The Sun.
London, England, 1866-02-24 00:00:00

THE LETTER CARRIERS AND THE POLICE.

Mr. FAWCETT asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer
whether he thought the Postmaster-General had come to
a just and wise decision in refusing the application which
the letter carriers made for an advance in their wages in
consequence of the rise in house rent end in the price of
provisions ; and whether these same considerations had
not induced the magistrates of many counties to raise the
salaries of the police ? •
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was of
opinion that the decision of the Postmaster-General was
judicious, because it had not been arrived at without the
fullest inquiry. With respect to the magistrates and the
police, he did not think that it showed any conclusive
evidence as to the course the Government ought to take
with respect to the letter carriers.

desirous that there should be a communication on railways
between passenger and guard and guard and engine driver.
He had seen the chairmen of some of the large railways,
and had impressed on them the necessity of such an ar-
rangement. He could not give an assurance that the
Government would bring in a bill with rtspeet to the
matter.

DEEP SEA FISHERY.
On the motion for going into committee of supply,
Mr. S. CAVE rose to call attention to the report of the
Deep Sea Fishery Commission, and asked the President of
the Board of Trade whether her Majesty's Government
intended to carry into effect the recommendation thereof
respecting the deep sea oyster fishery.

Mr. DU CANE said the subject was one of great import-
ance, and he hoped the Government would give a satisfac-
tory answer to the question.

Mr. D. GRIFFITH inquired whether the Chancellor of
the Exchequer was aware that certain railways had com-
menced carrying newspapers along the whole of their lines
by means of an adhesive stamp of the price of a half-
penny for each transmission ; and if so, whether it would
not be expedient that the charge on such arricles by the
Post-office should be reduced to the same amount.

Mr. GATHORNE HARDY drew notice to a recent de-
cision of the House of Lords on the rating of the Mersey
Docks, and asked the President of the Poor-law Board
questions as to the conduct of the Board in consequence of
that decision ; and also as to the intention of the Govern-
ment with respect to the law of rating generally, and espe-
cially as it affected charitable institutions, such as schools,
hospitals, drc.
Mr. VILLIERS, in reply, justified the decision of the
law lords, which was, he said, strictly in accordance with
the provisions of the statute. The Government were not
prepared to bring forward any fresh legislation on the sub-
ject; and if relief was required in individual cases, it must
be sought in other ways.
Mr. LABOUOIIERE called attention to the inadequacy
of our neutrality law to enable England to fulfil its inter-
national obligations towards foreign countries, andpointed
out cases in which inconvenience had arisen from the pre-
sent state of things.

Mr. ROEBUCK controverted the positions take up by
the last speaker, and urged that from the manner in which
the ships that had been used in the service of belligerents
towards whom England stood in the position of a neutral
had been fitted out, piece-meal, it was absolutely impos-
sible to bring them within the power of the law. The
case of America had been alluded to as one in which
this country had done much injury owing to the de-
fects of the law. He would only at once avow that all
his own sympathies were with the Southern States in
heir noble struggle. The Northern Power had conquered.
He wished them joy of their conquest. He begged, how-
ever, to say that the Americans were not yet a united
people, and for his own part he hoped they never would
be so.

Mr. LAING having made a few remarks, was followed
by Mr. SANDFORD and Mr. LEFETRE.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the present
topie was one of an equally important and difficult cha-
racter. Ho reminded the house that some years ago the
British Government suggested to the Cabinet of the United
States that it might be advisable mutually to revise their
Foreign Enlistment Acts; but the latter threw cold water
on the idea, considering that their own enactment required
no alteration, since it was quite adequate to meet every
occasion. He maintained that the British law, as it now
stood, was equal in all its provisions to that of the United
States, and argued from that fact that there was no neces-
sity 'for any alteration at present. He could not help
thinking that, when all the heat and irritation of the late
struggle should have subsided, the United States Govern-
ment, and the people of that country generally, would see
in the conduct of England an earnest and an honest in-
tention to maintain her neutrality.
The topic then dropped.

General DUNNE briefly referred to the report of the
committee on Irish taxation.

Lord STANLEY said he had been struck with the
enormous number of projected metropolitan railway
schemes for the present session, which involved a capital
of no less than £20,000,000, Now it was impossible that
any committee could do justice to so vast a number of lines.
He therefore thought that there ought to be instituted, as
in a previous year, some preliminary inquiry into the sub-
ject. The list could then be weeded, those which were
the most urgent and important being selected, and the rest
could stand over to another session.

Mr. M. GIBSON saw no reason for any- exceptional
course being pursued this session. The circumstances of
the period referred to when the list was weeded were
different to those which prevailed at present. Taking into
account the vast increase of the trade of the mighty me-
tropolis, and the number of persons absolutely driven out
of the City to live in the suburbs, no oue could be asto-
nished at the number of projectors who came forward ask-
ing not money from the State, but permission to invest
their own capital in what it was conceived would turn out
remunerative enterprises. Ile would,
.however, be only
too happy to confer with Lord Stanley in seeing how much
could be done for the public good. Reverting to the ques-
tion of Mr. Cave, in the early part of the evening, the
right hon. gentleman complimented the Commissioners on
their Deep Sea Fishery Report. That document was now
under careful consideration, and in all probability some
measure would be introduced founded upon it. It had
been forwarded to the French Government, but it would
require careful deliberation More giving an opinion as to
the expediency of dissolving the Convention now existing
with that power. In reference to the statement which had
gone forth that the supply of fish was rapidly decreasing,
the labours of the Commission had brought out the fact
that no human ingenuity was able to produce any appre-
ciable effect on the treasures of the deep for purposes of
food.

Mr. AYRTON having alluded to the now railway

schemes.

The SPEAKER suggested that it would be for the
convenience of the house if hon. members would debate
one of the topics before the house at a time.
Mr. H. LEWIS desiderated the rejection of all schemes
which were only designed for the benefit of promoters and
capitalists, and the passing of all which were really
designed for the public benefit.

Alter a few words from Mr. 'WHALLEY, the topic dropped.
Mr. \VATKIN asked if any and what representations
had been made by her Majesty's Government to the Go-
vernment of the United States in reference to the Fenian
organisation in America ; and more especially as to the
employment of United States officers, the issue of bonds
of the so-called Irish Republic, and the threats made to
levy war upon the dominions of her Majesty by that orga-

nisation ; and moved for copies of all papers relating to

the subject. The hon. gentleman quoted from documents
published in New York and in this country to prove the
terms of his question. lie then went on to say that,
Fenianism had no root in the British possessions, and that
it was largely owing to the proceedings in America that
any sympathy with the cause had been aroused in Ireland.
What he wanted to know was whether such conduct was
in accordance with the law of the United States.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—After
having, in reply to previous questions, stated that railway
companies conveying newspapers in the manner mentioned
by the hon. member for Devizes had not the expenses of
collection and distribution ; and with regard to Irish rail-
ways, where a small amount of capital was invested, the
English standard would not apply—proceeded to remark
upon the question submitted by the lion. member for Stock-
port. He said, as far as we are concerned, there are few
papers on this subject that could be produced. My hon.
friend, anticipating that a reason would be asked of him
for the discussion he introduced, stated as his reason
that the people of the United States were an outspoken
people, and that we were an outspoken people also. I
entirely concur with my hon. friend, and I think that ulti-
mate publicity and free discussion, whether in this house
or elsewhere in the country, form the most characteristic
and also the most valuable and important feature of our
habits. At the same time it does appear to me that con-
siderations of time and of place, and of the order of pro-
ceeding and considerations of prudence and of policy, bear
very strongly not only against the general principle an-
nounced by my hon. friend, but on'the question whether a
particular thing should or should not be said at a particular
time and place; and I confess that if I were asked what
useful object my right hon. friend anticipates from com-
mencing the discussion of this subject at the present mo-
ment, I should feel it difficult to give an answer. I would
ask my hon. friend to recollect, considering the tone of his
remarks, the position which England usually and habitually
stands in the eyes of foreign countries—that the proceed-
ings of English citizens are constantly the subject of com-
plaint abroad, that imputations are constantly thrown upon
the English Government of a disinclination to interfere
with these proceedings, and that we plead against these
imputations the freedom of our laws and our habits, and
the extremo inexpediency and imprudence of attempts on
the part of the Government at measures of repression cn
behalf and in the interest of any foreign Government, un-
less those measures of repression are founded upon facts of
a character perfectly notorious, or certain to be attended
with success. I am bound to say I do not think there was
in the speech of my hon. friend a sufficient amount of
athilvance for those considerations on the part of the Go-
vernment of tho United States. Did my hon. friend really
suppose that, making these statements from newspapers for
the first time to the public and in this house without any
previous communication to the Government, it would be
in my power to follow him to identify the sources from
which he drew them, which in various instances he did
not state, and to show in what degree, upon careful exami-
nationmade matters of represe-astes? they
of each of these could or could not be
tetot
fousn
alrt o the United States Go-
vernment
thatifm.e
aceto
mamainhtoauinnntdlal it does appear to me, sir,
iesnctharge of international
butut. r ayl
and tho s ei f
duties affecting not the -Governmd
who fill public situations in any civilised country,
teat ting the
goodthere
faith
h of statementsaforeignto
Government,
madeve
rn m apparentlyen4ts ihardlyn
oo.much
to ask that these statements should first be placed in the
hands of the representatives of our own Government,
order that they may be made the subjects of communica-
tion in
between the two Governments, and that either one
may be made responsible for declining to act upon them,
or that the Government of which complaint is made may

be made responsible for declining to act on the remon-
strance. The hon gentleman has made statements which
are in a great measure vague as regards the point at issue.
It may be true, and is unhappily too true, that Fenianism
in the main, and as to the means by which it is supported,
is a thing imported from America. About that there can
be no doubt ; but that is not all which should be shown to
the American Government in asking them either to put
down Fenianisni, or show why they do not put it down.
In his admirable speech in respect to the demand that we
should submit the case of the Alabama to arbitration, the
Attorney-General said we were requested to hold that the
Government were responsible for putting down or prevent-
ing that which they cannot always put down and prevent.
There are, however, two things in the main which we
have a right to expect from theAmericanGovernment. One
is, that when American laws have been broken they should
promptly vindicate those laws on behalf of England. The
hon. gentleman points out that those laws were promptly
vindicated in the ease of Spain. But that was the case of
the purchase and equipment of one or more ships for an
expedition, and was a thing above board, lying on the sur-
face of affairs and in the light of day. It is not enough for
my hon. friend to say that the Fenians held a congress in
Philadelphia, and collected so much money in so many
years, in order to raise the presumption that the Ame-
rican Government has neglected its duties. He ought to
show that such proceedings have been notorious—(hear,
hear)—not notorious in the way things depending on
public rumour are notorious, but notorious in the way
and in such a shape as can be made the subject of judicial
investigation. (Hear, hear.) My hon. friend has stated no
facts of that kind. I have heard nothing from him of any
acts done in America, and in the face of American law,
which it was the duty of the American Government to have
repressed. My hon. friend speaks of an interview he had
with President Johnson, but I do not apprehend he raises
from that an inference adverse to the United States, for he
paid a high and just compliment, if I may presume to say
so, to President Johnson, as a man anxious to do all in his
power to maintain friendly relations and the obligations of
international law. I stated that there were two cases in
which we might expect the United States Government to
act—the one where an offence had been committed against
the American law. Well, no proof has been advanced that
any such offence has been committed, and therefore we
have no ground of complaint under that head. The other
case is that in the event of an attempt on the part of
those misguided men against any portion of the Queen's
dominions we have a right to expect that the Government
of the United States will put down any such attempt. But
no such case happened ; and, therefore, upon that ground
too, we have no right to action on the part of the American
Government. However, there is also the case of persons
in the public employment. The hon. member says that 10
American officers were members of the Fenian Congress ;
but we do not know what was done, and we have no
knowledge of any dealings in which those officers took
part. The hon. member admits that General Sweeney
has been dismissed from the service of the United
States, and therefore, so far as General Sweeney is con-
cerned, there is no title to complain of the United States
Government. I have no more to say of the particular
allegations of my hon. friend beyond this, that where
they are vague they had much better not have been pro-
duced; where they are definite they ought first to have
been placed in the hands of the responsible Minister of the
Crown. It is obviously impossible that on being intro-
duced into this house without notice they can be properly
and satisfactorily dealt with. With regard to the question
what representations had been made on the subject to the
Government of the United States, I have to answer that
we have not made any such representations. We have
seen cause to deplore much that is taking place in Ame-
rica, but we have had no cause that would have justified
our making representations to the Government of the
country on the subject. My hon. friend says it is in vain
to act in Ireland unless we deal with the evil at its source.
These are very big words; to deal with an evil at its source
in the dominions of a foreign power, perhaps involving
measures for the ascertainment of the facts which we
would not for one moment tolerate or hear of in our coun-
try. (Hear, hear.) Sir, we have confidence in the govern-
ment of the United States. We believe it will fulfil its in-
ternational obligations to the best of its power. We have
confidence further in the public opinion of America, and as
far as we are informed the public opinion of America, like
the public opinion of England and Ireland, condemns the
Fenian proceedings. (Cheers.) Let us have some trust
and reliance in the power which the country possesses to
preserve order in every portion of her Majesty's dominions
—in the dignity and character which never reach a point
until they are joined with patience and endurance, uncon-
nected with the suspicion of weakness, and, on the con-
trary, impressed firmly with a consciousness of strength.
That is the course which I trust we may be permitted to
take. Do not let us needlessly or prematurely sow the
seeds of mistrust. We do not for one moment conceal that
the seed of this mischief lies in America, and that the ac-
tive agency has come from there ; but, though it is still in
America, we do not believe it to be of America. It is not
toe genuine fruit of American sentiment, or a general re-
presentation of the American mind. We believe it to be
condemned there as here, and, believing that in the total
absence of all evidence to the contrary, let us trust to a
friendly Government, which has not as yet failed in its
duty, and which we feel will not fail. The right hon
gentleman then resumed his seat, and Mr. Oliphant was
about to address the house when

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER again rose
and said—l must frankly own that Ido believe it is for the
public interest that the handling of this subject—and it has
been deeply in our Minds—should bo left entirely with the
executive Government.

Mr. OTWAY insisted that the facts of Fenian progress
in New York were patent to every one, and maintained that
the Government bad abundant means on which to remon-
strate with that of America.

Sir L. OLIPHANT deprecated any interference by way
of remonstrance as calculated to do more harm than good.
It was worth remembering that " people in glass houses
should not throw stones." England must first show a
clean bill of health in such matters as those referred to be-
fore she attempted to teach others.
Mr. YORKE made a few brief observations.
Mr. WALPOLE trusted with the Chancellor of the
Exchequer that this conversation would not be allowed to
go further. The question was one of the most grave, diffi-
cult, and embarrassing character, and whatever opinions
they might form of Irish affairs as connected with Ame-
rica the present was not the period for opening up the dis-
cussion.

Mr. T. HUGHES alluded to the great soreness which
existed in the United States towards England, and which
he attributed to the fact that somehow the English Go-
vernment had allowed vessels to get clear from their coasts
to prey on American commerce, and also to the subsequent
refusal of the British Government to submit tho whole
question to an impartial tribunal.
Mr. WATKIN withdrew his motion, and the subject

dropped.
The house then wont into Committee of Supply.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that
the sum of £30,000 bo granted to her Majesty for the mar-
riage portion of her Royal Highness the Princess Helena
Augusta Victoria.
The vote was agreed to, and the house resumed.
The Public Offices (Site) Bill was read a second time.
The Cattle Plague Bill as amended was considered.
The house then adjourned.

CUBAN AND BRAZILIAN SLAVERY.--The New
York Times, alluding to the influence of the pro-
gress of freedom in America, says :—The bar-
baric institution has a very feeble hold of life in
Cuba. In the mother country there is an agita-
tion for its abolition, and many of the foremost men
of the island, and not a few of its planters, are in
favour of free labour. The pro-slavery leaders
there, however, use the same arguments against
emancipation formerly so powerful in this country
—that the negroes would not work—that all labour
would be disorganised—that the plantations would
go to ruin, and that Cuba would descend from its
position as a rich and productive isle to that of a
decayed and bankrupt country. The same argu-
ments are used in Brazil ; and indeed they have
served their purpose in defence of slavery and serf-
dom throughout the different countries of the world
for thousands of years. They continually need
new and practical refutation ; and this country, we
trust, will furnish their latest refutation. We may
be sure that slavery will not last in Cuba two years,
nor in Brazil five, after our late Southern slaves
shall have shown that negro industry is not incom-
patible with negro freedom.
ADVERTISEMENT.} -Avoid medicines: they always aggra-
vate chronic complaints, but Du Barry's Delicious HealtE -
Restoring Revalenta Arabica Food, which yields three times
the nourishment of the bast meat, saves fifty times its cost
in other remedies, and invariably restores perfect digestion,
strong nerfrs, sound lungs, healthy liver, pure blood, re-
freshing sleep, functional regularity, and energy to the most
disordered or enfeebled. We extract a few out of 60,000
Cures :—Cure No. 58,216, of the Marchioness de Brehan,
of seven years' liver complaint, wastin; away, debility,
tier vousness, with a nervous palpitation all over, bad diges-
tion, constant sleeplessness, and the most intolerable nervous
agitation.—Cure No. 1,771. Lord Stuart de Decies. Lord
Lieutenant of Waterford, of many years' dyspepsia.—No.
49,832. "Fifty years' indescribable agony from dyspepsia,
nervousness, asthma, cough, constipation, flatulen. y,
spasms. sickness, and vomiting.—Maria Jolly."—Cute No.
46,270. Mr. James Roberts, of Frimley, Surrey, of thirty
years' diseased lung,, spitting of blood, liver derange-
ment, and partial deafness.—Cure No. 47,121. Miss Elizabeth
Jacobs, of extreme nervousness, indigestion, gatherings, 101 l
spirits, and nervous fancies.—Cure No. 54,816. The Rev. Jae
T. Campbell, Fakenham, Norfolk, "of indigestion and torpi
dity of the liver, which had resiste 1 all medical treatment.'
In tins, 11b, 2s 9d ; 21b, 4s 6,1 ; 51b, Its ; 121 b, 22s ; 241 b,
40s.—Barry Da Barry and Co., No. 77, Regent-street, London ;
also Phillips, tea dialers, 8, King William-street ; likewise
at 61, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 49, Btshopsgate-
street Within ; 63, 150, and 298, Oxford-street ; 330, Strand ;
54, Upper Baker-street; 103, Tottenham-court-road; 98,
Upper-street, Islington, N.; Harvey, Notting-hill; Close
Brothers, 65, High-street ; and Stubbs, Queen's-terrace, St.
John's-wood. London ; and all respectable grocers and che-
mists.—Beware of spurious imitations.