The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-07 00:00:00

CUBA.

Lord BROUGHAM understood that an expedition
had sailed from the United States, to take possession of
Cuba. He had no doubt whatever but that this was
without the consent of the Government of the United
States.—(Hear, hear.) He was sorry to learn that these
execrable pirates had esca; ed from the Spanish fleet at
sea, and he hoped they a ould be urn sty d in Cuba and
undergo condign punishment. He hoped that the re-
spectable Government of the United States had power to
put down such piratical expeditions, and he hoped his
Noble Friend would assure the House that the Gorvern-
ment had adopted means to put a atop to such an ex-
pedition.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was afraid it was
true that a piratical expedition had set out from the
United States for Cuba; but it was not only without the
cognizance, but subject to the disapprobation of the
United States Government, who entirely disapproved of
these proceedings.
Lord BROUGHAM bad hoped that something more
than disapprobation would be expressed by the United
States Government against these pirates.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that the Go-
vernment of the United States had not only expressed
their disapprobation, but had ordered their naval forces
ti endeavour to intercept the expedition.
Lord BROUGHAM said that this addition was more
satisfactor), but he could not understand how 8.000 men
could be armed and sent off without the knowledge of the
Government.
The Earl of ABERDEEN believed that the Govern-
ment of the United States had done the utmost to stop
the expedition, and he regretted that twenty years ago,
when the United States suspected us of unlawful dealings
in the island, they had not united with us and France
in guaranteeing the island to Spain.
Lord BROUGHAM as a lawyer challenged contra-
diction to this position that all civilized nations were
bound to give aid against pirates, and that the com-
mander of any British cruizer would be guilty of a neg-
lect of duty if he did not aid the Spaniards against the
pirates.

Lord STANLEY wished to know what instructions
had been sent to the commander of our naval forces in
reference to this expedition.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was not prepared to
state without notice what instructions had been sent to
the commanders of our cruizers.
Lord STANLEY—Rave any instructions been sent
at all ?

Earl GREY, in the present state of affairs, thought
he should be guilty of a breach of duty if he anawsred
the question.
Lord STANLEY had a right to ask and to expect an
answer to the question whether the subject had engaged
the attention of her Majesty's Government. He put the
question, and the Government might or might nut give
an answer.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE did not deny the
Right of the Noble Lord to put the question, and he
repeated what he had said, that the matter was under
the consideration of the Government.

Lord BEAUMONT was surpried at the conduct of
the Noble Lord (Stanley). The answer that the subject
ci as under the consideration of the Government was oue
which ought to satisfy him.
Lord BROUGHAM for his own part was satisfied
with the answer of the Noble Marquis, which amounted
to this—we know absolutely nothing of the subject.
The law was clear, these men were pirates; he hoped
therefore there would be no delicacy in treating the subject,
end it was the duty of all who used the sea to consider alt
those men as pirates, and treat them accordingly as the
pirates had been treated by Reja Brooke. Trey had,
according to some persons, been treated a little too
much so; though be did not agree in that opinion, he
thought Raja Brooke had treated those persons
properly.
no Earl of ABERDEEN thought that as we were
not on amicable terms with Spain during the time this
expe&tion was preparing, it would be advisable that
we should show that we had not been lukewarm in our
interference to put a stop to it.
Earl GREY said that their Lordships must be aware
that to give information as to the instructions given to
the naval
bat be the
xcedingly commanders in the West Indian seas, could not
further ad f
detrimental until
The subject thvented
srorpopmdthe West Indies.
we should have re-
ceived The Bills on the lee *
bwere forwarded a stage, and
table
their Lordships adjourned.

HOUSE COMMONS.OI----:""---
DRAINAGE AND IME.RovADVANCE '
S E
(Continued from our Afternoon
Mr. E WART
EMENT
ILL.
thought that tlio OF LAND
not been
what was
Edition.)
sufficiently taken into consideration,et had
limited sum, and that they had to decide
best use to In made of it. He thought tehat
be confined entirely to drainage, for if they jar to the
idthat this was a
the
it ought to
building of farms, buildings, and such
would have nothing left for drainage. He though they
t that
it would be decidedly most advantageous fur theg public
interest to spend the whole sum in drainage.
Captain PELHAM thought that the objection might
be got over by limiting the sum to be applied to build-
ing purpo‘es. entirely to new buildings.
Mr. BUCK tbou,:ht that it would be far better to
confine tl,e sum entirely to the purposes of drainage.
Mr. SLANEY said that if the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer did not give some feet lily to the small pr3prie-
tors in making their applications, the Bill would not be
( I the slightest use to them. lie also thought that these
advances should bu extended to the purposes of new
buildings at least.
could
safety
?It.; MOODY opposed the clause.
Al• DEEDES on the whole would praer that the
clause should stand in its e•ent condition if they
assured that the moneyPr.' could be lent with
bteo r
Mr. BRUCE ilirP°ses of building.
Scotland was in favour of the clause as far 119
Was concerned , be was sure great benefit would

arise from it to that country, and especially to 'the new
farms which were formed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQI .r.,T,R Paid
his purpose had been answered by the 6',,.3cussion
which had taken place; and as the present tV ority of
Members appeared in tavour of the omission of a e clause,
he would vote for its omission.
Colonel RAWDON hoped that the Chaneello r of the
Exchequer would not consent to omit the clime.
The CHANCELL'JR t.f the EXCHEQUER t bought
that the House wished to omit the clause, and kte was
perfectly willing to consent.
The House then divided, when there appeared--
Fur the clause ... 45

Against it ... ... 107
Majority --62
The clause was consequently rejected.
Clauses 5,6, and 7 were then agreed to, with some
slight amendm.'nts.
On clause 8 being proposed,
Mr. ROCFIE proposed to insert in line:3o, after "farm
buildings," the words, " including buildings for the stet p-
ing, drying, and cleaning of flax, and also such mac ai-
nery and apparatus for the above-mentioned purposes as
may come under the denomination of fixtures." To
show the advantage of promoting the growth of flax in
Ireland, he in el only mention that more than six mil-
lions worth of that cotumodity was imported into this
country in a year, and that if it were brought into
greater cultivation employment and support would be
given to a very large number of families.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. op
posed the amendment, thinking it would be most incon-
venient to advance money on the security of machinery,
for that was, in fact, the nature of the amendment. He
understood that, in many instances, machi ery in the
preparation of flax had been abandoned, and that the
practice of preparing it by hand had been substituted.
The amendment was then withdrawn, and the clause
agreed to.
The other clauses having been agreed to, the House
resumed, and the Chairman having reported progress,
The House adjourned till Five o'Clock.

The House resumed in the Old Chamber at Five
o'clock.