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

POSTAL CONTRACTS.

Mr. BAITER asked the Secret try to the Treasury
what was the present position of 013 negotiations
between Her Majesty's Government and that of the
United States on the subject of a new Poital Convention ;
And whether the Government, in making new contracts for
the conveyance of the mails, intend to place all the com-
panies on the same footingasto 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 was still under considera-
tion, therefore he could not further refer to it. With
respect to the latter part of the question, ho had to say
it was their intention to carry out the recommendation of
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) sole 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 on 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 the statue, and recom-
mended the amalgamation of the Vice-President of the
Council and the First Commissioner of Works into one
first-class Minisi.or, 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 site had bean 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. &alio, 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 DUFF 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 was 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 ho made this speech,
he was aware that in 18G6 Lord Derby had earnestly re-
quested Lord Clarendon to retain the seals of the Foreign-
office ? With a sneer at Mr. Disraeli's tendency to indulge
in post-prandial vapourings. Mr. Duff reminded the house
that in 1853, at the Slough Banquet, he 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. Puff'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
months 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 ht.d 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 more explicit answer. What were the " wars