The Sun.
London, England, 1857-02-13 00:00:00

TIIE SUN, LON DON, FRIDAY EV E"NING, FEBRUARY 13, 1857.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—(YESTER.DAY.)
SECONDARY PUNISEIMENTS.
The Marquis of SALISBURY rose to move
for the appointment of a select committee to
consider the question of secondary punishments. The
noble. earl entered at some length into the stihject, and
concluded by moving the appointment of the committee
of Which be bad given notice.
The moicti was negatived without a division.
The Select Committee on the Second Report of the
Statute Law Commission was named and appointed.
Their lordships adjourned at half-past seven..

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY.)
SIR R. PEEL'S LECTURE.

Mr. STAFFORD.—I rise to ask thJ hon. baronet the
member for Tamworth whether tha report of a speech
of his, made on the 7th of January, at Saltby, near
Birmingham, which appeared in the daily journals, be
correct, especially those passages which referred to the
Grand Duke Constantine of Russia, M. de Morny, and
the Prince de Ligne ?
Sir R. PEEL—My hon. friend has asked me a

question, and I hope the house will allow me to say a
few words in Explanation. (Hear, hear.) It is said
that a has been "arranged"—and the word is a heavy

one—to put a question to me whether a speech reported
to have been delivered by me at Saltby, and reported in
the daily journals, is correct ? Now, I do not think,
perhaps, that this is quite the tribunal in which I ought
to be called to account for expressions used in another
place, and totally unconnected with the business of
this house. (Rear, hear.) At the same time lam
quite ready to accept the challenge of the honourable
gentleman, and I am quite prepared to give him
every facility in obtaining the most accurate information
on this most important subject. (A. laugh.) The hon.
gentleman asks me whether I delivered the speech at
Saltby which appeared in the daily journals. I beg to
say that [ did deliver that speech as the guest of the
hon. member for Adderley—(laughter)—for North Staf-
fordshire. He invited me to-attend that meeting on the
occasion of a jollification (laughtei), and I addressed that
meeting. I admit that lam not in the habit of reading
reports of speeches of mine after they are delivered. I
generally rest satisfied with the favourable impression
that I produce at the time. (Laughter.) It is, therefore,
rather difficult for me at this distance of time to plsdge
myself to the exact accuracy of every word that appears
in that report. I believe I spoke for nearly two hours
and a half without notes, so that it is rather difficult for
me to say whether that report is precisely correct. But
this I am prepared to say, that such is the ability, the
acknowledged ability, and impartiality with which the
leading journals report the proceedings of public meet-
ings that I am quite prepared t) accept the entire
responsibility of every single sentence, except a particu-
lar phrase, which I do not think I used, but which if I
had used I should have been equally prepared to accept
the entire responsibility of. Bat I am sure that the
house, as a great deal has been said about this speech,
will give me ten minutes for a few remarks on it. (gear.)
I shall be very gild indeed to offer some explanation, as
my phrases have been tortured a good deal from their
true meaning, and a meaning has been given to them that
I never intended to convey. I did address the rneetirg at
Saltby, and, as a great deal of comment has been made
on my words, it will perhaps be right, as I occupy a

public situation, to put them in their true and proper
light. (Ilear, hear.) I am Bony, and I do regret
that any inconvenience should have arisen from any

txpressions that may have
sfallen from me, and which
have been misinterpreted on that occasion. It is

very far from my wish, and I think I may say
from my nature—and I am known to many members

of this house—to cause unnecessary pain to any one.

:General cheering.) But these sentences have been very

greatly twisted ; and, first, with reference to the Count
de Morny, the Grand Duke Constantine, and the Prince
de Ligne. (Hear.) As regards the Count de Morny,
I absolutely repudiate having said anything about him
which might not have been said by any gentleman with

reference—to his friends or acquaintances. (Much
laughter.) I said that he was le plus grand speculateur

de l'Europe. (Cheers and laughter.) Now, I did not
intend to imply anything detrimental to his honourable

character—(continued laughter)—and immediately on
my arrival in town, when I heard that these expressions

bad been noticed, I wrote to Count de Morny to say
that certainly envy and malice had done their best to
twist these expressions of mine into something odious
to him, but that I repudiated saying a single word

against his character or the position he occupied.
Now, I could not say more. (cheers.) As regards

the Grand Duke Constantine, that is another mat-
ter. I certainly said that the Grand Duke Constan-
tine did not quite impress me with the feeling of a
"frank and open-hearted sailor." (A. laulh.) I

said that ; but the words were not mine ; they
were used by the gallant admiral sitting there (pointing
to Sir Charles Napier, a►nid much laughter). I never

said one word against the Grand Duke Constantine, or

any other member of the Royal family of that country.
On the contrary, when I said that he did not give me
tae impression of being "a frank and open-hearted

sailor," I meant that he gave me the impression of being

a man of great powers of mind. (Roars of laughter.)
What I intended to convey was, that he was not inertly

a simple sailor—(continued laughter)—but a man of
greater grasp of mind. (Great laughter in which Sir C.
Napier heartily joined.) As regards the Prince de Ligne,
I accept the responsibility of every phrase that I used.

I certainly did say—l should be sorry to cause any
unnecessary pain to any one—but I was talking in a
familiar way, and I did use the expression that he

was as stiff and starched as the frill of Queen Riza,

beth." (A laugh.) I cannot accept the responsibility
of every word in the report. I see my hor. friend
opposite (Mr. Adderley) who was present, and Lord
Lyttleton was also present, andl appeal to him to say
whether a single word fell from my lips that might not
have found an echo and expression from the most
straight-laced gentleman in this house. (Laughter.) All
I can say is that if, in the opinion of the hon. gentleman
who may have considered this question—if, in the at•
tempt, the innocent attempt, I made to paint a few light
and airy sketches of character—(laughter)—tl, as Pope
said, " ho!cl the mirror up to nature"—(continued laugh-
ter)—to "catch the manners living as they rise"—(much
laughter)—if I have erred in the good opinion of those
whose good opinion I honour and value, and whose
judgment has weight, I beg to say, on this public occa-
sion, as an earnest of the sincerity of my feelings, that,
though I do not feel that I did err, still, if I did err in
their opinion, I now offer the most ample expression of
regret—(cheers)—and that is the most fitting amende
honorable that I can offer. (Cheering from all sides of
the House.)

THE " SECRET TREATY."

as a
Au3l

Lord PALMERSTON—I wish to set myself right with
the right hon. gentleman opposite with regard to an asser
tion I made on Tuesday night with respect to the mili-'
tar), convention to which I referred. I said that I had
been iwformed that that convention had not been signed
and my belief was that it had not been signed. But I
think it right to state that, on further inquiry, I find
that in point of fact it was signed—(cheers from the Op-
position benches)—but that, being in its nature more Of
a military than a political convention, and having for its
object the regulation, the mutual regulation, of the
French and Austrian troops which might be in Italy in
the contingency of Austria declaring war against Russia,
and Austria never having declared war against Russia,
that convention; although signed, became a dead letter,
and never had any application or effect whatever.
Mr. DISRAELI—Although there is no question be-
fore the house, yet I hope I shall be allowed to make a
few remarks, and they shall be of extreme brevity. The
house will recollect that I mentioned on the first night
of the session that there was a secret treaty between
France and Austria. That statement received a direct
contradiction from the noble lord. ("Not" from Lord Pal-
merston.) It was "a romance." (Opposition cheers.)
The noble lord said I was distinguished for my powers
of imagination, that this was a complete invention, that
I had produced some works of imagination, and that
this was another " romance." (Cheers.) A week
elapsed, and I took the earliest opportunity of the noble
lord's reappearance in the house to make a statement,
which I hope from a sense of justice is still in the recol-
lection of the house. I stated that what I had said on
a previous occasion was perfectly correct—that there
was a treaty between France and Austria, and that the
object of that treaty was to guarantee the security of
the Italian provinces of Austria. I said that that treaty
was signed—(Opposition itcheers)—thaatcted o
wna, fosar thected
on, that it was indeed extensively
of that treaty ; that at a su
troops of Austria were withdrawn from. Italye
t period
in con-
sequence esequn
alarm was felt by the Italianwithdrawal of those troops, andGtohvaetrnthmeeynrtseqautestthede
the permission of Austria to communicate in con-
fidence the existence of the treaty in order to tranquillise
their subjects. This was the treaty we were
never acted upon. (Cheers.) What was told was
the an
received on the second occasion ? The noble lord declared
on the first occasion that it was a romance. He was then,
d dscwlaerre id
after the details I gave, obliged to own that there.wasaas
written document in existence, the object of which
Ito accomplish that which I explained. The noble. lordw
said it was not a treaty but a convention. But, said the
noble lord, "That conventioa was neversigned. (Che.ere.)

I have been in active communication with those who
can give me the best information on the subject. I
have received information, and the fact is that the
affair never was in operation, and so I was justified in
my statement that there was nothing of the kind,
and that the whole thing was a romance." Now comes
the third act. NNe now have au acknowledgment from
the noble 1 ird, not merely that there is a written docu-
ment in ex stence in the shape of a convention between
those two Po Kers for the object I stated, and that it is a
secret document, but that the only statement which the
other night raved the noble 1 ird from substantial refuta-
tion namely, that the convention was not signed, is
incorrect, and that the convention was signed. (Hear.)
After these two admissions from the noble lord, I stand
here to state again that which I stated on the first night
of the session. I say it was not a convention, it was a
treaty—l say it was not only signed, but extensively
acted upon—l say that every expressien the noble lord
used in describing that instrument so lit'la applies
to its real nature, as it has been represented to me,
that I really believed at the end of the debate the
ether night that there must have been some mili-
tary convention in existence, founded upon the treaty,
which had not been signed, and that the noble lord was
entirely misleading the house. (Cheers.) I state again
that there is a treaty—a secret treaty—between France
and Austria, the object of which is to guarantee the se-
curity of the Italian possessions of Austria—that it was
executed on the day I mentioned—that it has been ex-
tensively acted upon—that to the best of my belief it
contains, on its surface, no limitation of the period of its
operation—and that the character given of it by the
noble lord the other night is entirely incorrect. (Loud
&leers.)
Lord PALMERSTON—I have no right to trespass
again upon the indulgence of the house, but I hope I
shall be allowed to say a few words after the observations
of the right hon. gentleman, by which he attempts to
cover his ignominious retreat from Lis first position.
( fronical cheers from the Opposition, and counter cheers.)
The right hon. gentleman has misstated what he said on
a former occasion. (Cheers and counter cheers.) He
has entirely misrepresented his own expressions—his own
statement. What was the right hon. gentleman's state-
ment ? His statement was that there was a treaty be-
tween Austria and France for guaranteeing the Italian
possessions of Austria—(hear)—that it was now in exist-
ence—that it had been recently quoted by Austria in
coosequence of the discussions between France and Eng •
land on the one hand and Naples on the other—and that
it had been executed at the instigation of the English
Government—(loud cries of " Oh, oh," and cheers)—that
it had been executed not only with the knowledge, but
at the instigation of her Majesty's Government. (Con-
tinued cheers and counter cheers.)
Mr. DISRA.EI,I—At the " instance !"

Lord PALMERSTON—No, "instigation." But the
right hon. gentleman cannot rest his statement upon syl-
lables. However, I heard the word, and I recollect it.
I am sure he made use of the word "instigation."
Mr. DlSRAELl—"lnstance" or "advice."

Lord PALMERSTON—WeII, advice. (Cheers from
the Opposition ) Oh ! but I heard the word " instiga-
tion" distircly. (Renewed cheers and counter cheers.)

Mr. DISRAELI—You say it is instigation.

Lord PALMERSTON—What the right hon. gentle-
man meant was that the treaty originated in advice and
counsel given by the English Government to the Govern-
ments of France and Austria. I denied the whole of
that statement at the time it was made, and the whole
of that statement I again deny. To the best of my know-
ledge and belief no such treaty exists or ever was exe-
cuted. I state most distinctly that the British Govern-
ment has no knowledge cf such a treaty, and therefore
cannot have instigated it. I said the other night that if
the rigs t lion, gentleman bad seen such a treaty, and

could aqsert, its existence on his own knowledge, of
course I would bow to hi 4 assertion, and although I
knew nothing of it I wouLI take for granted that it did

exist. I also said that a convention of a totally different
. . _

kind had been negotiated—a convention regulating the

mode of action of the French and Italian troops which

might happen to be in Italy at the time, in the event of
Austria declaring war against Russia and fighting in
concert with England and France, as Austria naturally
wished h3r rear to be secured while she was fighting in

the van in concert with the allies. I said that convention

was founded upon the assumed case of a declaration of
war by Austria against Russia, and such a declaration
never Laving taken place the convention became a dead
letter, and, whether signed or not, had no effect, and

never could take effoct. These assertions I still maintain,
and I say the right hon. gentleman, notwithstanding the
vapouring manner in which he has been pleased to follow
up his statement—(cries of " Oh !" from the Opposition,
and cheers fro.ii the Ministerial benches) —has been im.
posed upon. (Continued cheers.) I beg your pardon I
the right hon. gentleman used hard words, and I shall
express my opinion, . whatever he may think _ of my

mode of ticprebsioo. (Cheers.) I Day; then, that the

. . .
right hon. gentleman has, to the beet of my belief,
been grossly imposed upon ; that a military conven-

tion, which never came into operation, because that

which was to have been the basis and foundation of it

never took place, has be en represented to him as being
that which it never was, and was never intended to be,

permanent guarantee of the Italian possessions of
itria by France —I Hay that it is utterly impossible

that the military convention could have been made use
of in the manner he described, because Austria could not
have said to Naples, " I have a permanent guarantee
from France for my Italian possessions," seeing that the
only thing signed, as far as I am aware, was a con-
vention providing for a case which never had any exit-
ence, and that the military convention Ihave described
was not signed at our instigation or by our advice, but
was communicated to us as an arrangement already
settled between France and Austria ; and the only ques-
tion with us was whether on the whole, France was
bound in honour to make such arrangements as would
render the position of the Austrian armies in half secure•
So far, therefore, from that which I have stated bearing
out the Etaternent of the right hon. gentleman, it shows
that my own statement was perfectly true, and that the
right bon. gentleman is entirely misinformed as to the
facts of the case. (Loud cheers and counter cheers.)

justice could not interfere with him in anything with which
he had properly to do ; and on that the question came to
one of the proper distribution of work %Well must or
ought to be done by somebody, and which the existing
departments could not do. Then it was said that it would
interfere with the Irish executive. Now, he wanted to in-
terfere with the Irish cxecu'ive ; and he believed that no
part of the United Kingdom would be benefited' so much
by the appointment of a Minister of Justice as Ireland.
In that country what was wanted both in the administrl-
' tion of the law and the appointment of the judges, was the
introduction of Eaglish principles ;and the putting an end
to all that went on at the castle. He wanted to see uni-
formity of legislation for the whole kingdom, and that the
administration of the law should be as imperial as pos-
sible. In France the Minister of Justice published every
year a report giving a full account of all the proceedings
in and the state of all the courts of that country. If we
had such a thing in this country could we have got into
such a mess as we have with regard to the Incumbcred
Estates Court in Ireland ? It was also said that this de-
partment would interfere with the freedom of Parlia-
ment. Ho denied that the having a minister of justice in
Parliament to take charge of and explain all matters re-
lating to the law could in any way interfere with the
freedom of Parliament. In the proposition he had made
for the appointment of a minister of justice, he did not
desire to fetter the Government as to the way in which
the matter was to be worked out. He knew that there
were difficulties to be met in arranging the details of such
an establishment ; but he did not think that they were
insuperable. All he wished was that his motion for an
address to the Crown should be carried, and then let the
Government take the matter into their serious conside-
ration, and he was coaviuced that if they had the will
they would find the way to effect the object desired. He
hoped the house would support him in carrying the
motion.

Mr. COLLIER seconded the motion. He lamented
the unsatisfactory progress of law reform, which he at-
tributed in great measure to the indifference with which
both the great parties regarded it. ThePremierwas no doubt
willing to forward the progress of legal measures, but
he did not regard there with great anxiety, for he knew
well enough that the right hon. gentleman opposite was
not likely to oust him on a question of law reform. But
the real fault lay in the present system. Neither the
Lord Chancellor nor the Attorney and Solicitor-General
could act as that Minister of Justice which Mr. Napier
desiderated. The remedy lay, he believed, in the sug-
gestion made by Mr. Napier, and, therefore, he had no
hesitation in seconding his motion.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that his right
hon. friend the member 'for the University of Dublin
had added to his distinguished reputation by bringing
forward this motion. Unquestional ly the subject was
one which had not escaped the attention of the Govern-
meet. The terms of the earlier part of the resolution
showed that it had received the consideration of Minis-
ters; but the rest of the motion might be said to be the
property of the right hon. gentleman, inasmuch as he
had brought it forward in the year 1845. It must be
distinctly understood that in accepting, with a slight
modification, the resolution of the right boo. gentleman,
the Government did not see in the language used by
him, nor would it recognise as a consequence of the
adoption of the res lotion, the necessity of any such plan
as that which had been spoken of by him—namely, the
establishment of a separate Minister of Justice. He did
not conceive that at present there was any necessity for
the introduction of any such officer. (Ffear, hear.) He
thought that all the objects of the resolution might be
more effectually carried out by means of the essisting
machinery than by introducing the change recom-
mended. There were abundant means at disposal for
effecting all that was required without the addition to
the Cabinet of any each Minister. It would be utterly
impossible to introduce into the Cabinet the addition of
a _Minister of Justice whilst they had the Lord Chancel-
lor there, and whilst they had the Secretary there, with-
out introducing discordant elements, the possibility of
contention, and an absence of that unanimity which was
essential in order to carry out just and proper views.
S one years ago, when bills were introduced in 1852, for
what had been called the reform of the Courts of Chan-
cery, hou. members would recollect that a new tribunal
was constituted, called the Court of Lords Justices of
Appeal. This court having relieved the Lord Chancel-
lor of a considerable portion of his judicial duties, it
would be in the Lord Chancellor's power to discharge
the duties which would devolve upon him under this pro-
posed measure, without the nomination of a Minister of
Justice. It was certainly within the power of that dis-
tinguished officer, if he were only assisted by an effi-
cient staff, to accomplish, in a most complete manner,
the three great objects which they desired to attain—
viz., the effectual administration of justice in all its
departments ; secondly, the superintendence and effec-
tual carrying out of the process of the amendment of the
law ; and, thirdly, the giving prompt, effectual, and
complete assistance to the conduct of the business of
current leeislation. With the omission of some words in
the resolution, which he considered unnecessary—viz ,
" an urgent measure of administrative reform," the rest
of the resolution might be accepted in the language of
the right Lon. gentl-man, and the Government would
certainly give the subject all that attention which
the right hon. gentleman desired. (Hear, hear.) They
had in this country one very great peculiarity which he
believed was not possessed by any other—they Lad the
misfortune to have a great number of courts proceeding,
several of them upon ant-igonistic princilles. They had a
great number of tribunals, none of which were armed
with the power of dealing complete justice on any given
subject—(hear, hear)—and there was the necessity im-
posed upon individuals to resort to a-great number of
tribunals to obtain justice. They obtained a little por-
tion of justice at one tribunal and a little at another.
(leer.) That state of things must st,ll continue for
a considerable length of time. The apa'hy of the peop!e
with regard to any alteration in the shape of reform was
so great that it would be idle to expect any complete re-
construction at once without the process of patching.
If this system continued therefore, as he apprehended it
would continue, it spoke plainly enough in favour of
having some great department charged with the duties
of carefay watching over and superintending the work-
ing of our nunaeroue tribunals, and endeavouring to in-
troduce harmony and conformity into a system which
hitherto, in theory and practice, was in many respects in-
congruous. They had a portion of the laws in insolvency
dealt with by an Insolvent Court ; another portion was
committed to a Court of Bankruptcy ; a third portion was
committed to a sort of statutory tribunal, under the Wind-
ing-up Acts ; and a further portion still was assigned to
the Court of Chancery. They had also courtsof law, which
were in a great measure opposed altogether to courts of
equity. Again, they had a great number of county
court judges, and they had a defective system of crimi-
nal procedure—prosecutions were instituted and con-
ducted without any control. There was no adequate super
intendence in point of judicial authority over the sen-
tences and procedure of the county courts. In point of
fact, the whole system stood in such a position that the
only hope of order and unity would be to charge some
groat and responsible department with the duty of super-
intending- it ; of collecting the details of its working, and
the duty of pier enting them in a great report to Parlia-
ment. With regard to the manner in
which prosecu-
Moue were conducted, what war; the present system /
There was no machinery at all for improving it in any
effectual manner ; and, therefore, when an emergency
arose, no means of meeting it were at hand. With re-
gard to the amendment of the law, the house must un-
questionably recollect the difficult position in which they
had been placed on various occasions during the last
two or three sessions. To what was it due that there
was no department to which could be committed in
a satisfactory manner the consideration of any great
subject of legal reform It a measure came before
the house with the authority of such a department,
they would then be. able to receive a report of it.
The effects of the present system he would
illustrate by the following tzemple :- -He had the ho•
flour of proposing a bill on the subject of the Courts of
Testamentary Jurisdiction, and for providing a chief and
cphr
oairegeetd
wasby tbhie.
uecclesiasticalthe
hceo urt
house,s . Ttlahee
efficient mode of conducting the proceedings now dis-
mhoonin.egntentthlaet.
man the member for Suffolk brought forward another
competing plan ; he (the A ttorney-General) recommended
his proposal, and the right hon. gentleman recommended
his, and to this t eo contending remedies there was a
third difficulty added—a third bill was introduced, and
the house had before it then three projects at one and
the came time. Another argument to be brought for-
ward was with regard to the written and unwritten law.
The written law consisted of -a great variety of statutes
which were frequently obscure and inconsistent, and it
was difficult to ascertain what the law was. The un-
written law was in a worse condition. They had to find
it in a hundred volumes of reports, added to without any
sufficient authority, and any gentleman of the bar who
published a volume of reports and affixed his name to it
added to the law, and these reports were being produced
year by year in very considerable numbers, and when
cited in courts of justice judges felt themselves bound to
act upon them as authority ; but it was impossible to al-
low that the law of the country did not require consoli-
dation, and if the written law required consolidation, the
unwritten law required it much more. In the observa-
tions which lee bad made as to the necessity of immediate
attention being given to the subject, it must be under-
stood that he had merely stated his own opinion of the
matter, and that the Government must not consider him
as being pledged to it.
Lord J. RUSSELL thought the whole argument of
the Attorney-General was in favour of retaining the
clause to which the Government objected. He strongly
objected to vesting the controlling power alluded to in
the hauds of the Lord Chancellor, whose hands he be-
y occupied. It was
attribute the other-
aol i
lner vleyea ddoywn
aetrvheeer
wo alreadyrked that more
suppositionh a t t
hht than at
cut fullahueLord Chancellor was
ld
wise unanswerable fact that, in proposing to reform the
law of marriage, the present Lord Chancellor omitted to
sweep away the abominations of actions for seduction
and for criminal conversation. He rallied the Attorney
General on the difference of opinion that existed be•
tween him and the Lord Chancellor, comparing them
to the physician and the cook of Sancho Panza, the
one of whom produced most savoury dishes, which
the other forbade him to taste. lie would rather
Minister of Justice,
perly belong to him. He had no hope of any great re-
thheim Home
of
oStheecrretary s
a duties
which did not pro-
forms of the law being carried without the formation of
a separate and responsible department of justice.
Mr. KEATING hoped the Attorney-General would
appoint
tg
not insist on the omission of the clause. He thought
the proper and natural bead of such a department as was
referred to was the Lord Chancellor, and not the Home
Secretary.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said rather than
raise any discussion he would accept the elause recotn•
mending the motion as an " urgent measure." He only
objected to it as unusual, if not unnecessary, in an ad-
dress to the Crown.
The discussion was continued by Mr. Ingram, Mr.
Swart, Sir E. Perry, Mr. M, Chambers, Mr, L. King,

t r and Mr. Warren, who supported the motion, mid Mr.
Matins, who contended that it wool I produce no good
l effect.
Lord PALMERSTON promised the liou-e that the
. measure should receive the serious attention of Guyer:-
. ment, and iu reference to the different opinions esresseo,
whether the new department would I f quire a new Mini. -
ter, or whether it might to be attscbed t) some one of
the present functionaries, he expressed his own prefer-
ence for budding upon the old foundetions.
A fter a few words from Mr. HADFIELD, Mr. NAPIER
replied, and the motion was agreed to.
CHURCH RATES.
Sir W. CLAY rose to move for leave to bring in a
bill for the abolition of Church rates, the bill to lie limited
to the total abolition of such rates, and a provision say.
ing existing legal obligations. The bill, he said, had not
only the seine object, but was identical in terms with the
measure which he had introduced on the same subject
during the last session of Parliament, and the only dif-
ference was that a portion of the former measure was
omitted from the present bill. He therefore felt it un-
necessary to trouble the house with any observations,
but when he moved the second reading ho would ceialitiu
the reasons which•had induced him to make the omission
to which he had referred, and he would also feel it his
duty to comment upon the important returns relating to
the subject which had been laid upon the taSle in com-
pliance with the motion of a noble lord opposite.
Mr. SPOONER said that, although he and his hon.
friends on that side of the house would not oppose the
motion, it must not be supposed that they nave any
assent to the bill which the hon. baronet asked leave to
introduce, and which provided for the simple, ab -elute,
and unconditional abolition of Church rates. He thought
it would be convenient to the house and to the country to
learn what course her Majesty's Government intended
to take on this subject. They had already stated that
they did not themselves intend to bring in a bill, and
that they were not prepared to say that they would
move amendments to any measure which might be in-
troduced.
Mr. LABOUCHERE observed that his right hon.
friend the Secretary for the Home Department had stated
on a former occasion that the Government had no inten-
tion of introducing any measure on this subject during
the present session ; but he said that when the question
was brought before the house that would be the proper
time for the Government to declare what course they
intended to pursue. He (Mr. Labnichere) hoped the
hon. gentleman would not expect the Government now
to go out of the way to express their opinion, but when
the second reading of this bill came on, no doubt his
noble friend (Lord Palmerston) or the Horne Secretary
would state the views entertained by the Government.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
GENERAL POLLOCK.
Captain L. VERNON moved for a copy of all cor-
respondence relating to the removal of General Poilock,
G.C.8., from the direction of the Hon. East India Com-
pany. The hon. and gallant member gave a sketch of the
brilliant services of Gen. Pollock from his first victories in
India down to the time he received the thanks of Podia.
ment, and quoted " Kaye's History of the War" in sup-
port of his statements. When it came round to the Go-
vernment to appoint three directors, of course Sir George
Poll )ck was placed at the head of the list, because no man
had better led the Indian army ; but while he was only
nominated for two years, his colleagues, who had never
saved an Indian army, were nominated for four and six
years. Everybody expected that the gallant general
would have received the appointment for the longest
period, but he did not ; and on the (20::h "March, 1856,
he received a letter from the India Board intimating
that he would not be re-appointed, the only reason given
being a subterfuge, that the act of 1853 required, not a
re-appointment, but a new appointment, whereas two
clauses in the act expressly contemplated re-appointments.
(The hon. and gallant member read the correspondence
between Gen. Pollock and the India Board.) He was an
Indian officer, and of course his advancement was cavilied
at by the Horse Guards, and he (Captain Vernon) con-
sidered the general had been very unworthily dealt with.
(Hear.) He expected no redress in making these state-
ments to the house of the treatment txperiencod by
that distinguished soldier at the bands of the Presi-
dent of the Board of Control. He knew what the
answer would be. The right hon. gentleman, if he made
any reply at ell, would thank him for the opportuniq of
explaining the transaction. His (Captain Vernou'e) only
object was, to complete the general history from the
time he received the thanks of that house until the time
when his great services were so unworthily ignored by
the Government. The records of that house would
show to posterity the history of his great deeds, and
they would likewise testify to the small esteem in which
those great deeds were held by the Beard of Control.
Mr. VERNON SMITH said there was no such offi-
cial correspondence in existence as that for which the
hors. member had moved, as to the removal of General
Pollock, and further than that, Sir G. P. hock never had
been removed from the office of director, nor had such a
thing been ever contemplated. With regard to the tette' s
that had been read, everybody who knew anything of
Government patronage was aware that those communica-
tions were always considered to be private. That was the
first time he had known letters of that kind to be read in
that house, and he did not believe the general bad ever
sanctioned their being read. He was quite ready to ac-
knowledge Sir G. Pollock's services, and no one could
have felt more pain than he did when he felt it to be his
duty to eluse to re-appoint the gallantgeueral. His reason
for refuting was the conviction in his mind that the spirit
of the act required new blood to be infused into the di-
rection of Indian affairs. Ile considered Sir E. Ra wlin-
son, whose diplomatic and military character was well
known al! over the world, a better person to fill the ap-
pointment, and by, the advice of the noble lord at the
head of the Government Sir Z. Rawlinson was appointed.
Shortly after, on the vacancy caused by Mr. Melville's
retirement, Gen. Vivian was recommended for similar
reasons. Ile hoped the house would observe the difficul-
ties by which the Government were surrounded. Oa one
side were a number of gentlemen who .announced their
intention of watching every appointment that was made,
in order to see that the right man was put in the right
place, while on the other side wore gentlemen who, on
every occasion when this principle was acted upon,
brought charges against the Government of neglecting
distinguished services, But Gen. Poilock f ad never
been dismissed. His term had expired, and be ceased to
boll his appointment when his time was out as a matter
of course. He bad only to say that he did not regret
the appointment he had made, and never shoal as long
as he lived, and with regard to official correspondence,
there was none in existence.
Mr. DISRAELI opposed the Indian 8.11 in 1353, be-
lieving that it would not work satisfactorily or improve
the administration of our Indian affairs. And ail that
had occurred since had confirmed him in that impres-
sion. And be believed that on this point the Presi-
dent of the Board of Control concurred with him.
He had at that time been somewhat reconcileh to the
measure by the manner in which the Government
power of appointing directors was exercised. Ile was
not surprised that Sir George Pollock should wish
to have his case brought under the consideration of
Parliament. But in what a strange pos.tion did they
find themselves ? He gave the President of the
Board of Control full credit for having acted con-
scientiously in not re-appointing General Pollock ; but
in vindicating himself he had virtually censured his
colleague (Sir C. Wood), who had appointed the gallant
general. It could not be that in three years the great
abilities which he was said to have possessed, and must
have possessed, could have passed away. The letter which
he had written, and which had been read to the house,
was manly and dignified, and struck him as the produc-
tion of a man fully competent to the discharge of the
duties of an Indian director. He believed the appoint-
ment of Sir G. Pollock three years ago was a satisfactory
one ; he had heard nothing which caused hint to think
that the gallant general was less able than at any previ-
ous period to discharge the duties of the direction, and
therefore, although he was not prepared to contest the
right lion, gentleman's exercise of his responsibility, he
nevertheless must declare his regret that Gen. Pollock
was not a director, and that he (Mr. Disraeli) entertained
for him that respect which he believed was entertained
for him by the people at 1 .rge.
Lord PALMERSTON said it was quite a misrepre-
sentation to describe the course pursued by the Presi-
dent of the Board of Control as derogatory either to Sir
G-. Poll mk, or implied that Sir C. Wood was wrong in
appointing him three years ago. He hoped the hon. gen-
tleman would net plAce on the records of the house a
statement contrary to fact, for Gen. Pollock bad not been
dismissed. He was appointed by law for two years, and
was capable of being re-appointed: But it at that
time his right hon. friend thought that another person
was, from age or other circumstances, capable . t more
efficiently filling the office, he u as only doing his duty
in appointing him. Nor could he admit that the high
professional character of Sir G. Poll ock was at all dis•
paraged by the step which was then taken.
Captain L. VERNON would withdraw the word
"removal." As to the manner in wbich be got posses-
sion of the letters he had read, it was sufficient to say
that they fell into his hands, and he thought he had a
right to use them. As, however, there were no other
documents in existence save those which he had read
there was nothing for which to move, and he should
therefore withdraw his motion.
The motion was then withdrawn.
. WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
Mr. L. DAVIES submitted to the house the neces-
sity for legislation to prevent the gross inequalities in
the weights and measures of the United Kingd ern. The
present law was quite inadequate to meet the evils
which arose from the great inequalities of weights and
measures which prevailed in different parts of the coun-
try. If the Government would not bring in a bill he
would himself introduce a measure rendering it compul•
sory that in every part of the kingdom sales should be
made by imperial weights and measures alone, and by
no others. The loss caused by the present system
amounted to hundreds of thousands per annum between
the producer and the customer. He begged leave of the
house to introduce a bill to amend so much of the sth
and Gth Wm. IV. as related to weights and measures.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that no doubt could exist as the desirableness of having
an uniformity of weights and measures, but hitherto
legislation bad in vain contended with the inveterate
habits which bad fixed the adoption of varying weights
and measures in different parts of England. He did
not know whether in regard to corn it would not be
better to discard bushel and quarter altogether, and sell
only by weight. But then the tithe commutation rent-
charge was fixed by the bushel and quarter, and if the
change were made it would be necessary also to alter
our legislation on this subject. When the bid of the hon.
member was introduced it should have his best atten-
Mr. ADDERLEY contended that nothing of any im-
portance had yet been done to entorce an uniformity of
weights and measures. The act of Wrn. IV. was practi.
cally rendered inoperative by a proviso which defeated
the rest of the measure. The evils of the present aye

tern were very gnat. It ought to be undertaken by the
Government, but as they vAld not bring in a bill, be
svai glad th,i hon. gentleman (Kr. Davies) had done so ;
and he hoped that the feeling of the country and the
epinion of that house would suppor'.; him, and either
enable him to carry his measure through or force the
Government to 1 Oeate. All that was wanted was that
a stone, pound, bushel, yard, or foot should be the
same, and shoul I be a fixed quantity in all Faits of the
country, 'i'bet was iinrely a simple thing, and one that
could be easily cif cted. All that was requisite was to
repeal the provi,o in the Act of Win. IV., I y which
it was enacted twat sales should not be void if tne mea-
sures used, though not imperial, were yet what they
professed. If this were done, and if some machinery
were provided for enforcing the penalties imposed for
the use of illegal weights, he believed that the imperial
weights and treasures would soon be in general opera-
tionthroughouL, the country.

Mr. APO" ANN suggested that the difficulty might be
solved by insisting that dry goods should be sold by
weight, and liquid gootls by measure, allover tLe empire.
Mr. L. DAVIES having replied,
After a few words from Mr. ROEBUCK and Mr. BASS,
Leave was given to introduce the bill.