The Sun.
London, England, 1868-03-06 00:00:00

CHINA.

Mr. OSBORNE asked the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs if he would lay before the house, copies of memo-
rials addressed to her Majesty's representative in China on
the treaty of Tientsin by English Chambers of Commerce
and mercantile firms iu China ; and also the despatches of
her Majesty's Envoy and Chief Superintendent Consul in
China on the treaty and its revision?

Lord STANLEY said with respect to the memorial
there would be no objection to produce the papers, but
with respect to despatches of our own diplomatic agents
they were of a more private nature, and it would not be
fur the benefit of the public service to produca them.

THE ALABAMA CLAIMS.

On the motion for going into Committee of Supply,

Mr. S. LEFEV.RE called attention to the failure of the
negotiations with the United States Government for arbi-
tration of the Alabama claims, and said, iu bringing for-
ward the subject, it was far from his intention to make
any observation that would be in the least degree calcu-
lated to increase the difficulties which at present existed
between her Majesty's Government and the American Go-
vernment on the subject. The hon. gentleman then gave a
brief summary of the events connected with the breaking
out of the civil war in the United States, and also to the
matters connected with the building and launching
of certain vessels in this country which after-
wards appeared on the seas either as privateers or steam
rams, including the Alexandra, the Georgia, and the She-
nandoah, were fitted with secrecy in England, and then,
on sailing beyond our jurisdiction, receiving their
arms from other vessels. The action which
these ships had on the foreign commerce of
America was very serious, and the burning of
ships which those vessels caused produced a profound im-
pression in America, but he did not anticipate that war
would ensue through the failure of our negotiations,
because he felt sure that there was one feeling
on both sides of the Atlantic, and that was
that this question should at once bo finally settled
and brought to a conclusion. The hon. member then
proceeded to state how diplomacy had dealt with the ques-
tion, and referred to the steps taken by Mr. Adams,
the American Minister, in his communications with Earl
Russell, who before the correspondence closed, declined
the offer of arbitration, defended the opinion given by the
law officers of the Crown, and declined altogether to make
any compensation for the damage the vessel had occa-
sioned. The hon. gentleman then referred to the chazige
that took place in the Administration in 1866, when Lord
Derby and his colleagues came into power, and remarked
that a change seemed then to come over
the views of the then Government. In the
first interview that the noble lord (Stanley) had with
Mr. Adams, he assured him of his great desire to preserve
the most friendly relations with the United States, and
also that ho could not be held responsible for th 3 delivery
by certain members of Parliament of some ill-considered
speeches; but it did not appear that the noble lord
ever thought it right to prevent, as far as it
was possible, the delivery of those speeches.
The hon. gentleman again urged upon the Government
the necessity of taking some active steps to have the
matter once and for ever settled. To carry out that
principle they preferred arbitration to war, and
he concluded by moving an address to her Majorty
for certain papers connected with the motion.

Lord STANLEY said ho did not propose to follow the
hon. gentleman with respect to his strictures on the policy
of Earl Russell, because the noble lord bad a difficult duty
to perform, With respect to the conflict which had taken place
between North and South, this country having at the out-
set determined upon a position of neutrality, that position
was scrupulously observed, and with respect to the ques-
tion now under consideration, this country had
nothing to gain by keeping the matter open
but a great deal to gain in getting it closod.
In the first place, the thing was to define accurately the
points to be settled, and this was no easy matter, because
the question had been so complicated that it would puzzle
a great many to state clearly, that when this was desired
They were quite prepared to submit the Alabama claims to
arbitration, but ho could not see what the other question,
which it was also proposed, should be submitted, viz.,
were we right or wrong in recognizing the Confederate
States, had to do with the matter. (Hoar, hoar.)
(LEFT SFEARISG.)

ROUSE OF COWIONS—LAsT EVENING.
METROPOLITAN TRAMWAY BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. 11. LEWIS moved its rejection. It was one that
would create the greatest inconvenience, and the rate-
payers of the metropolitan parishes would be called upon
to repair all the damage occasioned by the laying down of
those tramways. The whole plan was most objectionable,
and for that reason ho moved that the bill be read a
second time that day six months.
Mr. SEELEY said it was much to be regretted that
opposition had been raised to this bill, which simply pro
posed to lay tramways down in various streets of tho
metropolis. There would be no obstruction to the ordi-
nary traffic, and it was competent for the promoters to
break up the roads in the metropolis, and that the ex-
panses of putting them in repair would not be thrown ou
the ratepayers, as the persons interested in this bill were
bound to put in order all the roads disturbed. The
tramways would be of the greatest use to the public.
The trams would not in the least degree prove obstruc-
tive to any description of vehicles now travelling on the
roads. The principle had been found most successfully
to facilitate and cheapen traffic, and therefore lie hoped
the house would read the bill a second time. He thought
it was altogether a mistake to say that tramways would be
highly dangerous.
Mr. PEASE said tramways had been in use in America,
and he hoped the bill would at all events be allowed to
pass a second reading.

Mr. MELLOR opposed the second reading.
Mr. HUGHES said that tramway travelling on the
streets of the metropolis would be found to be a particular
uuisance or in any part of the country that ho was familiar
With, and therefore he Ailoll.ll TO() agaihot their ihtro-

duction into the metropolis. They were dangerous both
to life and property.
Mr. CRAWFORD objected to the second reading.
-The bill was rejected without a division.
IRISH EARRACKS.
Lord OTHO FITZGERALD asked the Chief Secretary
for Ireland whether a circular issued to the proprietors of
police barracks in Ireland, calling upon them to put up
certain iron fortifications, upon plans enclosed, had been
acceded to ; and, if not, whether those barracks were to
remain in an indefensible state, or what further steps the
Government proposed to take in the matter ?
The Earl of MAYO said the owners of the barracks in
Ireland, the Government being merely tenants at will, had
been asked to put the barracks in a more defensible state
than they ware at present, and in the event of their doing
so the Government would pay 5 per cont. on the outlay ;
and in the event of the constabulary being moved from any
of them the owners would be fully compensated. Several
of the owners of the property had deno as required, and
he thought a number of others would soon follow the
example.