The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-09 00:00:00

THE NAVE

The Urgent, screw steam troopship, Commander
Hire, sailed from Spithead yesterday morning at
daylight for Devonport.
The Perseverance, screw steam transport, Com-
mander Power, will embark a portion of her troops
for the Cape of Good Hope at Portsmouth this day.
She will afterwards call at Milford and Queens-
town to embark the remainder.

A court-martial was held yesterday on board her
Majesty's ship Victory, flagship of Admiral W.
Bowles, C. 8., in Portsmouth Harbour, to try an
ordinary seaman of her Majesty's ship Blenheim,
on a charge of having attempted to stab with a
knife the captain of the afterguard of that ship, and
making use of foul and disgusting language. The
court was comprised of Captain George T. Gordon,
her Majesty's ship Hannibal, commanding steam
reserve, President ; Captains Scott, Harris, Far-
quhar, Wilson, and Hewlett ; with Mr. Hillier, as
Deputy Judge-Advocate. The Court, after hearing
the evidence adduced against the prisoner, and
what he had to say in his defence, (which was
tantamount to nothing, as he acknowledged'him the
chief part of the charge preferred against L),
sentenced him to receive 40 lashes on board her
Majesty's ship Blenheim, and to be afterwards im-
prisoned for 12 months in Winchester Gaol, with
hard labour.
Orders were yesterday received by the 2d bat-
talion of Infantry, Chatham, for the non-commis-
sioned officers and men belonging to the St.:Helena
Regiment to embark at Gravesend, for the purpose
of joining the head-quarters of that regiment. The
troops belonging to the Cape Mounted Rifles now
at Chatham are also to embark at the same place
for the Cape of Good Hope. Both detachments
will leave Chatham garrison this day.

COLUMBIAN MlSSlONS.—Yesterday afternoon, at
half-past two o'clock, a public meeting, attended by nume-
rous military officers and others, was held at the garrison
school-room Woolwich, when the Lord Bishop of Columbia
delivered an address on behalf of the Church Missions to
that colony, and a collection was made in aid of the funds.
MESSRS. HURST AND BLACKETT'S LITERARY
ANNOUNCEMENTS.—Among the New Works included in
Messrs. Hurst and Blackett's List for the ensuing Season
are " Sixteen Years of an Artist's Life in Morocco, Spain,
and the Canary Islands," by Mrs. Elizabeth Murray, with
coloured illustrations.—" Lectures on Art, Literature, and
Social Science," by Cardinal Wiseman.—" Realities of
Paris Life," by the Author of "Flemish Interiors," &c.—
" The Life and Times of George Villiers, First Duke of
Buckingham," by Mrs. Thomson.—" The Jews in the
East," from the German, by the Rev. P. Beaton, M.A.—
" Nathalie," by Julia Kavanagh, forming the Fourth
Volume of Hurst and Blackett's "Standard Library."—
Messrs. Hurst and Blackett also announce the following
new Works of Fiction :—" A Life for a Life," by. the
Author of 4, John Halifax, Gentleman."—"Woodleol;
by the Author of " Wildflower."—" A Good,q;;Tiewunf
Coming," by the Author of "Mathew Paxton."
I ;rations by
ton Dogvane," by Francis Franciswitll the Author of
Leech.—" A Mother's Trial,"
1 vol.
by
h the Shadows,"
&c.—"l:,hrre.g—,, Miriam Cop-
" The Discipine of Life,"
by the Author of " Sidney
_Grevevr
the Author
olefy,,,"mbayristre.tJaeuadffivuseorni3,--.riandeedmaaills,,, Storyc. by

IMPERI

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY).
Their lordships assembled at half-past 4.

ROYAL ASSENT.
The royal assent was given by commission to the follow-
ing bills :—The East India Company Loan ; the Oaths Act
Amendment ; the Patent of Inventions (Munitions of War);
Common Rights (War Department) ; the Shepton-Mallet
'Water ; the Wimbledon and Dorking Railway, and several
other private bills.

The Lords Commissioners were the Earl of Hardwicke,
Ahe Marquis of Salisbury, and the Lord Chancellor.
Their lordships adjourned during pleasure.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
At five o'clock.

TICKETS OF LEAVE.

Viscount DUNGANNON gave notice that on Monday
text he should move for returns of the number of convicts
who had been discharged with tickets of leave during the
years 1857 and 1858, and also the number of those who
who had been recommitted for subsequent offences.

PRIVATE BILLS.
The following bill was read a second time :—The Red
ea and Indian Telegraph Company (No. 2).
The following bills were read a third time and
-ed :—Bagnelstown and Wexford Railway, Glou-
cester and Cheltenham Tramway Abandonment, Great
Northern and Western of Ireland Railway,
Greenwich and South-Eastern Docks, Bray Com-
mon, Lendonderry Bridge, Sunderland and South Shields
'Water, and -Weymouth and Melcombe Regis Markets and
ier.

VOTE OF THANKS TO THE INDIAN ARMY.
The Earl of Derby said he should should postpone the
-moving of a vote of thanks to the army in Indian from
MoAday next till Thursday.
STATE OF EUROPE.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said he thought be-
fore Parliament was prorogued her Majesty' Government
should communicate some information to their lordships
as to what steps they had taken to procure the peace of
Europe.
The Earl of MALMESBURY said, before the Parlia-
ment closed, he should make a statevaent to the house
showing that the Government had done all they could to
preserve the peace of Europe.
INDICTABLE OFFENCES (METROPOLITAN
DO FE BILL.

The Lord CHANCELLOR moved the third reading
.
of this bill.
Lord LYNDHURST said he had great objections
to the bill. He thought at the present moment it
was utterly unnecessary to introduce enactments in
defence of the
.people against arbitrary government.
Political prosecutions for political offences were now nearly
unknown, so the complaints upon which the present bill
was grounded were almost groundless. He had, however,
lived in a time when Government was carried on not only
in an arbitrary but a tyrannical system, and when political
prosecutions were matters of daily occurrence, so he was
fully able to appreciate the advantages which prevailed
at the present day, compared with the time of which he
had spoken. To bear out his views, the noble and learned
lord quoted some passages from " Blackstone's Com-
mentaries," and proceeded to remark that it was
laid down as a maxim of the English law, that no
man could be put upon his trial unless a bill had
been found against him by a grand jury, and then
he could not be punished unless he was found guilty
by twelve of his countrymen. Such a provision, he con-
tended, afforded support and protection to all persons.
(Hear, hear.) He was exceedingly sorry to find that the
first innovation on the great principle of trial by jury was
ventured upon by her Majesty's present Government, and
although he entertained the highest respect for the noble
lord who now sat on the woolsack, he thought the pro-
visions of this bill would more then likely be strained
to arbitrary and tyrannical purposes. 'Now, then,
their lordships knew that no peer could be tried at their
lordships' bar untiLa bill had been found against him by a
grand jury, but suppose the bill was agreed to and went to
the House of Commons, what would they say to the mea-
sure ? Why, that this house agreed to a measure to abolish
the necessity of a grand jury, so far as the Commons
were concerned, but had taken care to exempt themselves
from its provisions. (Hear, hear.) The noble and learned
lord then referred to the inconvenience, as it had been
called by the supporters of the measnre of the great num-
ber of persons compelled to be Lie-attendance during the
sitting of the grand jury, -401 it he contended that
all that was occasioned by*on-consideration, and
he for one could not say that was sufficient
to cause such an important alteration in the law of Eng-
land. Then again, expense had been referred to, but he
thought this objection was as inefficient as the former for
the changes that would take place if' this bill became law.
He cautioned his noble friendr)hat if this bill passed,
the change would not remain where it was at present pro-
posed, but the counties would endeavour to get rid of their
grand juries. He (Lord Lyndhup3l) could only repeat
that he did not like a bill which be regarded as the first
step towards abolishing an institution which had been in
existence many hundred years, and which had been main-
tained in the worst times, and under the most arbitrary Go-
vernments. (Cheers.)
Lord WENSLEYDALE had stated on the second read-
ing that he entertained a strong objection to the bill on con-
stitutional grounds. That opinion he still retained.
Lord CAMPBELL hoped thatlifter what had occurred
the noble,and learned lord (Lord Chelmsford) would not press
his bill.; for it was utterly impossible that it could be dis-
cussed in the other house during the present session.
The LORD CHANCELLOR was not insensible to the
difficulty in which he stood, opposed, ash() was, by his noble
and learned friend, for whom he had for many years enter-
tained the greatest possible respect, and whose opinion he
knew to be ofthe highest authority in their lordships' house.
At the same time he thought he had a right to complain of
the course which had been taken by his noble friend with
regard to this bill. On its introduction he (the Lord Chan-
cellor) had explained the grounds, apon which he thought
such a measure was desirable, and they app to meet
with the general concurrence of their lo Ps. On the
second reading his noble friend never intimated that he en-
tertained the slightest objection to the bill • but his noble
friend (Lord Wensleydale) certainly did make some few re-
marks against the bill, which did not, however, meet with
any !general support. When the bill was fixed to go into
committee his learned friend put a question to him (Lord
Chelmsford) as to certain alterations which he said would
remove many of his objections to the bill.
Lord LYNDHURST—WouId lessen them.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—"Iessen" might be the
phrase, but his noble friend never intimated that he would
offer the bill any active opposition. When he (Lord Chelms-
ford) proposed a day for the third reading his noble friend
suggested that it would not be proper to pass such a mea-
sure in the absence of the Lord Chief Justice, and he had
therefore fixed the third reading for a distant day.
When his noble and learned friend arrived from circuit, he
had a communication with him on the subject of this bill,
but he had no reason to believethat he was hostile to it, and
he thought he should have some support from him, though
he made objections to some of the provisions of the bill. But
he did not till to-night know that there was to be any oppo-
sition to his bill, and he thought he' tad some reason to com-
plain of his noble and learned friends, who, on a former
occasion, induced him to postpone the bill, and,now urged
him to withdraw it. He was sure they did not mean to ac-
complish that result, but that had been the effect. He did
not yield to his noble and learned friend ii everyregard for
our ancient institutions, but he was notso blindly enamoured
as not to perceive their defects, nor was he so entirely
'wedded to antiquity as, when ancient thine had declined
from their original use, to abstain from placing a reforming
hand upon them. His noble and' learned friend (Lord
Lyndhurst) had regretted that this bill should have been
introduced for the first time by a Censervative Govern-
ment. His noble and learned friend would forgive him for
saying that this was not the first time that such a measure
had been introduced. In 1849 it was introduced into the
House of Commons by a Liberal Government. In the year
1857 it was introduced by himself into the House of Com-
mons with the sanction of a Liberal Government, and when
his noble and learned friend said they were now legislating
for themselves, and did not know how the bill would be re-
ceived in the House of Commons, he would tell his noble
and learned friend that a similar bill had passed the second
stage in the House of Commons no less than three times,
and he believed that a majority of the House of Commons
was in favour of this measure. His noble and learned friend
was in favour of continuing grand juries for the purpose of
protecting persons charged with political offences. One
would have thought that there was nothing in the bill to
exclude from its operation offences cif that description, but it
provided that persons charged with such offences should not
be put on ,their trial without the intervention of a grand jury,
and if his noble and learned friend, when the bill was in com-
mittee, would have made any suggestion to give further pro-
tection in that respect, he should have glady acquiesced in
it. He believed that at all events within the metropolitan
district grand juries were not only of no use, but that they
were actually mischieYous. But he had no desire to destroy
grand pules in the country. The Lord Chief Justice said
he objected to the Lord Mayor and aldermen sitting in the
public courts, and he said he did not find absolute wisdom
in a Lord-Mayor and aldermen. Ho was afraid if his noble
and learned friend extended his views beyond the city he
would not find absolute wisdom anywhere. It was a matter
of notoriety that the Lord Mayor and aldermen of the City
of London discharged their duty well, and he challenged his
noble and learned friend to produci any instance within
recent times in which there had been any failure on the
part of the city magistrates to do their duty. In the present
state of the session he despaired of passing the bill through
the House of Commons, and therefore he should withdraw
the bill, but if he was permitted he should introduce it in
another session

Lord OVERSTONE said when he was chairman of the
grand jury at the Central Criminal Court they had 400 bills
before them, and he put it to their lordships whether it was
possible to give' those bills due deliberation. Merchants
dreaded being summoned on the grand jury, as they were
away nine or ten days from business, frequently to their
serious inconvenience and detriment.
After a few words from Earl GREY and Lord CAMPBELL,
the order for the third reading of the bill was discharged.

AFFIDAVITS BY COMMISSION BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
PETITIONS OF RIGHT BILL.
On the order of the day fqr the second reading of this bill,
lord KINGSDOWN said there were some of the details
of the bill of which he did not approve, and in the present
state of the session he thought it better to move that the
order for the second reading be discharged.
After a few observations from the LORD CHANCELLOR
and Lord CAMPBELL, the order for the second reading was
discharged.

•
- PUBLIC OFFICES BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
NOTTINGHAM CHARITIES BILL.
This bill was also read a second time.
SAVINGS BANKS (IRELAND) BILL.
'his bill passed through committee.

RECREATION GROUNDS BILL.
02 t the bringing up of the report on this bill,
Lo rd DUNGANNON suggested that its provisions
ghoul d be extended to Ireland.
Thee Earl of SHAYTESBURY expressed his willing-
ness tcp.adopt the suggestion.
The word " Ireland" having been inserted, the report
was agreed to.
St. James saldersby Marriages Validity Bill was read a
second time.
Their lordships then adjourned.

ROUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY.)
The &E¢ took the chair at 4 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills -were read a third time and passed :
Atlantic,. Telegraph Company (No. 2) ; Brecon and Mer-
thyr Tydfil Junction 'Railway; Castle Douglas and Dum-
fries Railway ; Charleston Railway and Harbour ; Forth
and Clyde Navigation ; Gateshead Quay ; Great North of
Scotland .ItaibraY; McTthyr, Tredegar, and Abergavezmy

:AMA
rp Railway ; Travellers and Marine Insurance and Accidental
11 . Death Insurance Companies Amalgamation (No. 2).
The Lords' amendments to the Findhorn Railway Bill
were agreed for and the bill was ordered for a third reading.
The London and South Western Railway and the Lym-
ington Railway Bills were considered and ordered for third
reading.

ROYAL COMMISSION.
The Usher of the Black Rod summoned the members to
the House of Lords to hear the Royal assent given by
. commission to a number of bills (for which see Lords' re-
port].
trESTMINSTER NEW BRIDGE BILL.
Lord J. MANNERS moved that in the case of this bill
the examiners have leave to sit and proceed forthwith.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said he understood that
£138,000 had already been spent on the works and that
£178,000 more would be required. He wished to know
how the deficiency would be supplied, and whether a report
as to the engineer, contractor, and.surveyor being the same
person was true ?
Lord J. MANNERS said that as no notice was given
of the motion, he was not prepared with the figures neces-
sary to give a fall answer to the questions of the hon.
baronet. He believed that there was appended to the
report of the commissioners of last year an account of the
expenditure incurred, and that a further vote would be
required. The contractor, engineer, and surveyor, were
three different persons.
MR. CHISHOLM ANSTEY.

Mr. E. JAMES gave notice that on TliUrsday next he
would move for the correspondence and other documents
relating to the dismissal of Mr. Chisholm Anstey from his
official position in Hong-Kong.
THE STATE OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
trusted the noble lord the member for Tiverton would not
bring forward this evening the motion of which he had
given notice with reference to the state of foreign affairs,
or make those observations on the subject which he stated
it was his intention to do last evening. He could assure
the noble lord that • it would be most inconvenient to the
public interest to bring forward this evening the question
of the relation of this country with foreign Powers. It was
his intention, on Monday or Tuesday evening next, to
make a complete statement of the position in which this
country was placed with regard to any negotiations that
were pending. That course would enable the noble lord
to make those observations on the question, to which the
house no doubt would listen with great pleasure,
Lord PALMERSTON said it was impossible for him
not to comply with the request of the right hon. gentleman,
and his (Lord Palmerston's) object was merely that the
public might be put in possession of the positfon in which
this country at present stood with regard to foreign powers.
(Hear, hear.) At all events the course pursued by the
right hon. gentleman would give him and other hon. mem-
bers an opportunity of making some observations
(Laughter.) .
Lord J. RUSSELL hoped that the right hon. gentleman
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would bring the subject
forward in the form of a motion, so that hon. members
would have an opportunity of making some remarks.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
he would put the subject in the shape of a motion, of which,
perhaps, he would give notice on Monday next.
MAIL CONTRACTS.

Mr. DAVISON asked the Secretary to the Treasury
whether any renewal of the subsisting mail contracts to the
Royal Mail Steam Packet Company for the West Indian
and Brazilian Mail Service had been granted or promised to
that company without advertising for competitive tenders;
whether her Majesty's Government had had under
their consideration . any complaints of colonists or
passengers or other persons respecting the irregula-
rities, inconvenience, or mismanagement of the said ser-
vices, and whether any investigation as to the inconveni-
ence or management of the present service was contemplated
previously to the renewal of such contracts ; and whether
itjwas intended that such renewals shall be opened to com-
petition ?
Sir S. NORTHCOTE said that there had been no altera-
tion in the contracts, and he had heard of no complaints on
the subject.
EXCLUSION OF ROMAN CATHOLICS FROM
JURIES IN IRELAND.
Viscount CASTLEROSSE asked the Chief Secretary for
Ireland, whether his attention had been called to the fact
that at the late trial at Tralee of Daniel O'Sullivan, con-
victed of being a member of the Phoenix Society,
the eleven Roman Catholic jurors (including a gentle-
man lately appointed a magistrate of the county) who
were called and answered to their names, were directed to
" stand by" by the Crown ; and, if so, whether such a
course had been adopted with the approval of the Govern-
ment ? •

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
Government had given no instructions for the exclusion of
Roman Catholics from juries in Ireland.
After some discussion the sullject dropped.
COMMISSIONS IN THE ARMY.
Captain VIVIAN asked the Secretary of State for War,
a question relating to the appointment of Mr. Cunningham
to an Ensigncy in the 13th Regiment of Light In-
fantry, and drew attention to the advertisements
put forward by certain parties, stating that they
possessed peculiar facilities in procuring commissions
for persons who were desirous of entering the
army. Commissions should be given without purchase
only to relatives of those persons who had rendered emi-
nent services to the country, for such gifts were
the same as giving so much money; and he wished
to know what Mr. Cunningham's claims were to a commis-
sion without purchase.
General PEEL said with regard to the general question
of commissions in certain cases having been 'obtained
without purchase, he thought it would be most in-
convenient to enter into any statements on a question on
which an inquiry was being instituted. With reference to
Mr. Cunningham, he was the son of a distinguished officer
in the Bengal army, and his grandfather had been a general
in the British service. That gentleman had received testi-
monials from Sir S. Steele and Sir Robert Vivian. (Hear.)
MR. BARON BRAMWELL ON THE NORTH
WALES CIRCUIT.
• Mr. SALISBURY called the attention of the house to
remarks said to have been made by Mr. Baron Bramwell,
at Bala and other assize towns in the North Wales circuit,
and asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department
if he had any explanation to offer to the house on the cort-
duct of the learned judge. The hon. member denounced
the observations made by the learned judge in question as
most uncalled for and injudicious.
DISMISSAL OF MR. SANFORD FROM THE
EMIGRATION OFFICE.
Mr. HOPWOOD asked the Secretary to the Treasury
for an explanation of the recent dismissal of a gentleman
who had been employed for two years and a half in the
Emigration Office, and had subsequently passed a satis -
factory examination before the Civil Service Commis-
sioners ?
THE INDIAN OFFICE.
Sir E. PERRY asked the Secretary of State for India
what steps had been taken for removing the political
establishment of the Indian Office to the neighbourhood of
the other public offices of Government ?
CARRIAGE ROAD BY THE SIDE OF lIERKELEY
HOUSE.
Mr. KINNAIRD asked the Chief Commissioner whether
the Government would make up their minds by the meet-
ing of the new Parliament (seeing that Berkeley-house is
now pulled down) as to making a carriage road by the side
of Berkeley-house, from Cockspur-street and Charing-
cross, into St. James's Park ?
Lord J. MANNERS said he could not answer the first
part of the question, but he certainly would.take no steps to
prevent the new Parliament from expressing an opinion
on the subject.
THE CONSULAR COMMITTEE.
Mr M. MILNES asked the Under Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs, in what mode, and to what extent, the
Government intended to act upon the recommendations of
the Consular Committee of last session ?
Mr. S. FITZGERALD said that some of the recom-
mendations of the Consular Committee had been carried
out, but they could not consent to carry out that with re-
ference to an increase in the remuneration of some of the
officials, as the expense would be enormous.
THE MAGISTRACY AT HEREFORD.
Mr. CLIVE in pursuance of notice, called the attention
of the house to the recent appointment of magistrates for the
city of Hereford. The hon. member said at a time when no
additional magistracy were required at Hereford six were
appointed by the present Government. In a petition which
he had presented to the house it was stated, first, that there
was no want of new magistrates ; secondly, that theappoint-
ment was made without any previous communication with
the local authorities ; thirdly, that the petitioners believed
the appointment to be due to some person unknown. The
petition was signed by four out of six aldermen, 11 town
councillors, and four justices of the peace. Two of the new
magistrates ware objected to on the ground that they were
retail tradesmen. It was usual, he believed, for the Lord
Chancellor to communicate with the local authorities before
making any addition to the bench of magistrates ; but there
was no communication in the present instance, and he be-
lieved that if the session had lasted much longer, there
would have been numerous complaints like that which he
had thus brought before the house.
Sir J, PAK INGTON said his right hon. friend the
Secretary of State for the Home Department having spoken
once on the motion for the adjournment, could not do so
again ; but he had requested him to state that he would reply
to the questions which had been put to him on the order
of the day for going into committee of supply. He (Sir J.
Pakingto4-would take -that opportunity of replying, to a
question put by the hon. member for Kildare (Mr. Cogan).
The hon. member asked him whether it was his intention to
place the medical officers of the navy In a similar position to
that of the medical officers in the army. He could only re-
peat what he said on a former occasion when the subject
was under consideration, namely, that it was his intention
substantially to comply with the request of the naval medi-
cal service.

Lord STANLEY said two questions had been put to him
to which he would endeavour to reply. One related to the
locality where the Indian business was carried on. He
thought his hon. and learned friend (Sir E. Perry) attached
rather too much importance to that question in supposing, as
he appeared to do, that the change of the locality from the
City to the West-end would influence the administration of
Indian affairs. No person was so much interested in the
Indian department being within convenient reach of that
house as the Secretary of State for India for the time being.
There was very great inconvenience in his being distant
half-an-hour's journey from his colleagues and from that
house. Last autumn he considered whether the Board of
Control was large enoug for the conduct of all the Indian
business, and, finding that it was not, he thought it better
to move the department in Cannon-roW to Leadenhall-
street, than to have part of the business carried on at one
place and part at the other. The use of a site in Manchester-
buildings could only have been temporary, as a new India-
office was to be built in Downing-street, and as soon as the
house had decided what style of architecture was to be
adopted, the construction of the building would commence.
So far as the money was concerned there was no occasion to
wait, but as the India-office and the Foreign-office were to
form one block of buildings, some delay was unavoidable. As
regarded the intention of the Government to send out a
person versed in finance to sit in the
.legislative council atnu Calutta, he thought they were not limited by the act to the
choice of a member of the legal profession, but after what
his hon. and learned friend had said on the subject he
should take sonic means of:Betting that question at rest.
POSTAL SERVICE TO AMERICA.
Mr. BEAMISH asked the Secretary to the Treasury
whether Sir Samuel Cunard having offered, through a
deputation who waited on the Admiralty and Treasury de-
partments on Monday last, to convey the mails weekly be-
tween an Irish port and America for the sum of £5OO the
voyage out and home, it was the intention of her Majesty's
Government to persevere in completing a contract for £..MO
for this service (fortnightly) between lwayand America?
He had the authority of Sir S. Cunard for saying that he
would undertake 04 duty for 4209, He trustucl tlgit tke

Government would give this matter due consideration.. The
house would see it was a matter of serious import, when he
told them that the amount proposed tolbe paid to the Gal-
way line of packets was £3,000.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE would, in the first place, answer
the question put by Mr. Hopwood. He would explain, at
the outset, that the Commissioners of Emigration acted
under the Colonial-office, and that no gentleman could
properly be admitted into that departanentunless he received
the certificate of the commissioners. Some gentleman to
whom the question related was an employe in Mr. Gurney's
office, and was taken from there during a great pressure
which occurred in the Government offices some few years
since. Several other gentlemen were also taken into the
Government employment. It was intended that their en-
gagements should cease at the end of the Parliamentary
session, and such intention was carried out in all cases
except that of this particular gentleman. As the engage-
ment was temporary at its commencement, these gentlemen
did not receive the certificate of the Civil Service Commis-
sioners. When that gentleman remained in the office, his
case was not brought before the commissioners for some
time. When it was, they found he was perfectly competent
for his post, so far as literary attainments were concerned.
He could not, however, produce the necessary certificate of
health, and hence the commissioners had no option but to
refuse their certificate. He could assure the house that this
subject of the health of the Government clerks was a most
important one • in one case of an office where but 21 clerks
were employed,' the absences through ill-health were equiva-
lent to the loss of one clerk. With reference to Mr. Beamish's
question, he must say that when he read that question he
was much surprised, and his surprise had not been lessened
by the few words which the hon. member had addressed to
the house. The hon. gentleman seemed to insinuate that a
certain duty would be performed for £5OO, or, as he now said,
£250, for which the Galway line of packets would receive
£3,000. Now he had not had the advantage of meeting the
deputation which had waited upon the Government on this
subject, but he had seen Sir S. Cunard and also the hon.
gentleman upon it, and the proposition of Sir Samuel was
in fact this : that for the sum of £soo—in addition to what
he already received—(hear, hear)—that gentleman would
allow his vessels to call at Cork. Now, Sir S. Cunard
already received £3,400 in respect of his postal contract, and
hence by his proposal the country would pay, not £5OO
merely, but £3,900 for that which the Galway line would
undertake to do for £3,000. (Hear, hear.) And even this
did not represent the whole of the question ; the Galway
line of vessels would run at times between the running
Cunard line, whereas Sir S. Cunard's proposal was only
that his vessels, which now carried the mails, should call at
Ccrk.. He could only answer the hon. member's question
in The affirmative.
Mr. GLAD STONE said that he thought the house ought
to consider the general question of this engagement to which
the country was apparently about to be pledged. He should
be glad, therefore, to know if some opportunity could not be
affordeu to the house to consider this matter.
Lord DUNKELLIN believed that the effect of this ques-
tion was intended to be a support to capital and monopoly
against straggling enterprise. What he believed to be
wanted was, not that every mail vessel for America should
start from Liverpool, but that the mail should start from
the port nearest to America. The house would remember
that at the beginning of this year Liverpool had done every
thing possible to throw cold water on the Galway scheme.
He could not understand how Sir S. Cunard could claim
anything for going round by Cork ; it was as near to go by
the south as by the north of Ireland. Galway was within
15 hours of London, and thus within 16 hours from leaving
town passengers would be on their voyage to America.
Mr. MAGUIRE had never said one word, and did not
now intend to say one word, against the Galway scheme.
But on the other hand he believed that the south of Ireland
was also to be considered. Sir S. Cunard, a most competent
judge, was of opinion that Cork was the best port in Ireland,
and was, within 25 miles, equidistant from New York with
Galway. He had further said that his vessels might run in
there at any state of the tide, and that the journey from
London to Cork might be done in 17 hours; and thus there
was only two hours between him and the last speaker. He
thought, therefore, that it would be much to the advantage
of the commercial world if the Government required Sir S.
Cunard to drop the mails at Cork, giving him for that ser-
vice a small sum to meet the extra expense. The advantage
of calling at Cork would arise every week, whereas the Gal-
way harbour packet would only sail once a fortnight. He
wished well to Galway, but he thought that something ought
also to be done for Cork.
Mr. MONSELL thought the real question was whether
this contract ought to be carried out at all on the sole autho-
rity of the Government, without the consideration of that
house. (Hear, hear.) The commission which had sat on
this subject reported that all postal contracts should be the
subject of competition. The Government, instead of taking
this course, it appeared, intended to complete a contract
with a particular company. He was not going into the
merits of those ports, but there were statements in the re-
ports of commissions by no means favourable to the Galway
scheme. He trusted that his right hon. friend the Chan-
chellor of the Exchequer would intimate to the house that
the Government did not intend without inquiry to conclude
this contract. (" Spoke.") He was aware his right hon.
friend had already spoken on this question before the
house, but a word from him would be satisfactory. (Loud
laughter.) He regretted to see the head of his right hon.
friend was immoveable. (A laugh.) He must say, for his
own part, that he thought this subject ought not to be com-
pleted until a committee of the House Of Commons had had
an opportunity of expressing its opinion upon it.
Mr. REPTON said he saw no interest whatever in the
rival claims of different ports. He thought that if this
question was referred to a committee of the new Parlia-
ment, much valuable time would be lost without tiny coun-
terbalancing advantage. The subject had been reported
upon again and again, and there was now in the hands of
the Government every possible information they could re-
quire. He thought the Government would exercise a very
wise discretion in concluding the contract with the Galway
Company.
Mr. LABOUCHERE thought that the estimates for
these contracts should, be submitted to the house. He
offered no opinion as to the eligibility of Galway for a
packet station but he thought that some explanation should
be afforded to the house before the contracts were concluded.
Mr. COGAN said that, if they were to have a revision of
the mail contracts, they had better begin with that of Sir
S. Cunard, which had been renewed without competition.
(Hear.) He thought that the Government were entitled to the
support of the Irish members from all parts of the country
for the conduct which they had pursued respecting this
contract. •
Mr. J. EWART thought that the contract should have
been open to public competition.
Sir J. GRAHAM hoped that some explanation would be
.given respecting this contract. He was extremely unwilling
to enter into any criticism on the merits of Galway harbour,
but he had great doubts as to whether any additional
Atlantic packet accommodation was required. But there
was a much graver question to be considered, and that was
whether Government was justified in entering into engage-
ments to the extent of £70,000 a year without the sanction
of the house. He trusted that the right !hon.' gentleman
would be able to state that the arrangement with the com-
pany was only conditional on its ratification by the house.
Mr. LINDSAY, alluding to a correspondence which had
on a previous evening been discussed on the motion of Mr.
Horsfall, complained that no Liverpool house had been
allowed to compete for the contract.
The motion was then agreed to.
SUPPLY—THE REFORM BILL—THE DISSO-
LUTION.
On bringing up the report of supply,
Mr. CAYLEY said—l wish to put a question to the
Chancellor of the, Exchequer upon a matter of great in-
terest, which I trust it may not be inconvenient or inoppor-
[ tune for him to answer, though perhaps I ought to have
given him a more formal notice. An impression has gone
forth, founded apparently on the statement made by my
right hon. friend on Monday last, or on that made by Lord
Derby elsewhere, that Lord Derby's Government have
come to the resolution of altogether washing their hands' of
the question of Reform for the time to come, and that it is
not their intention either this year or in any other year to
bring in another Reform Bill. The question I wish to put
to the Chancellor of the Exchequer is, whether he meant
by his statement on Monday last to convey to the house
and to the country that Lord Derby's Government, if then
in office, had no intention of introducing a Reform Bill in
the session of 1860; and whether, on the other hand, it is
not the intention of Lord Derby's Government to introduce
another Reform Bill on the first practicable opportunity ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—It would
perhaps be more convenient that I should answer the ques-
tion which has been put to me by my hon. friend at once
than that I should mix it up with those other subjects
which have been brought under our notice this evening, and
to which it will be my duty to allude'before the report of
the Committee of Supply has been received. I am not
quite sure whether I have succeeded in collecting exactly
the precise nature of the inquiry which my hon. friend has
addressed to me, but I understood him to ask me whether,
when I announced it to be the intention of her Majesty's
Government to withdraw the bill which we introduced for
the amendment of the representation of the people, I
made a statement to the effect that it was not
the intention of the Government under any circum-
stances to bring forward again a measure of Parlia-
liamentary reform ? (" Hear, hear," from Mr. Cayley.)
Now, I certainly never intended to make, and my impres-
sion is that I never did make, any such statement. And
although on the occasion in question I was desirous of in-
troducing no subjeCt which could lead to controversy, I ne-
vertheless asserted the right of members who sit on this side
of the house, to deal, as a political party, with that question
of Parliamentary reform, which it seemed to me some per-
sons would maintain to be the peculiar privilege of another
party. I asserted then that I considered we had a perfect
right to deal with that or any other public question, but
that, having fulfilled the pledge which we had given to the
house and to the country by bringing forward a Reform
Bill, we did not wish to burden ourselves with any specific
pledge to bring forward another measure of reform at any
particular time ; that we reserved to ourselves the right to
bring forward such a measure when we considered the in-
terests of the country required it, if we had an opportunity
of carrying it ; but that I did not wish to bind ourselves
specifically to bring forward any such measure at a particu-
lar time. That was the impression which I intended in my
mind—and I thought I succeeded in doing so—to convey to
the house. I spoke with reference to the meeting of the new
Parliament in June or July next, and I did not wish to hold
out to the house or to the country the erroneous impression
that we intended to do then at once that which we did not in-
tend to do. But on a future occasion, if the opportuuity
should be favourable, and we happen to be in power, I do
consider we are perfectly at liberty to introduce a measure
on the subject. I believe the Conservative party have pecu-
liar advantages in dealing with the question of reform.
What has occurred has not changed my opinion upon that
point—(hear, hear)—and I should certainly be very happy
to be the instrument in bringing forward a measure which
would have the object of settling, as far as we can expect it,
fora considerable time the question of the amendment of the
representation of the people. (Cheers.)
Mr. FITZROY then brought up the report of the Com-
mittee of Supply.
On the question that the report be received,
Sir G. GREY rose and said—l am anxious to make a few
observations with respect to a question of some importance
as to the course to be pursued in reference to which it is, I
think, extremely desirable that we should obtain some ins-
formation from her Majesty's Government. On Monday
last the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Zulu-

quer stated that he and his colleagues had advised her Ma-
jesty to dissolve Parliament, and he accompanied that state-
ment by an announcement to the effect, that it was the in-
tention of the Government that the dissolution should take
place at the earliest possible moment. The assistance of the
house in enabling the right hon. gentleman to carry out
that intention was liberally accorded. Hon. members in
whose names notices stood upon the paper of the house waved
their claims to press them, and we agreed to a resolution in
accordance with which Government orders of the day are to
have precedence of other business during the remainder of
the session. The consequence has been that the business of
the house has progressed so rapidly that the votes in Com-
mittee of Supply have been closed, that the report has been
brought up, and that it is now competent for any hon. gen-
tleman to count the remaining days of the session. Indeed,
it may be safely predicted that, unless some unexpected
source of delay should arise, the prorogation of Parliament
may take place—if we should sit on Saturdays, which I be-
lieve is not intended—on the 16th inst., and, in any case, on
the Monday following. It was understood that a dissolution
would at once follow the prorogation, in accordance with the
usual practice under similar circumstances. During the last
20 years Parliament has been dissolved on five different oc •
casions, the dissolution, on four of those occasions, having
taken place on the same day as, and, on the fifth, on the day
following, the prorogation. But not only has this been the
usual practice, but it has always been felt that to allow a
long interval to elapse between the prorogation and dissolu-
tion of Parliament, when the latter was in contemplation,
was productive of the greatest possible public as well as
personal inconvenience. When, therefore, I first heard it
mentioned by a member of this house that that which
has of recent years been the course invariably pursued in
this respect was about to be departed from in the present
instance, I at once discredited the report; but since then,
and within the last three or four • days, I have heard, on
authority to which I felt bound to attach weight, that it is
proposed by the Government that the dissolution should
not take place for some days after the prorogation. Now,
if the dissolution were in accordance with the usual prac-
tice to take place on the same day, it is obvious that the
elections for boroughs might be. proceeded with. in Easter
week, and that the nominations in counties might take place
in the week following—(hear, hear)—while if a different
course be pursued, and the dissolution be delayed for a
week, the result will be that the borough elections cannot
be proceeded with until the week following Easter week,
and that the- county elections will be proportionately later.
Now, every one who has experienced, as I have done, the
inconvenience and expense attendant upon a contested elec-
tion in counties and boroughs, must be aware how much
both are increased by an additional canvass of four or five
days. (Hear.) Every candidate must, therefore, be desirous
of having his canvass brought to a termination at the
earliest possible moment. I have been told, however, that
the reason alleged to justify a departure from the ordinary
course, on the present occasion, is that it is not deemed
right that the writs fora new election should issue in Pas-
sion week. For my own part, I cannot understand the force
of that objection. If, indeed, it were a question as to whether
the elections should take place in Passion week, there might
be some reason—although such a circumstance is by no
means unprecedented—for the delay which I understand is
contemplated. That, however, is not the question, and I
contend that Easter week is about the best possible time at
which the elections can be held, because the early days of
the week are holydays of the working classes, who, in those
cases in which they possess a right of exercising the fran-
chise, would thus be enabled to vote for a borough without
interference with their daily earnings. (Hear, hear.) I
hope under these circumstances that the right honourable
gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be enabled
to assure the house that it is the intention of the Govern-
ment to adhere to what I am bound to say was the distinct
understanding on the part of the House of Commons—.
namely, that the impending dissolution should take place at
the earliest possible moment. (Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the E X C HE QUER--Whatever
information with respect to the subject of his observations
may have reached the right hon. gentleman, I can only say
that it is information which rests on no good authority, and
I must beg to object to be called on to account for statements
which are founded merely on common rumour. (Hear,
hear.) The calculation which I made when I addressed the
house originally on this subject was that, using our best ex-
ertions, we should have brought the necessary public busi-
ness to a conclusion on the Monday or Tuesday in Passion
week, and I took occasion to inform the house that the dis-
solution would take place as soon as possible--certainly
towards the end of the month. [Sir G. Grey—lt might
take place on the 16th inst., which is about the middle of
the month.] I think it would be very objectionable to have
the elections in Passion week, and representations to that
effect were strongly urged upon me by gentlemen on
the same side of the house as that on which the right hon.
baronet sits. I cannot at this moment fix a precise day for
the dissolution of Parliament, but it will of course take
place as soon as is convenient after the prorogation, there
being no wish on the part of the Government to delay it
beyond that time. I may now, perhaps, be permitted to
take this opportunity of noticing a subject to the
inquiries of hon. gentlemen in respect to which I
have not hitherto been enabled to reply. If the house
wishes to change the whole system under which
contracts for the public service are entered into by the
Government, the question is of course a very fair one for
discussion and I should, I trust, be found prepared to give
due consideration to any suggestion which may be made on
the subject. I would now, however, merely observe that
her Majesty's Government, in the course which they have
taken in reference to this question of the Galway line, have
simply followed in the footsteps of previous Administra-
tions. (Hear, hear.) It is for the house, if it disapproves
the system under which those contracts are made, to come
to some definite resolution with respect to them. If the
executive is not to be entrusted with the power of entering
into a contract for a packet service, I should like to know
with what functions it can be entrusted ? (Hear.) When
we came into office we found a contract concluded of a most
important character, but the contract was not brought be-
fore the house. I am perfectly astonished that any hon.
gentleman should maintain that it is desirable to appoint a
select committee to inquire into the propriety of any new
contract relating to the packet service which the Executive
Government may think to be advantageous for the public
interests. Then it is said there is an important principle
involved, because we have decided upon this case not after
public tender, but according to our own views, and upon
our own responsibility. I apprehend we had the power
of doing that if we thought fit. It is not the first time that
such a thing has occurred, and I find upon the paper of this
evening a question to be put by an hon. member to the
Secretary to the Treasury, a Whether any renewal of the
subsisting mail contracts to the Royal Mail Steam Packet
Company for the West Indian and Brazilian mail service
has been granted or promised to that company without ad-
vertising for competitive tenders," &c. Now, what are
really the facts of the case in regard to the Galway con -
tract ? Here are some enterprising persons who develope a
moans of communication which no one had previously
thought of, and which it would be of immense advantage to
establish. We investigate the circumstances. We find that
they offer a rate of speed exceeding that of any' service at
present existing. I think we shall gain by this arrange-
ment two days in point of time in the communication be-
tween Ireland and America, and we shall save 5400 upon
each voyage. (Hear.) They also offer advantageous con-
ditions for the transport of troops from Athlone--a great
military station—to America, and the transmission of tele-
graphic communications under circumstances peculiarly
advantageous to the Government. We had to consider
whether persons of such enterprise should be encouraged
and supported by the Government or not, and we had also
to consider whether,;if that encouragement was not given,
there would not be a chance that the promised advantages
would be lost to the country. Believing that it would be
of great advantage to the country if this enterprise should be
established, finding that the rate of cost was so much lower
than was paid for the Cunard service, that the speed offered
was greater, and that there were many other advantages
offered; we have acted upon our own responsibility, and, as I
believe, for the public good, in determining that it was de-
sirable the contract should be entered into. I shall be per-
fectly ready at any time, upon a proper opportunity, and
not in this desultory manner, to vindicate that policy as one
highly ad vantageousto the United Kingdom, and one which
we were justified in adopting. I may say that it was our
duty td adopt it. The right hon. gentleman opposite is anx-
ious that there should be a proper Parliamentary control
over these contracts by the estimates being laid before the
house. Why, sir, of course the estimate will be laid before
the house. How are we to carry it into effect, except with
the consent of Parliament F
Mr. LABOUCHERE—WiII it be in the votes this yearF
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER--It cannot
be, because no vote is necessary, but before Government
pays a shilling there will be a vote laid before Parliament.
It was necessary to enter into a contract, because the pre-
parations required to, carry out this service would take con-
siderable time—(hear)—but when the first estimate is sub-
mitted—l believe before a single shilling has been paid by
the Government—the House of Commons will have the
same opportunities of dealing with it as they have
now in respect of Sir S. Cunard's contract. If the
house will not give the money there is an end of the
service, but the house may do that every year with respect
to the Cunard service. I believe the Government in this
matter have acted wisely and for the public benefit. If
they have not acted wisely nor for the public advantage,
they have acted upon full precedent, and have not taken a
single step which is not justified by the course taken by
preceding Governments in similar circumstances. I trust,
therefore, the house will not think it necessary to interfere
with an arrangement which I believe is greatly for the
public benefit. (Hear.)

Lord PALkERSTON—I merely wish to call the atten-
tion of the right hon. ggatjcpmn to_ the answer- he he's
given to the question of my right hon. friend as to the pe-
riod of dissolution. That answer was anything but satis-
factory. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman appears to
contend that the dissolution should not take place until the
end of the month.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Towardm
the end of the month.

Lord. PALMERSTON—Towards-the end of the month.
(A laugh.) My right hon. friend urged that in accordance
with the declaration of the Government, that the dissolu-
, 'ion should take place as soon as possible ; the writs should
issue the day after the prorogation. The dissolution could
take place the day after the prorogation, and it is possible for
it to take place on the same day. I can't imagine what
purpose the Government can have in view in postponing
the dissolution apparently until " towards the end of the
month." The house.feels the great inconvenience of such
e course. (Hear, hear.) Gentlemen sitting behind the
Treasury bench must feel it to be as inconvenient to them
as it is to gentlemen upon this side,. and therefore I entreat
the Government to reconsider then: intentions upon this
point. The dissolution might take place with perfect conve-
nience upon the very day of the prorogation, or the day
after; the elections could take place in Easter week, and
Parliament could meet at the earliest possible period. But
we were told just now that Government would not under-
take to bring in a Reform Bill in June or July, and are we
to understand that Parliament will not meet until June or
July ? (Hear, hear.) When the Government with which
I had the honour of being connected dissolved Parliament in
1857, the right hon. gentleman reproached us with endea-
vouring to waste a year. I am sure we vindicated ourselves
from that reproach, because when Parliament met, at ths
earliest possible moment measures of a very important cha-
racter were considered and carried. But if the dissolution
is to be postponed in the manner indicated by what has
fallen from the right hon. gentleman, and the meeting of
the new Parliament is not to take place until late in June or
the beginning of July, the reproach of wasting a year may, I
think, be justly applied to the present Government. (Hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I talked
of a motion, not of the house. I did.not suppose that a Re,
form Bill should be introduced npun the Very day that Par,
liament met. (Hear, hear.) I can only say again, we have
no intention of postponing the dissolution. I cannot Con-
ceive how it could be to the advantage of the Gloverument

to delay the dissolution, and I am sure it would not be for
the convenience of our friends. But I say again, Ido not
think it would be convenient to pledge myself to a particu-
lar day for Parliament to be dissolved. I still think, as
well as we can calculate, that all the business will be con-
cluded about Tuesday week—the 19th. 'That, I think, is
getting " towards the end of the month." The noble lord
is somewhat hypercritical upon that point. (A laugh.)
The convenience of members is certainly to be considered,
but there are also other considerations by which we must
be guided. As soon after the-business of this house is con-
cluded as we think is consistent with public conveni-
nience, of course the dissolution will take place. The pro-
rogation cannot take place until or " towards the end of
the month," and the dissolution will follow. •
Lord J. RUSSELL.—The right hon. gentleman cannot
at this moment pledge himself to any particular day upon
which Parliament will be dissolved, because there might be
business which may take a longer time than is at present
calculated upon, although I believe that pretty generally
members of this house can estimate that the business will
not occupy us later than Monday week. But the right hon .
gentleman is perfectly able to answer the question of my
right hon. friend whether the dissolution will immediately
follow the prorogation. (Hear, hear.) There can be no
difficulty about that. We have repeated precedents in
which the Crown, having thought fit to dissolve Parliament,
asked the assistance of the House of Commons, and that
assistance has been readily given, as I am sure it has been
now, but a dissolution has always followed, if not on the
same day at latest upon the day after the prorogation.
(Hear, hear.) I cannot imagine what difficulty there
can be in assuring the house that as soon as the Crown
is able to prorogue Parliament her Majesty will be advised
to do so. My noble friend is quite justified in commenting
upon the phrase of introducing a Reform Bill in June or
July. I believe that upon the 19th or the 20th of this
month Parliament may be dissolved, and then the new
house can meet about the end of May. (Hear, hear.) The
right hon. gentleman the other day rather taunted my noble
friend and myself with a want of patriotism, for ask-
ing, as Sir Robert Peel asked me in 1841, that if
the existing Parliament should be dissolved the new
one should meet as soon as constitutional prece-
dents and the requirements of the law would permit.
Since that time a law has been passed, known as Lord
Brougham's Act, by which Parliaments may meet sooner
*han formerly. The new Parliament might meet by the
end of May. What is the meaning, then, of talking about
a Reform Bill in July ? (Hear.) There can be no diffi-
culty, if a Reform Bill is really in contemplation, in intro-
ducing it, as was done in 1831, 10 days after the assembling
of the new Parliament, and if Parliament meet by the end
of May a Reform Bill might be introduced by the middle of
June. I cannot help thinking that there is something
strange in the declaration of the right hon. gentleman upon
this subject ; but, as the house has behaved with the utmost
courtesy to the Government, I trust that we shall not be left
in doubt with respect to the dissolution. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. GLADSTONE—If there has been any ambiguity in
the language of the Government with respect to the disso-
lution I have no doubt that we shall have it speedily cleared
up, because there can be no question that it is desirable upon
every ground that the dissolution should take place at the
earliest possible moment—which may be qualified on the
present occasion, however, to the extent of a day or two, by
the intervention of Passion week—and that the meeting of
Parliament should also take place at as early a period as
possible. lam quite certain, therefore, that that can never
become a matter of argument. (Cheers.) With respect
to the other subject, which, owing to the accident of the
discussion, his become mixed up with the question of the
dissolution, I would venture to say that the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer should not understand that
any imputation is sought to be cast upon the Government
with regard to the Galway contract. This matter of the
packet service is, after all, a young subject. It has
been growing up of late years, and it may be that
during its progress the house has been mreo anxious to
witness its growth than to maintain with strictness the ex •
ercise of its own constitutional control over the public ex-
penditure. (Hear, hear.) But upon 'this occasion an
important contract with a new company happens to have
come before the house when the contract is as yet uncom-
pleted. The speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if
rigidly interpreted, might be construed to mean that it is
positively better that there should be no eontrol by this
house over such contracts until they aro completed, and
until the money of private persons has been laid out upon
the faith of those contracts. (Hear.) Then at last an
estimate is proposed—not for future expenses, as from the
nature of an estimate is implied--but for the payment of
expenses already incurred ; so that, in point of fact, no
option then remains to the house. (Hear, hear.) And
the Chancellor of the Exchequer must know as well as
anybody, when he speaks of the control of the House of
Commons in such a case, that it really means no control at
all. (Hear.) There is no blame to the Government if they
have proceeded in this matter as former Governments have
done. But if it be desirable, for the sake of a due control
over the expenditure, that an estimate of the ordi-
nary expenses of a single year should be placed dis-
tinctly before the house before the expenses are
incurred, much more is it desirable that this house
should exercise a prior and not a posterior judgment on a
contract which is essentially of a somewhat delicate cha-
racter, and which is to bind the public faith for a very large
sum and over a considerable period of time. (Hear, hear.)
Without blaming the Government I would point out that
this matter comes before us at a time when the public faith
is not pledged, and when we can without imputation vin-
dicate to ourselves the right of considering it, and of trying
the reasons which have approved themselves to the minds
of the Government. I would, therefore, respectfully sub-
mit to the Government that, under those circumstances,
they- would do well and wisely to recognise the constitu-
tional
,jurisdiction and control of the House of Commons
over the public expenditure, and to afford to it a full oppor-
tunity.of considering the contract which they purpose to
complete before it is completed, and before private persons
have laid out their money upon the faith of it. (Hear.)
Colonel FRENCH said that, although the right hon.
gentleman who had just sat down had disclaimed any inten-
tion of blaming the Government for what they had done in
the matter of this contract, the Government had twice been
attacked,; without much consideration, on account of it.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer had fairly thrown down
the gauntlet, and had stated that he was ready to justify
the contract, and to show that it was for the benefit of the
public. If the right hon. member for the University of
Oxford doubted that, let him take up the gauntlet in a
straightforward way, instead of attacking the proceeding by
a side wind. (Hear.)
Mr. F. W. RUSSELL complained of the secrecy with
which he alleged that the contract had been attempted to
be carried out, and, urged, as there were other ports besides
Galway which might contend for the advantage of despatch-
ing steamers to America, that it was the duty of the Go-
vernment to suspend the completion of the contract until
the assembling of the new Parliament.
Mr. RICHARDSON claimed for Ireland the benefit of a
direct communication with America, and was understood to
advocate the Galway route as affording the readiest means
for the shipment of manufactured goods.
BARON BRAMWELL AND WELSH JURIES.—
• HEREFORD MAGISTRATES.
Mr. S. ESTCOURT rose to answer one or two questions
which had been asked some time ago, and which, he said,
the house had very likely forgotten, owing to the varied
character of the discussion which had taken place since they
had been put. The hon. member for Chester had called
the attention of the house to remarks said to have been
made by Mr. Baron Bramwell at Bala, on the North
Wales circuit, and speaking as a private individual, had
exercised the right—which he (Mr. Estcourt) would not
contest—of expressing an opinion upon the discretion of
the remarks attributed to the learned judge. The hon.
ourable gentleman pointed out that some of those re-
marks not only impugned .the verdict of the jury, but
that they seemed to depreciate the Principality of Wales
in point of honesty, as compared with England. He might
join with the honourable gentleman in thinking that al•
though nothing was said by the learned judge which could
be made the subject of complaint, still, as a matter of dis-
cretion, a comparison between one part of the country and
another might have been avoided. (Hear, hear.) But he
(Mr. Estcourt) would beg the house to observe that lie was
called to speak on this matter as a Minister of the Crown,
and that there were considerations connected with it of far
higher importance than that immediately referred to in the
notice on the paper. (Hear) The question was really one
which seriously trenched on the independence of the judges.
(Hear,) He should be loth to take any step, or to use any
expressions which might in the smallest degree disparage that
independence of the judges, which was one of the last quali-
ties which that house ought to surrender. (Hear, hear.)
So strongly had Parliament always endeavoured to maintain
the independence of the judges that they were not reckoned
as officers over whom the Home Secretary had any control.
The judges of the land, in addressing juries from time to
time, had frequently made use of remarks intended as warn-
ings or reprehensions, or as guides to public opinion on
matters not immediately before them, but which
inci-
dentally arose out of the circumstances they were trying.
That liberty of remark had been felt to be a great preserva-
tive against innovations, misconduct, and a number of
practices deserving of reprobetiontin checking which no
such opportunities were ettbrded us those which came with.
in the province of the judges in the administration of justice.
That being so he had to state that he did not think it con-
sistent with the duties of his office to Oar any explanation
by way of apology for the learned judge who was said to
have made the remarks to which the hon. gentleman had
called the attention of the house, (Hear, hear.) He turned
now to the recent appointment of magistrates for Hereford,
which the bon, gentleman (Mr. Clive) who represented that
city, had brought under consideration in an earlier part of
the evenin had .
lt That was a different matter, and he (Mr.
Estcourt)fe bound to direct the attention of the Lord
Chancellor to the notice which the hon. member had placed
upon the paper, In order that the nobleand learned lord might
have an opportunity of affording any explanation he might
wish to make in reference to the subject. It was impossible
for him (Mr. Estcourt) to divine beforehand the nature of
the speech with which the hon. gentleman (Mes Clive) would
preface his question; but what he understood the right hon.
member to complain of was, that six gentlemen should have
been added to the commission of the peace for the city of
Hereford, all of whom were supposed to hold Conservative
opinions, and two of whom the hon. gentleman rather in-
sinuated were scarcely fit for the office by reason of being
tradesmen, and carrying on business in that city. He also
understood the hon. gentleman to impugn the course pur-
sued by the Lord Chancellor in having made the appoint-
ments in question without communication with the autho-
rities of the city of Hereford. First, with regard to those
six gentlemen, he understood that about this time last
year, from which the commencement of this transaction
dated, there were altogether, including the Recorder, the
Mayor, the ex-Mayor, 10 gentlemen in the commission
of the peace for that city. One, a medical gentleman, had
never acted ; and of all that body of gentlemen one alone
was supposed to hold Conservative opinions—(hear, hear)—
and eight of them had been appointed by former Lord
Chancellors holding Liberal opinions. That being the
state of the case, he (Mr, Estcourt) thought no one would
wonder that gentlemen living in the city of Hereford and
holdlng the same opinions as her Majesty's present Go-
vernment were dissatisfied, and that they considered an
opportunity had fairly arisen when there ought to be an in-
fusion into the magistracy of gentlemen holding similar opi-
nions with themselves. They held a public meeting, at
which the names of certain gentlemen were canvassed, and
after several trenseeticaso had taken place consequent upon
sonic of those gentlemen declining to be put in nommas
tion, the names sent up were :—Mr. J. H. Griffith, a bar-
rister, a county justices of the peace, the son of a Minty
justice of the peace, residing five miles from Hereford ; Mr.
John Prince, a gentleman ot large property residing one
mile from tie Oty Qharles Price, a lieutenant na taw

navy, whose lately deceased brother was an active borough
magistrate ; Mr. William Bullock, a private gentleman re-
siding in his own house, where his father and family had
resided above 50 years ; he was in the law, and his father a
prebendary of the cathedral; Mr. Ambery Court, a respect-
able grocer in a large way of business ; and Mr. John. Parker. a respectable bookseller. Those names w ere
agreed on at a public meeting, and afterwards submitted to
the Lord Chancellor for consideration. What Was the
Lord Chancellor to do ? He communicated with the town-
clerk on the subject, and requested that the names of
the existing magistrates might be sent up to him.
That certainly was notice sufficient to the municipal
authorities. They did not, however, recoramend any
naraes, and no communication, he (Mr. Estcourt) believed,
was made by them to the Lord Chancellor. The Lord Chan-
cellor then made inquiries into the character of the gentle-
men whose names had been sent up to him frem the public
meeting, and finding they occupied the revectable posi-
tions which he (Mr. Estcourt) had described, the noble and
learned lord placed them upon the commission of the peace.
Those were the circumstances of the case, and he had only
further to say that he could not consent to the production
of any correspondence on the subject, seeing that it had
passed between the Lord Chancellor and gentlemen acting
m behalf of a public meeting.
Mr. CLIVE said the right hon. gentleman had stated
that of the gentlemen in the commission of the peace at the
time the six in question were appointed one was a Conser-
vative, and one alone. Would he mention the name of that
gentleman ?
Mr. ESTCOURT—Mr. Thomas Evans, an attorney (as
we understood).
Mr. CLIVE said in that the right hon. gentleman was
mistaken.
Mr. JAMES thought the house would cordially concur
in the constitutional principles propounded :by the Howe
Secretary in reference to the independence of the judges,
on which the security and liberty of the subject in this
country so • materially depended. At the same time he
thought it reprehensible for a judge to make any re-
mark on the conduct of a jury. (Hear, hear.) It was
a practice from which our greatest judges had always
abstained. It was the duty of a judge to expound the law to a jury, and the jury, moving in their orbit, were respon-
sible for the verdict. A verdict so given our most dis-
tinguished judges invariably respected, though they might
not always approve. He had had the honour of being on
the same circuit as the.learned judge whose conduct was
impugned on this occasion. That learned judge was elevated
to the bench entirely on his ownmerits, and he (Mr. James)
believed him to be a man incapable either of giving offence
to a jury or of interfereing with the due and impartial ad-
ministration of justice. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DILLWYN said, five gentlemen had been appointed
to the commission of the peace in the borough which he
represented, withovt, as far as he was aware, any previous
communication having been made to any of the local autho-
rities.
On the vote for military rewards,
Mr. COWAN called the attention of the committee to the
circumstances attending the deaths of Sergeant Carmichael
and Corporal Burgess, or Burgess Greerson, who sacrificed
their lives in the blowing in of the Cashmere-gate, at
Delhi, in September, 1857 ; and after reading an account of
the exploit written. by Colonel Baird Smith, in which a
glowing eulogiwu was passed on their devotion, asked
whether the Government would grant the Victoria Cross or a
pension to the fatherof Corporal Burgess, who was a consti-
tuent of his and in very reduced circumstances, and who was
anxious to possess some testimonial of his son's services ?
He should never regret that he was a member of the Select
Committee which had been the means of doing tardy justice
to the Land Transport Corps. He hoped that the next Par-
liament would apply themselves to reduce the national ex-
penditure, but he was sure no Parliament would ever grudge
rewards to those who counted not their lives dear to them
in the defence of their country. (Hear, hear.) He had to
thank the gallant general and every member of the Govern-
ment for the great courtesy and attention which they had
shown to him. He did not regard the vote which he re-
cently gave as a vote of censure. He should certainly never
have concurred in a vote of censure on the Government.
(Hear, hear.) No one wished more than he did that they
should continue in the prosecution of the various branches
of legislation in which they had been so honourably and
successfully engaged—(hear, hear)—and, in addressing the
last words which probably he should ever utter in that
house, he could assure them that it was his earnest wish
that the new Parliament should apply themselves to the
promotion of such objects both at homeand abroad as would
conduce to the honour and prosperity of the country.
General PEEL said it was with extreme regret that he
found himself unable to comply with the request which the
hon. member had previously made to him in reference to
these gallant men. It was not the custom to grant tewards
to those who had the misfortune to be killed in action. The
difference between these two men and the two officers, was
that, though the officers were severely wounded, they sur-
vived a •short time, and received an acknowled.gment of
their gallantry from Sir A. Wilson. Her l`lajesty had
great pleasure in confirming the Victoria Cross to them,
and handing it over to their surviving relatives. If these
two gallant soldiers had survived, how 'ever short a time, the
same course would doubtless have, been pursued. As to
granting a pension, they were eoldiers in the Company's
service, and the amount would eaves o
come out of the
revenue of India. He wished he had the power to grant to
the father of one of them the pensiento which he thought
him entitled.
The report was then agreed to.
WAYS AND MEANS.
In Committee of. Ways and Means resolutions were
agreed to—that £10,813,708 be granted to her 'Majesty
towards making good Supply out of the Consolidated Fund,
and that £13,277,400 be raised by Exchequer-bills for the
service of the year 1859.
The Sale of Poisons Bill, the Sale and Transfer of Land
(Ireland), Compensations and Stamps Bill, the Sale and
Transfer of Land (Ireland) Bill, and the Receivers in Chan-
cery (Ireland) Aboltion Bill were withdrawn.
second time.
The Pauper Maintenance Act Continuance Bill passed
through committee.
The Confirmation and Probate Act Amendment Bill was
read a second time.
The Naval Medical Supplemental Fund Society Annuities,
&c., Act Continuance Bill passed through committee.
LAW OF PROPERTY AND TRUSTEES RELIEF
• AMENDMENT BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill.
Mr. R OLT hoped that at this period of the session the
bill would not be proceeded with. There were many clauses
requiring great consideration.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE wished, before his hon. and learned
friend rose, to add that the bill seriously affected the inte-
rests of the Crown and the revenue departments. It.would
therefore be more convenient that the bill should be with-
drawn and brought forward in a new Parliament.
Sir P. KELLY regretted that there should be any appo-
sition to the passing of this bill, which had twice received
the sanction of the house of Lords after much discussion
and investigation, and which in its main features -
proved by all the most eminent lawyers in Parliament and
in the country. Looking, however to the present state of
the house and the session, he felt bound, although.with un-
feigned regret, to acquiesce in the suggestion of his hon.
and learned friend and withdraw the bill.
The bill was then withdrawn.
EVIDENCE BY COMMISSION BILL.
The Lords' amendments to this bill were considered.
COMBINATION OF WORKMEN BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
The house adjourned at a quarter past 9 o'clock until
Monday.

METROPOLITAN BOARD OF WORKS.

the usual weekly meeting of the Board, yes-
4.erday, after various matters of the usual routine
character bad been disposed of, Mr. LESLIE asked
the clerk whether, in the contract by the Board
with Mr. Moxon for the construction of the
northern high level sewer at £152,430, the Board
and the Government were bound by the specifica-
tion of the engineer and the drawings, levels, and
sections in connection therewith, or were concluded
by the estimates for those works signed by Richard
tateccontract2mn
Roberts and Edward Gotto, and dated Dec.,
1858.
Mr. yooLnYcH (the clerk) considered tat the
tothtneethe
ele2hos i n specification,hatnGor
I,nde rt2ni d
board were
were
nn yau tbh
pnvet
i,sceetd; drawings,tnhn. butea
or
heB4o .4washich
ofo p
uobnldigerattihoen
9thw h asteeevt
e otpf
incorporatedhhe er
i
n
cap. 104, or any other; and he further thought. the
Board were in no way bound by the
quant quantities con-
tained in the estimate dated December, 1858.
Mr. LESLIE then proceeded to point out some
gross errors, as he termed them
in that estimate,
and said that the quantities W
were, in many in-
stances, greatly exaggerated and far exceeded the
estimate made by Mr. Bazalgette, the engineer of
the Board. In the course of his observations he
stated that 16 contractors made tenders for the
work, and that 15 of them fixed their figures greatly
beyond the £152,430, at which the contract was
finally concluded with Mr. Moxon ; and he then
intimated, in terms rather stronger than we feel
ourselves at liberty to use the possibility that the
exaggerated estimate had been furnished to 15 of the
parties, and that what he called the true estimate
had been in some way made known to the 16th
contractor. Upon this assumption he declared that
the document to which he was referring was a fraud
and a swindle upon the ratepayers.
Mr. 11. L. Taylor, Mr. Carpmael, and several other
members of the Board expressed their strong con-
demnation of the insinuation thus made against two
highly honourable men, especially in their absence,
and called upon Mr. Leslie to withdraw his words;
but that gentleman contented himself with denying
that he had said more than that there was a proba-
bility of such information having been furnished to
one of the 16 contractors ; and contended that he
was justified in asserting that the "document" was
a swindle upon the ratepayers.
In answer to a question by Mr. Wright,
The ENGINEER said no doubt there were errore
in th^ document referred to by Mr. Leslie, but it
was not upon the quantities contained in that paper
that the estimate of this board was made as to the
amount on which the contract should be taken, nor
did he think that if those quantitiesshould actually
be executed it would in any
affect the ratepayers.
made
Mr. LESLIE degree pecuniarily
repeated efforts to-continue his
oarddderr ;
e ss
atnod, the
afterboard, a
g abiunt
rhvusi
efwansga str en called to
words be really had used,
Mr. CARPMAEL moved a vote of
cernesturarectupanon
that gentleman,
carried lr
y a majority of 10, there being 15 for
, which was seconded, and on a divi-
sionit and 5 against it.
Mr. Leslie wassensured accordingly, the CHAIR-
MAN at the samd time expressing his very great
regret at having to discharge that painful duty.
The board then adjourned.

NANA SAHlB.—According to the latest intelli-
gence received at Gorruckpore, the Nana is encamped at the
foot of the hills, with 3,000 troops at the outside. It is re-
ported that be has now no power, but goes about from place
to place disguised, and is Down to very few of the rebels.
Ile row two treachery.