The Sun.
London, England, 1861-07-19 00:00:00

REGIMENTS.

Mr. TORRENS asked the Secretary of State for India
whether any reply had been received from the Governor-
General of India to the fifth paragraph of the Secretary of
State's letter of the 22d of December, 1860, relating to cer-
thin claims on the late State of Oude, and, if not, whether
he had any objection peremptorily to call the Governor-
G eneral's early attention to the subject ; also, whether it
was intended to place the officers of her Majesty's Indian
Artillery Regiments, who are now on staff and civil em-
ploy. on the seconded list, as was the case with the officers
of the Royal Artillery when so employed.
Sir C. WOOD said that no answer had yet been received
from India relating to the claims on the State of Oude
The officers of the Indian Artillery Regiments would be
placed in the same position as all the other officers of the
Indian army.
MR. GLADSTONE AND THE DUKE OF MODENA.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER wished to
make an explanation with regard to a speech which he had
made on a former occasion with reference to an eminent
personage—the Duke of Modena—and matters connected
with the Italian Government. Within the last ten days
he had received a communication from the Marquis of
Normanby, wishing him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
to withdraw the charge he had made against the adminis-
tration of the Duke of Modena. The charge was, that
while the Duke of Modena forbade the application of the
law to execute persons convicted of capital offences, if
those persons were under 21 years of age, he altered the
law in the case of a person named Granai. He (Mr. Glad-
stone) did not intend to convey to the house the idea that
that young man was executed, hut that he was brought within
the scopo of the law and awaiting capital punishment. He
believed that that person was not executed. (Hear, hear.)
But as far as the evidence in his (Mr. Gladstone's) pos-
session went, it appeared that a person of that name
was sentenced to the galleys for life. He (Mr. Glad-
stone) would be extremely sorry to have used words
to signify that he was executed, for the most rigorous
accuracy should be exercised in statements of this kind.
He did no more than state what had appeared in public
documents. The Marquis of Normanby had asked him to
withdraw the principal part of the charge, that the Duke of
Modena had, by ex post facto law, declared persons liable to
capital punishment. Now the evidence in support of that
charge was too abundant. In October, 1857, the Duke of
Modena issued a decree establishing in his capital a state of
siege.
Mr. DISRAELI—I rise to order. There is no question
before the house, and it would be much more convenient if
the right hon. gentleman would take advantage of the op-
portunities which will be afforded him to-morrow for enter-
ing into an argument on this subject. (Hear, hear, from the
Opposition.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I have
taken this course after consulting authorities. lam simply
stating facts explanatory of what has fallen from me on a
previous occasion. (Hear, hear, from the Ministerial side.)
Mr. DISRAELI—The right hon. gentleman is referring
to documents not in the possession of hon. membere, nor in
my possession. Ido not think it right to found a state-
ment on documents not accessible to hon. members. I
as sure the right hon. gentleman that it is with pain 1 in-
terrupt
sueshtiimon should
; bu b
but
emattersfairly
and
ofthfiesllkyinendtietreisdin
te. I desirablethat
the hope,
ttphhe
eerrf
aeufnao
irttteye,
matter before
hhb
eaa
fttwill rightffu
sehredo.ne
d.
(bHgiemenatrrl ma n will take the op -
The SPEAKER was understood to concur forin bringingththis
re.
commendation.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER expressed
his acquiescence, and the matter dropped.
HIGHWAYS BILL.

Sir G. C. LEWIS, in answer to aquestion from
Deedes, said the Highways Bill would be proceeded wMitrh.
on Tuesday next.
BANK RUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY BILL.
On the motion for taking into consideration the Lords'
amendments to this bill,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the bill projected
great improvements in the existing law, and having
passed the House of Commons, was sent to the other house,
where certain alterations were made in it. The bill contained
some cardinal points, such as the chief judge's office, credi-
tor's assignees, and the paying of salaries. These were
amendments on the bill of last session. The Lords struck out
those amendments. He believed that if those amendments
were omitted the bill would be deprived of the machinery
most important fer its effectual working. He would there-
fore strenuously endeavour to have those clauses restored.
The objection to the appointment of a chief judge was, that