The Sun.
London, England, 1868-06-26 00:00:00

THE NEW LAW COURTS.

In reply to Mr. BENTINCK,
Mr. BOOTH said he could not state whether the judges
were unanimous in favour of the external elevation of Mr.
Street. With respect to placing the design in the library
he could sae no advantage to be gained by so doing. The
whole of the papers upon the matter would very shortly
be laid on the table of the house.
THE CARRIERS ACT.

Mr. CARTER asked the Vice-President of the Board of
Trade whether her Majesty's Government, in withdraw-
ing from the Railways Regulation Bill the clauses they
had inserted in it for amending, in certain respects, the
General Carriers Act, are satisfied that the provisions of
that Act, passed forty years since, are suitable to the re-
quirements of the present day; or whether the Govern-
ment are still of opinion that the Carriers Act requires
amendment, and ought to 1.3 r0vi..3,1 by Parliament.

➢lr. CAVE said that after the greatest consideration the
Board of Trade were of opinion that the Carriers Act now
in force was not suited for the present time. Au inquiry
would ba made next session, after which he hoped a new
act would be introducad to Parliament.
POSTAL CONTRACTS.

Mr. BAXTER asked the Sicrotary to the Treasury
what was the present position of the negotiations
between Her Majesty's Government and that of the
United States on the subject of a new Postal Convention ;
And whether the Government, in making new contracts for
the conveyance of the mails, intend to place all the coin-
panies on the same footingas to terms of payment and con-
ditions of service, carrying out the declaration of Mr. Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer on the 20th of March, " that the
present arrangement was faulty, because it was wrong that
the companies carrying mails to America should be under
different terms with the Government.'"
Mr. BOOTH said the matter w&s still under considera-
tion, therefore he could not further refer to it. With
respectwas tthositrhientleantttieornptaortcaory
question,frthoeuttherecommendation recoof he had to say
it
his right hon. friend.
THE NEW LAW COURTS.

Mr. M. CHAMBERS asked the First Commissioner of
Works if the intention of the Government to appoint Mr.
Street (whose design was approved by the judges for
elevation only) solo architect of the New Law Courts was
communicated to the Royal Commission, and whether the
Royal Commission had expressed any opinion on the ap-
pointment.
Lord J. MANNERS said the decision had been com-
municated to the Royal Commission, but there not having
been a meeting of the Royal Commissioners no opinion on
the matter had been expressed.
The first business on the paper was supply, but before
getting into committee there were two or three lively dis-
cussions on various topics. The first was raised by a
motion to remove the Peel statue from its present site in
Palace-yard, made by Lord Elcho. He criticised sharply
the artistic merits of the statue, pronouncing it a disgrace
to Peel's memory, and suggesting that it should either be
melted down, buried, or put under "Buxton's Extin-
guisher" on the other side of the way. Lord Elcho took
the opportunity of generalising at some length en the
ornamentation of the metropolis, and suggested that all
these matters—statues, bridges, and the like—should be
placed under the control of the First Commissioner of
Wcrks, assisted by a council of taste.

Mr. B. HOPE also condemned tho statue, and recom-
mended the amalgamation of the Vice-President of the
Council and the First Commissioner of Works into one
first-class Minister, to whom might be committed the
charge of matters of art, with an Under-Secretary.
Mr. CARDWELL, the honorary secretary of the Peel
Statue Committee, explained that the original and the
present sito had been chosen with the assent of Baron
Marochetti, the artist, Mr. Barry, and the past and present
First Commissioner of Works.

The removal of the statue was supported by Mr. Gre-
gory, Mr. Layard, Mr. H. Baillie, Mr. Bromley-Davenport,
and Mr. Osborne, who denounced it in his usual trenchant
style as a "hideous effigy" and a "horrible abomination."
Lord J. MANNERS explained the share the Board of
Works had in the erection of the statue, but without
making any particular defence of it, and on a division Lord
Elcho carried his motion by a majority of 111-182 to 71.
The next topic was Mr. Disraeli's recent speech at the
Merchant Taylors' dinner, and for an hour or more the
house was plunged into one of those angry and excited
bursts of recrimination which, earlier in the session, were
of almost nightly occurrence.
Mr. GRANT DUFI- led off by reading this passage from
the speech :—" When we acceded to office the name of
England was a name of suspicion and distrust in every
foreign Court and Cabinet. There vas no possibility of
that cordial action with any of the great Powers which is
the only security for peace, and in consequence of that
want of cordiality wars were frequently occurring ;" and
he asked Mr. Disraeli whether, when he made this speech,
he was aware that in 1866 Lord Derby had earnestly re-
quested Lord Clarendon to retain the seals of the Foreign-
office ? With a sneer at Mr. DiBraeli's tendency to indulge
in post-prandial vapourings, Mr. Duff reminded the house
that in 1858, at the Slough Banquet, ho had made exactly
the same charge, and he wound up with a bitter and care-
fully elaborated personal attack on the Premier..
Mr. DISRAELI, dismissing Mr. Duff's philippic with
the remark that the "exhibition" hardly repaid the House
for the waste of time, replied to his question that the re-
port he had quoted was substantially correct, and asserted
emphatically that it was a fair representation of the literal
truth. But he disclaimed all intention to attack Lord
Clarendon, who had only been Foreign Minister a few
mouths when the late Government wont out. It was the
system prevailing during Lord Russell's seven years' mis-
management of the Foreign-office which he had de-
nounced. Lord Clarendon had the misfortune to inherit
difficulties from his predecessor, and had transmitted them
to his successor.

Mr. LAYARD refused to be put off with "chaff," and
demanded a tuere explicit answer. What were tb.o " wars