consciences, without caring about the result ;
and that of pressing for that for which the Porte would
hold us responsible. It would not have been in our power or
right to do more than we have done. In the present state
of .n ;cm c it is impnc.cible to form pia no of c...-
tingency. The Turkisk Empire is in a state of transition.
Advice good now may not be good five or six years hence.
But we shall watch carefully the chain of events; and I
hope the house will believe our sympathy with the Chris-
tian races is not less real and sincere, because we have not
given a semblance of encouragement to a hopeless insur-
rection, or to compromise ourselves or them by precipitate
and premature proceedings. (Cheers.)
The motion was withdrawn.

The House then adjourned.

Metropolltan Board of Works.

The usual meeting of the Metropolitan Board o
Works was held yesterday at the office, in Spring
gardens ; Sir John Thwaites in the chair.

FINANCE.

The financial statement was presented, which
showed that the cash balances in the hands of the
treasurer amounted to £548,971 16s. Bd. ; cheques
not presented, £46,382 19s. 2d. Payments were
ordered to the amount of £19,745 7s. Bd.
NEW IMPROVEMENT BILL OF THE CITY OF LONDON.
A report was brought up from the Works and
Improvement Committee recommending that a peti-
tion be presented against the preamble of the Lon-
don City Improvement Rates Bill, promoted by the
Corporation of the City of London.
Mr. S. TAYLOR moved the adoption of the report,
which was seconded.

Mr. H. L. TAYLOR opposed the motion, contend-
ing that as the bill sought to raise a rate of 6d. in
the pound from the inhabitants exclusively of the
city of London for improvements within the city
this board ought not to interfere. He moved as an
amendment to the report of the committee—" That
it is both inexpedient and improper on the part of
this board to oppose by petition the bill introduced
into Parliament by the city of London for improve-
ments intended to be effected exclusively within
the city of London."
Mr. Alderman STONE seconded the amendment.
_ _

Mr. NEWTON said he could see no reason what-
ever why the city of London should be excepted
from the general rating which was levied over the
other parts of the metropolis, for if it were to be
adopted he could not see any valid reason why the
parish he represented should not enjoy the same
privilege. In his opinion they were approaching the
period when the city of London should become an
integral portion of the metropolis, and the argument
that Mr. Taylor had used as to granting the city of
London powers to raise rates for their own improve-
ments would be equally good for a separation from
this Board altogether.
Mr. CoLuNsoN said it the city of London were to
be allowed the powers they sought there would be
nothing but discord throughout the other parishes of
the metropolis.
The CHAIRMAN remarked that the city of Loudon
intended to oppose the Improvement Bill promoted
by this Board, and therefore they were almost com-
pelled to oppose that of the city of London. He
trusted there would be no disturbance of the arrange-
ment come to in 1856, and that the bill would not be
sanctioned, by which the city of London sought to
exempt themselves from charges which all other parts
of the metropolis were liable.
Mr. DixoN supported the amendment.
Mr. ELT said he believed the city of London had
such power in the House of Commons as would
ingthat of their bill, and if this Board
did notrcourse would smooth the way
asencduep
facilitatethoeposse it pan
the passing of their own bill for a
similar object.
Mr. EVANS said he looked upon the application
of the city of London in reality as one for separation
from the rest of the metropolis. On this question the
arguments of the hon. member for the city of London
(Mr. H. L. Taylor) were, as usual, very cogent, and
he limited himself to the question of improvements
within the city of London, but he never hinted at
what would be the real effect, and that was its sepa-
ration from the rest of the metropolis. The hon.
member for the city of London might feel confident
that the House of Commons would favour his views,
but he (Mr. Evans) thought he was too sanguine in
his expectations. The question -was not as he had
put it, but it was whether this should be the first
step towards the separation of the city of London
from the rest of the metropolis.
Mr. SAVAGE said that this first step for dissolving
the union was so manifestthat he should vote against
the amendment.

Mr. CARPMAEL said they had, then, a new case of
the North against the South, and with respectto the
union which had existed since 1866, it was proposed
that the city of London should be separated, and no

longer form a part of it. Now he (Mr. Carpmael)
had invariably supported the city of London in
their applications for money for improvements, as
being a most important part of the metropolis, to
which everybody necessarily went to do their busi-
ness in it. It was then proposed to sever that
portion, which he (Mr. Carpmael) looked upon as
the commencement of the destruction of the whole
union, and that the present united states should no
longer exist in the metropolis. Happily they did not
entertain any warlike feelings towards each other,
as had unfortunately been the case with their friends
over the water ; but this was a question that ought
to be dealt with at an early period, as bills were
about to be brought into Parliament for the purpose
of defining municipal boundaries ; but at the same
time he should vote against the city of Londonbeing
separated from them until the other bill had been
discussed and settled by Parliament.
The CIL&IRMAN put the question, and the amend-
ment was negatived by a majority of 24 to 4.
•
BARRIERS IN PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES..

A report was brought up from the Works and
Improvements Committee, recommending that a
petition be presented by the Board to Parliament to
repeal any authority given to private persons to
erect gates or barriers across streets or thoroughfares
so as to obstruct the traffic therein, in cases where

the lighting, cleansing, and paving of such streets or
thoroughfares is paid for out of the public rates.
Mr. SHAW said the same question was brought to
the notice of the Metropolitan Board three weeks
ago. He could understand where a private person
paid the expense of keeping a street in order, he
should be allowed to exercise his own discretion in
making it private, but when they saw the numerous
accidents caused by obstructions in the streets com-
pelling traffic to take only particular grooves, and
other nuisances which those barriers promoted, he
could not readily apprehend why the public should
be subjected to those serious inconveniences. There
were streets wholly occupied by persona of doubtful

character, because the privacy those barriers created
invited persons of a certain class into those locali-
ties, which were a positive nuisance ; and only last
year upwards of 2,000 persons were killed and
maimed in The overcrowded streets by vehicles and
horses, and it was too much to expect that these bar-
rier nuisances would be retained at the expense of
the ratepayers, to the danger of the life and limb of
the public.

The motion was then agreed to.
FINSBURY AND SOUTHWARK PARKS.

A report was brought up from the Works and
Improvements Committee, submitting estimate for
lodges, entrance-gates, fencing, roadways, and
drainage of Finsbury and Southwark Parks, and re-
commending that the officers be directed to prepare
the necessary plans and specifications, with a view
to advertisements being issued for tenders for the
execution of the words, such tenders to be received
on the 18th March next.

After a short discussion this subject was referred
back to the committee for further consideration.

IMPROVEMENTS NEAP. THE HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.

Mr. WHITE moved :—" That it be referred to the
Works and General Purposes Committee to consider
the propriety of obtaining the surface of the strip
of land lately forming a portion of St. Margaret's
Churchyard, and purchased by the Metropolitan
District Railway Company for constructing their
line, with a view to the improvement of the line
of thoroughfare from Victoria-street to Palace-
yard and Westminster-bridge."
The motion was put and agreed to, and the rest
of the business being disposed of, the Board ad-
journed.