The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-12 00:00:00

(No. 2) BILL.

On the motion for the consideration of the Lords' Amend-
ments to this measure, which stood on the paper as a pri-
vate bill, and the consideration of which, it will be remem-
bered, was adjourned from Thursday last till this day, on
an exception taken by Sir H. Willoughby.
Sir J. GRAHAM said he thought the hon. baronet the
member for Evesham (Sir H. Willoughby) had done great
public service in pointing attention to the nature of this
measure when it was last before the house. He (Sir J.
Graham) had since endeavoured to ascertain the facts con-
nected with the introduction of the bill and the efforts
made to pass it. He held in his hand the original prospec-
tus of the company, issued in August .last, in which the
substance of the agreement subsequently made by them with
the Government was embodied. The bill containing that
agreement was introduced at the commencement of last ses-
sion, and, being a private bill, the forms of the house would
necessarily be gone through, but no attention on the part
of the house was bestowed on the subject, and no respon-
sible Minister of the Crown explained the nature of the
transaction. The bill, so passed, was carried to the House
of Lords without comment, so far as he was able to under-
stand. There it arrived at its last stage immediately before
the dissolution, and so dropped, though an attempt had been
there made on the part of the late Government to pass it
without delay. The bill was re-introduced in the present
Parliament, the same forms were gone through in this
house without observation, as it appeared, on the part of
hon. members, and it went up to the House of Lords, where
it was on the point of passing, when Lord Stanley of Al-
derley, in its last stage, insisted as an amendment, that the
whole of the contract between the company and the Go-
vernment should be inserted in the bill. That amendment
the Lords made, and that amendment the House of Com-
mons were now called on to consider. He (Sir J. Graham)
had a strong opinion that this bill contained some objection-
able clauses. In the first place, it gave a guarantee of 4,1
per cent.—(hear)—upon all the capital of this company
paid up, and for what period, would the house believe, that
guarantee was given ? Why, for a period of 50 years from
this time, and that guarantee was to extend over the whole
of that long interval without reference to the success of the
company. (Hear.) There was another circumstance in which
he saw the most serious objection—namely, that the Govern-
ment was nominated ex officio directors, and one of those
ex officio directors, an intimate friend of his own, was a first-
class clerk of the Treasury, a gentleman of the highest hon-
our, and for whom he had the greatest respect ; but what
was the temptation to which. that gentleman was exposed ?
There was no restraining clause whatever in the bill against
those ex officio directors becoming shareholders in the con-
cern. (Hear.) He thought under the circumstances the
house would do well to suspend the further consideration of
the Lords' amendments of the bill for a fortnight or three
weeks to enable the committee on contracts,which:was to be
appointed that night, to inquire into the transaction and re-
port their opinion upon it to the house. (Hear.) That being
the view he ventured to take of the matter he moved as an
amendment that the further consideration of the Lords'
amendments be deferred for one fortnight. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. ELLICE seconded the amendment, and expressed
his obligations to his right hon. friend for bringing this
subject under the consideration of the house. He (Mr.
Ellice) came down to the house for the purpose of asking
the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he intended to no-
minate his committee on contracts, and to raise a discussion
with respect to the constitution of that committee. He com-
plained that the Treasury gave their sanction to bills of this
description without the house having before them any of
the grounds on whick they did so—(hear, hear)—and he
intended to call the attention of the house to that subject,
which was altogether contrary to what used to be the prac-
tice of the Treasury. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. GRAHAM said, in explanation, he was in error
in stating the bill had been reintroduced in the present Par-
liament. appeared to have been suspended, which, of
course, bade his case the stronger.
Mr. GREGSON 'said that the only amendment of. the
slightest importance, except the schedule, was the omission
of the clause giving borrowing powers to the company. The
project was before the 'public for 18 months before the
guarantee was obtained,• a prospectus issued in 185", pro-
mising. s 5 par cent• conditional guarantee from the East
India Company,
having failed to induce the public to sub-
scribe. He had received a letter from Mr. Corthorn, the
broker to the company,
a gentleman of high respectability,
who said :
" You will recollect the anxious deliberation bestowed
upon the extent of guarantee to be given by the Govern-
ment to the Red Sea Telegraph Company, and the desire
felt not to require more than sufficient to float the shares.
I can conscientiously declare that I believed at the time,
and still believe, that lower terms than those granted to the
company wouh) not have been sufficient to raise the capital
required for the undertaking. The result of the issue of the
.shares fully corroborates this opinion, for from the date
of the issue of the shares—viz., the 2d of August last, to
the 7th of January, the price ranged from 12s. 6d. pre-
mium per share to ss. premium, the average being Bs. 9d.
premium per share, a profit not too remunerating. Subse-
quently the shares were done at a premium of 15s. ; but
when an obstacle to the passing of the Act of Parliament
during the last Parliament arose the shares fell to 325. 6d.
discount. On the passing of the bill by the Lords, they
rose to a premium of f to I ; but without such guarantee
by Act of Parliament the price would again fall to a dis-
count, and the shares become unmarketable, and great diffi-
culty felt in getting the remaining calls paid."
The total length of line from Alexandria to Kurrachee was
3,268 miles, with eight stations. The line was now completed
from Alexandria to Aden, a distance of 1,590 miles, and the
remaining section to India would be completed by the end
of this year. Duo securities were taken by the Govern.
ment. All advances of interest by the Treasury were to
be a charge against future profits, and all profits beyond 10
per cent. were to be at the disposal of Government for
the benefit of the public. The Govertunent had the
power to fix the tariff, and all tht proceedings of the com-
pany were subject to the approval of the Lords of the Trea •
sury, who appointed two ex officio directors. The capital
was subscribed entirely on the faith of the contract with
the Treasury, one of the conditions being that the company
should proceed at once with the work, and enter into con-
tracts for the completion of the line within a given time.
Great inconvenience had been caused by the delay which
bad already occurred in passing the bill, which went through
both houses in the usual manner, the money clauses having
been passed in committee of the whole house, on the motion
of the right hon. gentleman the late Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer. The following particulars connected with the
laying of the cable would, ho trusted, be interesting to the
house :
" The cable was laid without any difficulty between Suez
and. Aden, the greatest depth being 500 fathoms,and the
oin soft throughout.
It wcrks admirably (according to
tho,en,ineer's report, better than any line hitherto laid),
V ad'Olse been continually at work, though, not handed over
te‘ the company till 30 days after laying. !here has been an
-option at Kosseir, caused by. an Egyptian steaer
drtegh ing her anchor in a gale of wind. It is probe
fleuret l by this time, being in the harbour, and in shallow
w 4ter . Mr. L. Gisborne,the engineer, telegraphed by this
tile loss of the Alma from Aden to Kosseir in a long
nit tssi age of 70 or 80 words, and received a reply within an
hot. T. The company's officers have received the most cor-
dial L assistance from all the Turkish and Egyptian authori-
ties j, vied a slight disturbance among the Hadjis (pilgrims)
at ICosseir, who pulled down the telegraph landmark, was
urn mediately suppressed by the Governor. At Suakin the
P; tcha, entertained all the telegraph staff at a grand dinner,
as Le rendered them every assistance in his power. This
Zr liming's mail brings intelligence of the completion of the
Ir nisei line between Alexandria and Suez."
C *Adoring the importance of a line of telegraph to India,

and that the bill feceived the assent of the house in March
last, he trusted that the right hon. baronet would not per-
severe in his opposition to this bill. (Hear, hear.)
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY thought it inconsistent with the
honour and dignity of the house that they should learn the
enancial obligations which were about to be imposed upon
the Exchequer by means of the Lords' amendments. (Hear,
hear.) A resolution was certainly po acted on the 11th of
I March and reported on the 14th, authorising' the Treasury
to make an agreement with the company, nut the house
was never informed that an actual agreement was in exist-
ence, rendering the Exchequer liable for a guarantee of
£36,000 for 50 years being 4f per cent. on a capital of
£BOO,OOO. If the capital should be increased to £1,000,000
there would be an annual charge of £45,000 upon the Trea-
sury, which would involve a total charge of £2,225,000. He
should certainly support the amendment.
Mr. H. BAILLIE thought it very desirable to have a
line of electric telegraph to India, but he believed the Go-
vernment would have acted more wisely if, instead of agree-
ing to such terms, the Government had decided to make the
line. He should support the amendment.
Mr. FITZROY said that the usual course had been taken
upon this bill, and a resolution had been agreed to in com-
mittee of the whole house, which certainly had not been
carried sub silintio. _ _ _

Mr. LABOUCHERE observed that it might be true that
there had been the usual opportunities afforded for a dis-
cussion of the bill, but the present was the first occasion
upon which the attention of the house had been called to
the subject. He thought the suggestion of the right hon.
baronet the member for Carlisle was a good one, and there-
fore he should support the amendment.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE said there appeared to be two
points under discussion. The first was as to the mode in
which the bill had passed through that house ; but he un-
derstood that the usual course had been pursued, and hon.
members had had all the opportunities for discussing it
which they had upon every other private bill. The other
point that had been raised was as to the expenditure
proposed, and the right hon. baronet the member for
Carlisle had stated that he regarded the contract entered
into by the late Government as very objectionable. The
matter had been arranged before he (Sir S. Northcote) had
entered upon his duties at the Treasury, but he believed it
was based upon the example of similar contracts made by
preceding Governments, and especially upon the contract
with the Mediterranean Extension Telegraph Company,
from Cagliari to Malta and thence to Corfu, in which casethe
preceding Government gave a guarantee of 6 per cent. for 25
years, instead of 41- per cent. for 60 years, as in the present
instance. The subject was one of great importance, and if
the only mode of successfully floating the line was by a gua-
rantee, he thought the Government was wise in giving it.
The contract had been called a one-sided bargain, but the
company had bound themselves to certain provisions which
would compel them to perform their part of the contract.
Another condition was that when the line was once laid the
company were bound to work it, or the Government might
take possession of the line. There were other conditions in
the contract giving the Government certain advantages,
such as the right of priority in sending messages. That was
an important matter. Let that be contrasted with the stipu-
lations made with some of the lines in this country. The
Submarine Telegraph Company had entered into a stipula-
tion with France, by which the French Government got the
priority. What an immense importance it waste this country
to maintain communication with. its East Indian possessions.
Let the house consider the case of the late Indian mutiny,
and a thousand other circumstances, in which rapid commu-
nication with India was absolutely necessary, and it would
agree that any arrangement,eowever extravagant it might
seem, that put this country in communication with our
East Indian possessions, without making the country de-
pendent on any foreign Government, was of the utmost
importance. (Hear, hear.) The contract was very care-
fully drawn, and the late Government had improved on
the terms entered into by their predecessors in regard to
the Mediterranean extension line. Provision was made

for a reserve fund, and for a reduction of the charges to
the public, and all possible care was taken to provide for
the good working of the line. He thought the clause em •
powering the appointment of official directors, having au-
thority to control the whole proceedings of the company,
and to take care that nothing was done to imperil the secu-
rity, a good clause, though the right hon. member for Car-
lisle had objected to it. With respect to the adjournment
of the consideraiion of the Lords' amendments he expressed
no opinion. That was a question for the Government and
the promoters of the bill. He thought the agreement made
by the late Government a good, proper, and economical
agreement, and there was nothing on which he was more
ready to encounter scrutiny. Therefore, he did not oppose
the motion for an adjournment of the discussion for a fort-
night.
Sir J. GRAHAM observed that there were not above 15
copies of the bill printed. With regard to the ex officio di-
rectors. the case was stronger than he had thought. (Cries
of "Order.") Did the house not desire to know the facts
Mr. ROEBUCK called the right hon. baronet to order.
He was always glad to hear the right hon. baronet, but he
did not think that the right hon. baronet had a right to
speak twice. (Hear, hear.)
The SPEAKER observed that the right hon. baronet
had only a right to explain.
Sir T. GRAHAM said that he was endeavouring to ex-
plain that these ex officio directors were not prohibited
from holding shares, and, indeed, there was a provision de-
claring that they might hold shares.
Mr. KINNAIRD observed that there was nothing pecu-
liar or irregular in the way in which the bill had passed
through its stages. The shareholders of the line were now in
this position, after a Government guarantee had been dis-
tinctly given, and after they had on its faith expended three-
fourths of the capital, that they were not able to complete
the line because they could not make a call or borrow money
until the present bill passed. Any delay would be mostpre-
judicial to them, and he must say that the present proceed-
ing savoured very much like repudiation. It should be borne
in mind that this undertaking was projected during a great
crisis in the affairs of this country, viz., during the Indian
mutiny, when rapid communication between India and this
country was of vital importance.
Mr. CRAWFORD said that hi: hon. frien d who had just
spoken had anticipated what he had to say. More than half
the capital of the company had been raised and expended
on the faith of the guarantee, and he wished to know whe-
ther it competent for the house now to consider the bill
otherwise than exclusively in reference to the Lords'
amendments.
Lord DUNCAN thought the question before the house
was whether they were to sanction a system which gave away
the public money by a private bill, of which only about 12
or 13 copies were printed. Until attention was drawn to the
measure he was not aware of its provisions, and now he
found that byone of the Lords' amendments it was proposed
to give a guarantee of 41- per cent. for 50 years on a sum of
£BOO,OOO, which might be raised to £1,000,000. It was a
great public question whether that house should bind the
country for 50 years to pay the sum of £45,000.f0r the Red
Sea Telegraph. Without adverting to the merits of the
matter, he raised his voice against binding this country in
such a way to give a guarantee on an undertaking not even
now in existence. It would be far better to give the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer the entire power of making these
guarantees without referring them to the house at all.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
this was a question of very considerable nicety and delicacy
—(hear)—and he thought it his duty, holding the office he
did, to state to the house what considerations occurred to
him. He must say that he was a little disappointed when
the hon. baronet opposite (Sir S. Northopte) declined to
enter into the question of the motion of the right hon. mem-
ber for Carlisle, stating that that was an affair for the
Government and the parties to consider; for the right hon.
baronet was the official erg,an of the Government that
Made this contract.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE explained that it was made some
months before he joined the Treasury.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
mean to state that the right hon. baronet made the contract,
but onlythat he was the official organ of the Government that
made the contract. He wished simply to state to the house
the view he took of the position of the Government in regard
to the contract, because the matter was one of the ex-
tremest delicacy, and public credit was that which not only
ought not to be broken, but ought not to be even sus-
pected of being broken. (Hear, hear.) What he found to be
the case, when the present Government assumed office, was
that the present bill was in the House of Lords, and noble-
men connected with the Government in that house, as a de-
bate upon it was about to take place, made application to
him to ,know whether it was the intention of the Govern-
ment to support the bill as it stood. In his opinion they
were pledged to the bill in the position in which it stood,
and it was too late for the Government to raise a question
on its merits on that account. The merits were not entered
into by the Government in the House of Lords, and it was
his intention, when the plan was brought to issue, to fulfil
the contract, which he found written in the agreement be-
tween the executive Government and the parties to the fol-
lowing effect :—That an Act of Parliament (according to
the last clause of the bill) should be applied for in the next
session, for the purpose of confirming and giving effect to
the agreement; and that the clauses necessary for the pur-
pose should be submitted to, and approved by, the Lords
Commissioners of the Treasury, who were to sanction
and further the application by the company for such A it
of Parliament. That was the agreement, and on coming
into office and finding these terms in existence laid down,
and entirely independent of the discretion of the present
Government, no choice was presented to them except to
give their support as far as possible to the bill. On that
agreement he felt bound to act, but with respect to the
rights of the house, that undoubtedly was a different mat-
ter, and it was not for him to determine, but for the house
to decide where its jurisdiction commenced, and what were
its duties and obligations, and he had no doubt that it
would consider the former and adhere to the latter. He
did not understand that the right hon. member for Carlisle
raised any issue as to the merits of the contract ; but he
merely recommended that as this was a new Parliament, and
as the arrangement under which the bill was brought be-
fore them in its present form, and which had prevented the
present Parliament from entering into a minute examina-
tion of the measure, had been made, not for the conveni-
ence of Parliament, but of the parties interested in the
bill, its further consideration should be postponed for a
term of 14 days. in order that the house might know what
they were going to vote. The right hon. baronet said;
"Arrangements of great importance have been made
between the Government and the company ; principles of
great moment to the public interests are involved in those
arrangements ; and as a committee is about to be appointed
to inquire into the general question, let us have an oppor-
tunity of ascertaining accurately what we are asked to do."
In that suggestion he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
did not see anything • tending to impugn or to weaken the
force of the contract between the Government and the
parties, or to impair the nature of the obligation, whatever
it might be, which Parliament had contracted with regard
to these parties. He hoped, therefore, that the hon. mem-
ber for Lancaster and other hon. members would not persist
in their objections to the postponement. If they did so it
might be supposed out of doors that an issue was raised
upon a question of public faith, whereas there was merely
a demand for time, with a view to consideration. The con-
cession of such time might be attended with some temporary
and limited inconvenience to the parties, but if his right
hon. friend the member for Carlisle thought the Douse
ought not to proceed blindfold in it matter of such public
importance, as tb.at view was entertained by so many hon.
gentlemen, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would feel
ehtia gole':ifortnvtg arrangements.chsehor Yiedmtseration, and numerous
bound to support his proposition. He would only add that
s
in the last Parliament, on the 14th of March, a resolution
was reported by the then Chairman of Wave and Means
from the Committee on the Red Sea and Indian Telegraph
Company, the effect of which was, undoubtedly, to give the
sanction of the House of Coninio'ns, so far as preliminary
proceedings were concerned, to the agreement which le.il
versally, regardelsnuig.ppwoi
been entered into between the Goverment and the lied
Sea and Indian Telegraph
first resolution of thase
ahosuuffseioN
Company, and in such cases the
tepoagsn uayyacommonly,
guarantees
ueif w
anots a ut n a i
foundation to warrant the
i ngi‘partiesro. Dgu
it.ivpseritto
their
rd
rt
th tt
thoughtoh
thatliantedeterniin
Govern-
ment were influenced by motives of public policy. (Hear,
hear.) The
pwuhto
underle
th e
n
ir
of a similar character were preferred ; but,
aearirpluycapteir;:nosd
although the late Government came to the conclusion that

it was not advisable that they should enter into anruncon-
fitional guarantees, they felt it their duty to make two ex-
eeptions to that principle, the first being in the case of the
scheme for securing a telegraphic cammnication with India,
and the other for providing a similar communication with the
iTnited States of America. The condition of India at the
period when this arrangement was made would be within
the recollection of every member of the house, and he
thought it would be admitted on all sides that it was not
only a serious injury but a disgrace to this country that, in
such an age of science and progress as the present, we should
not have possessed the means of telegraphic communication
with that important dependency. (Hear.) The late Govern-
ment did not of course enter into this guarantee until they
had exhaasted every means ofascertaining whetherthere was
any prospect that the object would be attained without their
interference. After considerable delay and prolonged in
vestigation—after consulting the ablest men and endeavour-
ing by every means in their power to obtain authentic in-
formation—it was their deliberate opinion that the scheme
now under consideration was the only mode by which tele-
graphic communication between this country and India
could be accomplished, and they shrank from the responsi-
bility which they must.necessazily have incurred had they
met Parliament without attaining so desirable an object.
With regard to the feeling of the present House of Com-
mons on this subject, it was natural they should enter-
tain some jealousy of an arrangement which they were
called upon to sanction providing for' the 'expenditure of
public money for a considerable time to come. This might be
a natural, but it was not alegal or constitutional feeling; for,
according to the laws and regulations of Parliament, if they
resolved to continue the labours of their predecessors—the
, Parliamentlately dissolved—with regard to this class of legis-
lation they must adopt at the same time the resolutions which
their predecessors had agreed to, and the conclusions at
which they had arrived. It was not open to this house to
say that they now, for the first time, became acquainted
with important engagements which the House of Commons
were Called upon to fulfil. That was not a fair, true, or ac-
curate representation. They must consider this bill as if
it had gone through all its stages in the new House of
Commons, and he thought it had been shown indisputably
that every Parliamentary form to guard against any mis-
application of the public money had been strictly observed.
He had not heard the observations of the right hon. mem
ber for Carlisle, but if his proposition was merely what it
had been represented to be by the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, he was far from wishing to oppose it. He thought
it was of the utmost importance that tne country and the
house should be perfectly satisfied with regard to these
transactions ; and as he hoped that no risk of injury or in-
convenience could accrue from the short delay proposed, it
might be advantageous that the bill should be referred to
the committee.
Mr. BOUVERIE was at a loss to understand what object
could be attained by the postponement of the bill with a
view to its consideration by the select committee to be ap-
pointed to-night. Even if the contract should prove to
have been improvident so far as the public were concerned,
the matter had gone so far that the faith of the House of
Commons was pledged to the arrangement, and it would now
be too late to back out of it. He thought this case showed
that the forms of the house were defective, and that this
discussion might have been avoided if a full statement of
the circumstances connected with the contract had been
submitted to the late Parliament. The company had made
a call, spent their money, and executed a great part of their
project, and the case was one in which the public credit
required that there should now be no repudiation on the
part of Parliament. The bargain might or might not
have been an improvident one, but advantage could not
honourably be taken of a pure technicality to get rid of it.
The SPEAKER wished to say a few words on a point of
form. In the case of this bill and two other bills of a simi-
lar nature —viz., the Indian and Australian and the Atlantic
Telegraph Bills, and in which there were guarantees of
public money, the clauses containing the guarantees not
having been printed in italics in the first copies of the bills,
by his direction the original measures had been withdrawn,
and fresh bills presented, with the clauses in question
printed in italics, and therefore specially inviting the atten-
tion of the house to them. The substantial merits of this
question did not in any way come within his province. If
there had been anything informal or irregular anything
that contravened the rules and privileges of that house in
the amendments made by the Lords, it would have been
his duty to bring them under notice. But there was nothing
of that nature in those amendments. With respect to the
inquiry addressed to him by the hon. member for London
—namely, what was the exact question now before the
house ? the answer was " Whether the house would agree
to the amendments of the Lords." The question certainly
was not whether the house would revise or reconsider
parts of the Bill to which it had given its assent, and
which the other house had also accepted. (Hear, hear.)
Viscount DUNCAN hoped the Speaker would inform the
house how many copies of private bills were circulated
among hon. members.
Mr. WILSON had understood the right hon. gentleman
(Mr. Disraeli) to say that there had been two exceptions in
the time of the late Government to the principle of a con-
tingent guarantee—viz., the Red Sea Telegraph and the
Atlantic Telegraph. This was the first time he had heard
that an absolute guarantee had been given to the Atlantic
Telegraph Company, which, he always understood, had re-
ceived only a contingent guarantee. He must, however,
bear his testimony to the accuracy of the right hon. gentle-
man's statement that the late Government had exhausted,
but in vain, every means in their power to fizd parties ready
to take up the project of a Red Sea Telegraph on the prin-
ciple of a contingent guarantee.
The SPEAKER said that copies of private bills were
printed by their promoters, and circulated in considerable
numbers among hon. members on both sides of the house.
Mr. DISRAELI explained that he had been in error in
saying that the guarantee to the Atlantic Telegraph Com-
pany was an absolute one.
The house then divided, when there appeared—
• For the further consideration of the amendments 177
Against l3O

Majority
The amendments were then considered, and the bill was
ordered to be read a third time.
THE PACKET SERVICE.

Mr. RICH gave notice that at the proper time he should
move the postponement of the vote for the conveyance of
the mails from Dover to Calais and Ostend.

THE QUEEN'S PRINTER.

Mr. BAINES asked the Home Secretary whether it was
the intention of her Majesty's Government, on the expira-
tion of the patent of the Queen's printer for England and
Wales, on the 21st of January, 1860, to propose the renewal
of that patent, so far as it related to the printing of Bibles
and Testaments, or any restriction on the free printing of
the Holy Scriptures.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said the restraints on the printing of
the Holy Scriptures in the United Kingdom did not, as the
hon. gentleman seemed to think, rest merely on the patent
granted to the Queen's printer. They rested on the prero-
gative of the Crown, which had the power of restricting the
printing of the authorised versions of the Holy Scriptures
and the Book of Common Prayer. That prerogative would
subsist unless it were abandoned by the Crown or termi •
nated by an Act of Parliament. The subject of the policy
of renewing the monopoly was under the consideration of
her Majesty's Government, but it was a point involving a
number of difficult questions —(hear, hear)—and they had
not come to any decision upon it. The house, however,
would permit him to state that, so far as the matter had
been represented to him, it could not be said there was any
practical grievance with respect to the printing either of
the Bible or the Prayer-book, as to inaccuracy or as to want
of cheapness. (Hear, hear.) He was assured that the
cheap prices at which the Bible and Prayer-book were
printed could not be exceeded, and that copies printed by
the Queen's printer and at the two English Universities
were circulated in the United States and in our colonies,
and competed there with Bibles and Prayer-books printed
without any restraint or monopoly. In 'regard, therefore, to
cheapness, he was not aware that a change of system wouold
produce any advantage ; and, as to accuracy of text, he
found it generally admitted, but that some authentication
by a public authority was necessary. (Hear, hear.) He
would add that, although in Scotland there was no mono-
poly with respect to one printer, there was a restraint on all
printers, inasmuch as it was not competent for any printer
in Scotland to publish a copy of the Bible without the con-
sent of the Bible Board. Therefore, that was just as much
a restraint on the liberty of printing as if the privilege of
printing were granted to a limited number of persons.
(Hear, hear.) If the Scottish system in that respect were
introduced into England, it would entail certain expenses
not now incurred. He found that in the year 1858 the
salary of the Secretary to the Bible Board was £6OO ; those
of the law agents, £240 ; and the law charges amounted to
£2so—making an annual charge in respect of the Bible Board
of £l,OOO. He added, in reply to Mr. Hadfield, that no legis•
lation was required for the purpose of renewing the patent
of the Queen's printer. It was a grant derived from the
prerogative, and there was no occasion for that house to
legislate on the subject. The Government had not come to
any decision on the question. What he had said, there-
fore, was merely interlocutory, and other opportunities
would occur for bringing the matter under the considera-
tion of the house.
ROADS IN SCOTLAND.
Sir A. AGNEW asked the Secretary of Stab: for the
Home Department whether he could give any information
as to the proceedings of the Royal Commission appointed to
inquire into the management of roads in Scotland, and when
they ware likely to publish their report.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said, according to a letter under the
hand of the Secretary to the Commission addressed to the
Home Department, the Commissimers had made very con-
siderable progress in their inquiries, and there was every
reason to believe that they would report before the end of
the present year.
THE WESTMINSTER PALACE CLOCK.
Mr. HANKEY asked the First Commissioner of Works
what was the reason why only two faces of the clock in the
clock tower are now made use of ; also, whether there had
been any late correspondence between the maker of the
clock and the architect of the Houses of Parliament or the
,Board of Works ; and if so, whether there was any objec-
tion to lay such correspondence before the house ?
Mr, FITZROY said the reason was that the minute
hands and the counterpoises for the clock were found to be
so heavy that it was impossible to work the clock. (A laugh.)
The truth was there was a divided jurisdiction between the
architect of the palace and the maker of the clock. It was
originally proposed that the minute hands should weigh
2 cwt., but, having been cast in gun metal, the weight of
them had been increased to 3 cwt„ with something more
than 4 cwt. of counterpoise within the clock room, so that
the total weight amounted to no less than 7 cwt., in-
stead of 2 cwt. as originally proposed. Directions had been
given to Air, Dent, the maker of the clock, to construct
new hands of the proper weight. A correspondence had
passed between the Department of Works and the architect
of the palace, but it would not throw much more light on
the subject.
THE SUBMARINE TELEGRAPH BETWEEN

ENGLAND AND FRANCE.
Sir S. NoRTHeOTE asked the Secretary to the Treasury
whether the Submarine Telegraph Company had been per-
mitted by her Majesty's Government to lay down any addi-
tional wires between England and France; • and whether
the permission had been given to them without requiring a
surrender or modification of the monopoly which had recently
been granted to that company by the I rench Government,
and which gave them an exclusive right to lay down lines
of telegraph between the two countries ; and whether there
would be any objection to lay on the table of the house the
correspondence relating to the subject.
Mr. LAING said the Submarine Telegraph Company
had recently obtained from the French Government a con-
cession to lay down additional wires between England and
France. The late Government entertained an objection to
the monopoly, and used all their influence to prevent the
company laying down the cable. On the present Govern-
ment coming into office they found a letter from the com-
pany, stating, among other things, that by their charter
they were protected until July, 1862, in the right of laying
down the cable between the two countries. The opinion
of the law officers of the Crown, to whom the matter had
been referred, was decidedly in favour of the view taken by
the present Government, and the prohibition of the late
Government had been withdrawn. An intimation, how-
ever, had been given to the company to the effect that,

having regard to the objectionable nature of the monopoly,
*as soon as the, period during which they were pro-
tected by their charter expired the Government would
feel it their ,duty. to exercise the rights of the. Crown in the
matter in such a manner as the public interests might seem
to require.
THE INCOME-TAX.

Mr. BUTLER asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer
whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Government
to introduce any measure during the present session by
which the mode of assessment and collection of the income
tax by local unpaid commissioners would be altered ; and,
if so, in what manner it would be proposed to make such
assessment and collection.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—There
neither is nor has been such an intention.
NAVAL PENSIONERS.

Sir G. B. PECHELL asked the Secretary to the Admi-
ralty if it was intended to enforce the re-entry into the ser-
vice of all naval pensioners, or whether special cases would
be considered of persons in receipt of very small pensions,
or whom under certain circumstances it might be expedient
to relieve from such compulsory service.
Lord C. PAGET said that about 600 pensioners were
called out, and that there were about a dozen who asked
for an exemption. As a general rule, the Admiralty, when
a special case for exemptiqn was made out, were always
disposed to take a favourable view of the application. At
the present moment there were four or five who had been
exempted.
THE ARMISTICE IN ITALY.

Mr. DISRAELI—The country heard last Friday with
gratification that an armistice had been entered into be-
tween the Allies and the Emperor of Austria. I wish now
to inquire of her Majesty's Government whether they
have received official information of the event from the
Government of France, and whether the armistice is a mere
military convention, or whether, on the other hand, the
Government can hold out to the house any prospect that
negotiations for peace will be prosecuted in consequence.

Lord J. RUSSELL—What I stated was that an official
intimation of an armistice had been received by-me from
the French Ambassador, but that this official information
did not go beyond that contained in the lifoniteur. I have
nothing farther to say at present, for on the face of the
armistice it appears to be only for military purposes. At
the same time the house well knows that the armistice
which was signed on the Sth inst. will extend to five weeks.
I cannot but hope that this duration of five weeks implies
that the belligerent Powers will be ready to receive sugges-
tions, or will of themselves propose some terms, by which
hostilities may be put an end to. (Hear, hear.) This is
at present, however, mere conjecture, since there is nothing
on the face of the armistice which declares that, either on
the part of the Emperor of the French or the Emperor of
Austria, there is any agreement to enter into any negotia-
tions for peace. There is a meeting to-day of the two Em-
perors at Villafranca, and I trust that we shall soon have
some intelligence on the subject of their interview.
Mr. DISRAELI—I am afraid I have very imperfectly
expressed my meaning. What I wanted to know from her
Majesty's Government was whether any further informa-
tion except the formal communication of the armistice
which the noble lord announced on Friday has been offici-
ally communicated by the Government of France.

Lord J. RUSSELL—I have no further official informa-
tion, except a telegram from her Majesty's ambassador al
Paris.

CONTRACTS COMMITTEE.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave no-
tice that he should Postpone until to-morrow (this day) the
nomination of this committee, when he should propose that
it consist of 19 members.
SUPPLY.—REPORT.

The report of the votes agreed to on Friday night was
brought in and received.

ENTRANCE TO ST. JAMES'S PARK

On the motion for going into committee of supply,
Mr. KINNAI RD called the attention of the house to the
advisability of tt.king advantage of the present opportunity
of Berkeley-house having been pulled down to secure a
road for the passage of carriages and horses from Charing-
cross through Spring-gardens into St. James's-park. The
house would recollect that a great effort was made to open
a communication between Belgrave-square and St. James's,
and the utmost difficulties were encountered. A committee
of that house had suggested that an ornamental gate
should be made near the German chapel ; instead of that
the Government, or these who had the authority, had
built up two huge ugly walls, as though to disgust the
public as much as possible. There had been an undrstand-
ing that Carlton-house terrace shout 1 be completed ; the
only obstacle was the lease of Berkeley-house ; but the
owner having great Parliamentary influence, some five or six
votes, got his lease renewed, and that opportunity was lost.
Now the house was pulled dswn by the Metropolitan Board,
and he had hoped that the late Government would have taken
care to secure a public carriage road into St. James's-park.
That corner of the park, now a perfect disgrace, might be
made one of the most ornamental parts of the ground. A.
committee of that house had long ago recommended an open-
ing to the park from Trafalgar-square ; and Mr. Pennithorne
had made a plan for it so long as 15 years ago. The pro-
posed opening would be a great advantage to her Majesty
herself on her way to the National Gallery, and places east-
ward of Charing-cross. He hoped to hear from the Clief
Commissioner of Works that they were prepared to carry
out this improvement.
Lord DUNCAN said there was now a great diference be-
tween the Board of Works and the Board of Woods. (A
laugh.) The-former expended money for public improve-
ments ; the latter was an office of receipt ; last year its
receipts were £420,000, and the civil list, as was well known,
was only £350,000. He denied that the property referred
to was the property of the country ; it had belonged to the
Crown from before the Norman Conquest. (Hear, hear.)
If any Crown property was taken for improvements it must
be paid for, and the Crown ought also to receive compen-
sation, the same as a private proprietor. The metropolis
was the wealthiest community in the world, and could well
afford to pay for improvements. Let the Metropolitan
Board apply their money to constructing this passage,'
instead of spending £50,000 over Berkeley-house. He
believed that for £4,000 they might render the building in
Greek-street perfectly fit for their purpose.
Lord J. MANNERS said ho agreed in almost everything
that had fallen from the noble lord.
Mr. TITE said he did not mean to be the apologist of the
Metropolitan Board of Works, but he thought they made a
wise and prudent bargain on the part of the public in making
this purchase. Berkeley-house was now being pulled down,
and when it was rebuilt it would give a light airy foot pass-
age into the park of 21ft. wide and 100 ft. long. What his
hon. friend wanted was that there should be a carriage way as
well as a foot passage into the park. He thought that would
be a great convenience, particularly as a large terminus was
about to come into the neighbourhood. No great expense
would be necessary, particularly as the land belonged to the
Crown, and they would have to pay for one house only, the
lease of which would soon expire. The Board of Works were
at present making enormous improvements in the metro-
polis. They were making a street from *he borough through
Stamford-street, which would cost £190,000 ; another to
Covent-garden, which would cost £70,000 ; and others in
the east end of the metropolis, which would cost £120,000.
All this expenditure would fall on the ratepayers, and if
the house was of opinion that the expense of this improve-
ment should also be borne by them, it ought to be tho-
roughly understood that the roadway was to be 45 feet wide.
Mr. Frrz ROY said that the question raised by the hon.
gentleman resolved itself into one of finance. The hon. gen-
tleman said that this would be a great public improvement,
and that it could be effected at a small cost. He was at issue
with him on both points. There was now a new opening at
Marlborough-house, and this road, together with the Bird-
cage-walk road, would make the proposed carriage way a
mere infinitesimal gain to an infinitesimal number of the
population, whilst it would interfere with that solitary nook
where so many children were in the habit of enjoying
themselves in peace and quiet. (Hear.) If the road •
way was to be made, as it should be they must take
half the garden on. which Sir J. S. Lefevre's house
stood and three houses. He understood that the cost
would be £53,000, and the question was whether the house
was prepared to throw so great a burden on the country.
He was of opinion they ought not to lay out any of
the public money on metropolitan improvements, except
where the health and comfort of the people were concerned.
He was not inclined to take any stops in the matter now,
but should make further inquiry as to the expense, which,
however, he did not think would be much reduced below the
amount he had mentioned.