The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-31 00:00:00

MONEY COINED IN SYDNEY.

Mr. Alderman SALOMONS asked the Under Secretary
of State for the Colonies, what steps had been taken, if any,
towards making the colonial sovereign coined by the
branch of the Royal Mint at Sydney, New South Wales,
a legal tender throughout her Majesty's dominions.
Mr. C. FORTESCUE said that no steps had been taken
in reference to the subject.
THE DISTURBANCES AT MILAN.
Mr. C. BENTINCK asked the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs whether he should lay upon the table any
official accounts he may have received relative to the late
disturbances at Milan ?

Lord J. RUSSELL said that there was nothing in the
correspondence that justified his laying it upon the table.

SUDBURY AND ST. ALBANS.

Mr. A. EGERTON asked the Secretary of State for the
Rome Department whether it was his intention to proceed,
during the present session, with the Appropriation of Seats
(Sudbury and St. Albans) Bill ?
Sir G. C. LEWIS answered in the affirmative.
ORNAMENTAL GATES AT HAMPTON COURT.
Mr. C. BENTINCK asked the First Commissioner of
-Works at whose request and for what purpose certain or-
namental gates had lately been removed from Hampton
Court Palace Gardens, and whether it was intended to re-
store such gates to their original position ?
Mr. COWPER s'id that the gates in question had be-
come much deteriorated, and were removed to London for
the purpose of being renovated, after which they would be
restored to their former position.
THE GALWAY CONTRACT.
Mr. LANIGAN asked the First Lord of the Treasury
whether the representations made to her Majesty's Govern-
ment on behalf of the Royal Atlantic Steam Navigation
Company, relative to a recc,nt letter of the Postmaster
Greneral in reference to th- Galway contract, had been con-
sidered, and with what result ?
Lord PALMERSTON said that the communication re-
ferred to was very long, and was received only yesterday
afternoon. The statement would have to be considered by
her Majesty's Government, but would be laid on the table
with the answer of the Postmaster-General.
In reply to Mr. BEAMISH,

Lord PALMERSTON said he had no hesitation in
stating that it would ba most advantageous to the interests
of the United Kingdom to have the most rapid communi-
cation with the north of America, He was of opinion that
Ireland was that portion of the United Kingdom from
which such communication should be established, and her
Iclajesty's Government would be ready to adopt a plan for
that purpose, provided it was founded upon the principle of
open competition.
Col. FRENCH asked if it was the intention of the Go-
vernment to withdraw the subsidy for the Galway contract?
Lord PALMER•STON said that the house was already
in possession of what had taken place on this subject.
Mr. KER asked if the Government had received a memo-
rial from the inhabitants of Dublin and Waterford against
the withdrawal of the subsidy.

Lord PALMERSTON said that some petitions to that
effect had been received from certain parts of Ireland, but
those in question had not reached the Government.

BRITISH SUBJECTS IN AMERICA.

Lord J. RUSSELL, in reference to a question which had
been asked him the other evening, said he had received a
communication from the British Consul at New Orleans,
stating that some British subjects in that part of America
had been forced to enter the militia, but they were now
liberated, and redress was premised.
THE PAPER DUTY.—ADJOURNED DEBATE.
Mr. MELLOR resumed the adjourned debate en going
into committee on the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill.
The hon. and learned member contended that the argu-
meats against the 4th clause of the bill for the
repeal of the paper duty were fallacious, and the
opposition of sonic honourable members to the remis-
sion of that impost was most inconsistent. It
was said that there would be no surplus, and therefore it
would be most inexpedient to remit this tax. But if that
were true, how, then, could they advocate the repeal of the
tea
duty, which WAS much larger in amount ? It was said
that the tea duty was a war tax, and therefore should be the
that repealed ; but he contended the most objectionable tax
should have the precedence in being remitted. Moreover,
the paper duty was a war tax, and on that ground was
as much entitled to repeal as the tea duty. The effect
of removing the paper duty would increase employment by
increasing the productive property of a certain branch of
industry, and enable the paper manufacturers to compeba
With those on the continent, who were exempted from an y
financial restrictions. He denied that the repeal of th is
tax would cause a collision with the House of Lords, and 'ae
cited Lord Monteagle on the eubject. The hon. gentiem an
then went in detail through the arguments used against the
4th clause of the bill, and urged some arguments in its
favour which were not very novel or effective.
Mr. DISRAELI—Sir, I cannot but think that if lion.
members would on this occasion think less of their con-
stituents and more of the interests of their constitu cuts,
'S4 Would be assisted at arriving at a more satisfactory
'hear.)
Although on the question before us. (Hear,
Although he was perfectly ready on Monday night to have
come to a division, I shall avail myself of the opportu-
nity, for which we are indebted to the interposition of
the hon. and learned gentleman, to place succinctly before
the house the views which I and those friends who ,act with

"---ZZ'satraw. I • 4