The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-19 00:00:00

SYRIA.

Sir C. NAPIER begged to repeat the question he had
already put to the Right Hon. Baronet, respecting the
treatment of the Emir Beschir, late Prince of the Le-
banon, by the Turkish Government, and the intended
mode of governing that district by two Pachas.
Sir R. PEEL was not able as yet to give the
particulars asked, for it would be remembered
that the object of the late operations in Syria was to
restore the independence of the Turkish Govern-
ment. No accounts had arrived from Constantinople
since the 20th of January, at which time the Emir
had not arrived there. With respect to the other point,
all he (Sir R. Peel) could say at present was, that the
Turkish Government had sent the Seraskier Pacha to
Beyrout, to inquire both amongst the Druses and
Maronites as to the best mode of governing the district,
but the result of his mission had not yet transpired.
He regretted, therefore, that he could not as yet give
the desired information to the Hon. and Gallant Admiral.

Sir C. NAPIER—I am much obliged to the Right Hon.
Baronet for calling me Gallant AdmiralZbut that is a
mistake.—(Great laughter and cheers.)

THE LORD PRESIDENT HOPE.

Mr. WAKLEY said he had received a letter from this
distinguished individual, Ns hich ho would read to the
House :—" Edinburgh, Feb. 14, 1842.—Sir,—As you ap-
pear to me to act in Parliament quite independently of
party feelings—(Laughter and cheers)—and as many
may have drawn the same inference which you kave
from the motion for retutns made by Mr. Fox Maule
being refused, on good Parliamentary grounds no
doubt, I am sure you will be glad to state to
the House on a proper opportunity, that during eleven
years since the trying the civil causes by jury by the
Court of Session devolved on me, I have been absent only
on three cases. With those exceptions I attended every
one. I was absent from one of the three on account of the
possible interest of a near relative in the case, and
from the other two in consequence of casual
indisposition which did not hold
,for three clays.
If Mr. Maule's motion had been granted, and if it in-
cluded all the trials down to August, for it did not go
beyond July, it would be seen that there was only one
case upon which any other Judge sat.—C. HOPE."—He
Mr. Wakley) had great pleasure in reading the letter, and
he would assure the House that the part he took in this case
was only on public grounds.—(Hear, hear.) It would now
be seen, that this whole case had originated in misap-
prehension.
Sir R. PEEL said he wished to make an observation
in reference to this subject. The Right Hon. Gentle-
man: opposite (Mr. Fox Maule) would probably re-
collect that he had asked him (Sir R. Peel), on a
previous night, whether that, during the period when
he held office in 1834 and 1835, the Lord President had
not signified to him his intention to resign office. He
had then stated that he had no recollection of such a
circumstance, but he had since received a communi-
cation from the Lord President, stating that he had
never made any such proposal, and that he might
therefore give the most peremptory contradiction to the
statement.

Mr. F. MAULE said, what had just fallen from the
Right Hon. Baronet was rather an answer to a
questionof
which he had put in debate, than a contradiction
any-
thing which he had stated. He (Mr. Fox Maule)wa
as much pleased with the result of the debates
as any friend of the Lord President could possibly be,
setting at rest, as it did, a report which had been
widely circulated in Scotland. No one now was
more convinced than he was of the misrepresentation
which had taken place, and no one accepted the
refutation with greater satisfaction. He was ex-
tremely gratified by the letter which had been read
by the Hon. Member for Finsbury, and in the absence
of all official information, whatever might have been his
opinion with reference to the conduct of the retired
Judge in remaining in office, as he had thought,
after his powers had failed, he should be the last
man either in that House or cut of doors to ques-
tion anything which came from such a source.
He had no hesitation in stating now, as he had before
done, that he had been led by wrong information into an
error which he sincerely regretted. He was extremely
sorry that the subject had ever been mooted, and he
trusted that it would now be set at rest.—(Hear, hear.)

CHANNEL FISHERIES.
Captain PECHELL wished to put a question to the
Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Go-
vernment. The Right Honourable Baronet was aware
that a treaty had been concluded with France,
which had for its object the regulation of the fishing.
trade on the' coast of that country and of Great
Bri-
tain. Commissioners had been appointed forinamaging
the fisheries of. the two countries, and to prevent colli-
sions. He wished to knOw in what position the matter
at present stood, and also what steps the Hon. Baronet
intended to pursue ?