The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-03-07 00:00:00

,ck to the bankir
id died on WednE

I, and valued

le, that

was impossit

... he could have any personal ene-
Here the learned gentleman seemed to be much
You will naturally ask, then, gentlemen, what
-e the prisoner to deprive of life a being so un-
mr- Drumm,— • •- without any per-

d was not on
lid not fill any prominent situation
le did not hold that situation in public
him obnovious to political enemies,
tcretary of the principal minister of
f his house,_ and constantly passing
offices in Downing-street and the
)out which the prisoner was observed to be
;ping. You will be satisfied from the facts
e, from the threats used by the prisoner before he
d his crime, and his declarations afterwards, that it
of the life of Mr. Drummond that he sought. You
satisfied that it was the life of Sir Robert Peel that he
d, and that it was his life that he believed he was taking
he discharged the pistol at the person of M r. Drnmmond.
emen, the nature of. his crime is not altered by this
nstance, but it affords a reason for it. I need not tell

an inmat

you that he is guilty of murder, although he might have mis-
taken the person against whom he discharged the pistol. Of
the guilt of the prisoner—of the fact of his having deprived
ivir. Drummond of life—it is impossible I can suggest a
doubt ; it is impossible that any doubt can be suggested that
the crime was committed, and that that crime was murder.
But I cannot conceal from yon, because I know from appli-
cations which have been made to this court, and the deposi-
ions which have been made on behalf of the prisoner, that
is intended to rest the defence on the plea that he was
isane at the time he committed the crime ; and, gentlemen,
ur painful duty—for painful it must be—to de-

it will I

cide whether he was in that degree of insanity at the time he
committed that crime which would render him not a respon-
sible agent, and not answerable to the laws of his country.
This defence is a difficult one at all times ; for while, on the
one hand, every one must be anxious that an unconscious
being should not suffer, yet, on the other hand; the public
safety requires that this defence should not be too readily

stened to; and above all, the public safety requires that
the atrocious nature of the act itself, and the circumstances
under which it was committed, should not form any ingredi-
ent in that defence. There are few crimes that are commit-
ted, and above all crimes of an atrocious nature like this,
that are not committed by persons labouring under some
morbid affection of the mind ; and it is difficult for well-
regulated minds to understand the motives which lead to
such offences in the absence of that morbid affection of the
mind. I believe that the truth of this remark will be more
especially proved when attacks are directed to persons hokl-
ing high and important stations in the nation. If you look
)ostted them I into t

Of the

ids' per

e of history, and direct your attention to tl}ose
cases in which such persons have been deprived of life, you
will be satisfied of the truth of that proposition. But we
need not look far back ; occurrences of our own times fur-
nish us with sufficient instances for illustration. If you look
at a neighbouring country, you will see there that persons in
broad day, in the crowded streets of the metropolis of
France, without any precaution for their own safety, without
any attempt to escape, in the midst of the people, close to
the armed guards of the King, have discharged their wea-
pons at the person of the Sovereign of the country. What
motive had they ? We know of none but that of an ill-regu-
lated mind, worked upon by political feeling. We have seen
instances in France of parties having laid plans to assist
themselves in their escape, discharging infernal instruments

in the streets of Paris, regardless or hCiw many or what lives
they destroyed provided they could reach the person of the
Sovereign. I refer to these things, gentlemen, to show that
the circumstances attendant upon crime itself afford no
grounds for holding that the parties committing it are not
responsible to the laws of their country. But I know that

in this case the defence on the part of the prisoner will not
rest upon this, but that evidence will be offered to show that
the prisoner was not in a sane state of mind at the time he
committed the crime ; and knowing that, I feel that I ought
in this stage of the case to refer to some authorities, and
state my view of the principles of the English law. It will
be open to my learned friend, whose powerful assistance I
am happy to see the prisoner will have, to comment upon
that, and to differ from me if he thinks lam wrong. It has
been the custom in these cases to refer to proceedings of au-
thority, and to the dicta of judges who have tried similar
questions : not that I mean to say for one moment that it is
a question of law ; on the contrary. the question to be de-
cided by you is a question of fact, a question of common
sense and belief. The whole question will turn upon this—
if you believe 'the prisoner at the bar at the time he com-
mitted this act was not a responsible agent•—if you believe
that when he fired the pistol he was incapable of distinguish.
ing between right and wrong—if you believe that he was
under the influence and control of some disease of the mind
which prevented him from being conscious that he was com-
mitting a crime—if you believe that he did not know he was
violating the law both of God and man, then, undoubtedly,
he is entitled to your acquittal. But it is my duty, subject
to the correction of my lord, and to the observations of my
learned friend, to tell you that nothing short of that excuse
can excuse him upon the principle of the English law. To
excuse him, it will not be sufficient that he laboured at the
time under partial insanity, that he had a morbid disposition
of mind, which would not exist in a sane person ; that is not
enough, if he had that degree of intellect to enable him to
know and distinguish right from wrong, if he knew what
would be the effects of his crime, and consciously committed
it, and if with that consciousness he wilfully committted it.
With regard to the authorities upon this point, observations
have been made to the effect that they have attempted to
define the law too strictly. That observation was made
thout regard to the object of the authorities. It is impos-
le to lay down beforehand any definition of the madness
ich will excuse the crime of murder; the disease assumes
; and such various shapes, and acts in such
t you cannot define it. But you may lay
of law which are applicable to it ; and
and uniformly laid down in the same way
for the jury to take into their considers-

uch di

e ways, that

resquus to tto
,n," Mr. Luc

the prince}

in his

led in ma

for ayo

tion whether the party was a responsible agent when he com-
mitted the crime, whether he then knew right from wrong,
ious that he was offending against the
nature, and whether he did it wilfully.
c safety is the object of all law ; the
safety is intrusted solely to the protection of courts of
and to juries who administer justice
t is with a view to the public safety
is laid down by legal authorities principally f. r
9 who have to decide upon questions of
rued gentleman then referred to several
s statements as to the law of the case,
y before the jury what was known re-
ter during his residence in Glasgow, and
d towards the close of the evidence for the

d at st

(INV of his

nal judicature
the law; an(

moval ;

nee of jurit
re. The

ich bas already appeared respecting the
cation of Mr. Drummond was then given,

conduct in GI
Gordon exam
der. residi

done, b

s town
r for the last

a as to the

—I am a

by Mr. Waddington
gat Glasgow. I have known the pri-
,ears. When first I knew him he car-
s of a turner on his own account. I
N him on the business of Lang and Son, by
I afterwards employed him myself
which was about a year and a half
nerallv acquainted with him beyond em-
-1 have frequently paid him money, for which
I never noticed anything particular or
In the month of November last I
came to London, when I accidentally met the prisoner in St.
Martin's lane. I did not, till then, know that he was in.
London. I shook hands with him and asked him what he
was doing in London, He asked me the same question, and
I told him that I was in search of employment, and he then
said that he was in search of employment also. I told him
that I was going to Great Peter-street, Westminster, and he
walked with me. We passed through Whitehall and Parlia-

vied on th
frequently

n 1 was employed

in his manner

ment-street to Westminster-hall. The prisoner took me past
Sir Robert Peel's house, when, pointing to it, he said, " That
is where Sir Robert Peel stops," and added, " D—n
sink him," or something like that. We then crossed to the
Treasury, when he said, " That is where all the wealth of
the nation ii," or something to that effect. 'We then went
into one of the courts in Westminster-hall, where we re-
bout five minutes, and then went to Westminster
isoner said—" See how time has
j." He then left me, and on
llowing Friday evening he called upon me at Mr.
's, where I was then at work. We walked away to-
over Westminster-bridge, and went to a public-house,
we had two quarts of porter. As far as I can re-

ed that

)out Glasgow; but be
the previous Monday he had
shop in Great Peter-street,

ion was chiefly

He rema

cl that the turners in Lon-

hind in their work, and that if he had

the public-house

i that they had had trans-
isoner, and that they never observed any
ner. The curator of the Me-
in 1838, 1839, and 1840, the
t that institution, and that he
1R42.

On leaving the public

le depo

the pr

.on at Glasgow, and

%t the Mechanics' institute

drisoner attended my lectures on
my, and .1 bad opportunities of speaking to him almost
day. but our conversation was upon anatomy only, and

In the wee

time 1 saw the pris

us. He sub!
I told him tt
might have

My attention has been.

and address
ton, frontland, top flat

SATURDAY

A. LEG.-

watcbmak

uspecting

V
he appeared perfectly to understand the subject. Ile gene-
aritainclitatp VrOftrbi
rally
,pent about an hour a day in the dissecting-room, and na
rhilst there, was in the ;habit of reading books on anatomy,
About him to lead me to slit

never observ-__, _
mind was at all disordered. I gave lectures five
d the prisoner attended regularly. The last
er,' till I saw him in custody, was or

the 31st of July.
Robert Swanson examined by Mr. Waddington.-1 am a
clerk in the 'London Joint Stock Bank. Both the papers
produced were written by me. The one dated the 7th of
August is for X

out £5, but
but he

400. which was for the sum deposited wit}
cluently called and wished to dral
t I could not let him have that sun

the whole amount if be pleased, and he gave
ntie.e. —..
of withdrawal : on the 28th of August he drew out the
money, and having deducted £5, again deposited the re-
mainder, to which the second paper referred, being a receipt
for ,X 745. In June last, in consequence of a letter I received
from the prisoner, 1 transferred the amount to the Glasgow
and Shipping Bank.
The following is a copy of the letter :
" Glasgow, May 23, 1842.

" Sir,—l hereby intimate to you, thatwill require the
money 'ten days from this date which I deposited in the
London Joint Stock Bank through you. The account is
£745 ; the account is dated August 28,1841, but is not num-
bered. As it would put me to some inconvenience to give
personal intimation, and then remain in London till the
eight days' notice agreed upon would expire, I trust that this
will be considered sufficient.—Yours, &c..
" DANIEL M'IsTAUGIITEN."

William Thomas, examined by the' Solicitor-General.—l
am a clerk in the bank of Messrs. Glynn and Co. ; the Glas-
gow and. Shipping Bank correspond with us. On the 29th
of November I paid the sum of £2O to the prisoner's draught
on account of the Glasgow Bank.
Thomas M'Quige, examined by the Solicitor-General.—
I am an agent for advertisements; the advertisement pro-
duced was inserted by a gentleman for whom I acted ; the
letter produced I received in answer to that advertisement,
and the note annexed to it is my reply.
Mr. Anthony M'Nish, examined by Mr. Waddington.—
I searched the prisoner's lodging at Glasgow, and found,
amongst other things, a quantity of books and papers—a list
of which I now produce.
The advertisement alluded to and the answer thereto were
then read, and were as follows
" OPTIONAL R&RTNERSIIIP.— Any gentleman having
£l,OOO may invest them, on the most advantageous terms, in
a genteel business in London, attended with no risk ; with
the option, within a given period, of becoming a partner, and
of ultimately succeeding to the whole business. In the mean
time security and liberal interest will be given for the loan.
Apply by letter B. 8.,' Mr. Hilton's, bookseller, Pen-
ton-street. Pentonville."

On the 21st of July the advertiser received from the pri-
soner the following letter :

'!Glasgow, 19th July. 1812

Icted to your advertise-

ment in the Spectator newsprper, and, as I am unemployed
at present, and very anxious to obtain some, I have been in-
duced to write, requesting you to state some particulars re-
garding the nature of the business which you are engaged in.
If immediate employment can be given or otherwise, what
sort of security will be given for the money, and how much
interest? I may mention that I have been engaged in busi-
ness on my own account for a few years, am under 30 years
of age, and of very active and sober habits
" The

capital Which I possess has been acquired by the
most vigilant industry, but unfortunately does not amount to
the exact sum specified in your advertisement ; if nothing less
will do, I will be sorry for it, but cannot help it; if other-
wise, have the goodness to write to me at your earliest con-
venience ' D. M. M.,' 90, Clyde-street, Ander-

The case for the prosecution closed herp, and the inquiry
was adjourned to the following day.

This morning the judges took their seats at uitie •o'clock.
Mr. Cockburn then rose to reply, and occupied four hours
in the delivery of his address. Tiie prisoner's father under-
went a long examination, and spoke to the delusions under
which the prisoner laboured as to the persecutions to which
he was subject. Several other persons, some with whom he
had lodged, and others who had known him for a length of
time, declared their belief that he was insane. A number of
physicians and surgeons, who have-had for a series of years
great experience in the treatment of insane persons, were
then examined, and stated their belief that the prisoner was
affected by morbid delusions sufficient to account for the act
which he had committed. Mr. Wimslow the author of a
work on insanity, amongst the rest, said that the prisoner
was labouring under a morbid delusion, and was incapable,
at the time of commitiing the act, of controlling his actions.
Mr. Clarkson then called Dr. B. Philips, and was abodt
to examine him, when he was interrupted by
Chief Justice TINDAL, who asked the Solicitor-General
if he had any evidence to rebut that which had been given
by the medical gentlemen who had been examined ?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL replied that he had not.
Lord Chief Justice TINDAL.—My learned brethren and
myself are of opinion, that, after the testimony which has
been given by the medical gentlemen of the state of the pri-
soner's mind, the case for the prosecution cannot be legally
sustained—that is, if you are not prepared with other evidence
to rebut that testimony.

The witnesses were hereupon ordered to withdraw, and
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, addressing the jury, said—
Gentlemen, I feel that I should not properly discharge my
duty, on this occasion, if. after the opinion which has just
been stated by the learned judge, I were to ask you to give
your verdict against the prisoner. The Lord Chief Justice
has intimated to me, that a very strong opinion is entertained
by himself and by the other learned judges on the bench
that the evidence—especially the evidence of the medical
witnesses—which has been brought forward for the defence,
shows that the unhappy man, at the time he committed the
crime for which he has been indicted, was labouring under
insanity. If, therefore, you are equally satisfied on that
point, the prisoner is entitled to a verdict in his favour.
But, gentlemen, I was anxious to say, that, on the part of
the Crown, there was no object—there could be no object—
in prosecuting this case, but that of the administration of
Public justice ; and I believe that I am right when I say
that every facility has been given to the prisoner's legal ad-
visers to enable them to make a defence for him. There
was no wish, nor could there be any wish, on the part of the
Crown other than that the ends of justice should be attained
and satisfied. But, most certainly, when, in the open streets
of the metropolis, crimes of this nature are committed, it is
incumbent on those who have the care of the public safety
to have the circumstances connected with those crimes in-
vestigated ; for such investigations are necessary to the pro-
tection of the minds, the persons, and the property of us all.
On the part of the prosecution, I. felt it my duty to lay before
you the evidence which we possessed respecting the conduct
of M'Naughten in connection with the ordinary affairs of
his life. With the doctrines laid down by my learned friend
I fully agree, believing them as I do to be the correct law ;
for he says that the great object, in every case of this nature,
is to ascertain whether the party who commits a crime was,
when he committed it, a responsible agent, and whether his
mind was under proper controul, or whether his controlling
powers of mind had been taken from him, and that he was
rendered thereby irresponsible for his actions. These are
also the opinions of the learned Chief Justice, who will state
to you his views in reference to the evidence which bas been
adduced, and it will then be for you to deal with the case as
you shall think fit.
Lord Chief Justice TINDAL then addressed the jury, and
said the question for them to determine was, whether, at the
time the act in question was committed, the prisoner had or
had not the use of his understanding, so as to know that he
was doing a wicked and wrong act. If they should be of
sound opinion that he was not sensible at the time he committed
it that he was violating the laws bostthatoef
nGfonidind,
and
tmhaenn, ththeir
he would be entitled to a verdict in his favour ; and if, on
the contrary,
the
act n
theye wasshou
ind 1;i e
sno opinion that, when he com-
mitted
verdict would be against him• He (the learned chief justice)
concurred in opinion with his learned brethren beside him,
that the evidence of the medical gentleman who had ex-
amined the unhappy man (he called him unhappy with respect
to the state of his mind), the tendency of which they would
remember was all on one side, clearly proved that his mind
was in such a state at the time he committed the act as not
to render him responsible for the commission of it. • If they
thought it necessary that he should read the evidence, he
would do so; or if they required any further information
with respect to the law of the case, he would be happy to
give it to them. _

The Foretnan.—l am desired by my brother jurymen to
say to your lordship that they do not require to hear the evi-
dence read.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-THURSDAY

Chief Justice Tindal.—lf you find the prisoner not guilty
on the point in reference to which I have given my opinion,
then it will be for you to state that you acquit him on the
ground of insanity, in which case there will be proper care
taken of him.
The jury, without leaving the box, consulted together for
about a minute, and emphatically said—we find that the pri-
soner is " not guilty," believing him to be insane at the time
he committed the act.

The Solicitor-General.—Will your lordship be pleased to
give directions respecting the prisoner's future custody ?
Lord Chief Justice Tindal said he would of course be kept
in safe custody until her Majesty's pleasure should be known

especting him.
The court then adjourned at ten minutes to eight o'clock

A LEpal. DISTINCTION.—On Tuesday last, at our country
adjourned Quarter Sessions, two men, named Byewater, were
charged with stealing turnips. The honourable Chairman,
in his address to the jury, stated ':,turnips, when growing in
a field, if stolen, is not a felony. No doubt the excellent
Chairman, and most worthy gentleman—for be is esteemed
by all who know kim—intended to use the word " taken "
for " stolen." In either case, what an absurd distinction the
law makes, as though taking the property of another, without
permission, is not theft.

—On Saturday evening last one of those adroit
limners, who wish to enjoy the good things of this life
without paying for them, hit upon the following ingenious
plan of securing a capital joint for his Sunday's dinner. The
fellow, who was well dressed, and of respectable exterior,
walked up to the shop front of a respectable butcher in the
Mile-end-road, and, taking a capital leg of mutton off the
hook, took it into the shop. At the moment, the butcher was
engaged in receiving payment for some meat, but as soon as
he was disengaged, the " dodger " addressing him said, he
had purchased the leg of mutton then in his hand from a
butcher a little higher up the road; and having some misgiv-
ing that he had been " done " in the weight, he should feel
much obliged by his (the butcher's) just putting it in the
scale to satisfy big Mind on the point. The butcher, who
is one of the old school, and remarkable for his bluff John
Bullneoigu hgho
goods of his fellow-tradesmen, that he had
weigh his own, hinted something about the
enough
mannerism,
thed o
t o replied, that he was not in the habit of
honesty of suspicious persons, and told the fellow, that if he
wished to gratify his scruples he must go elsewhere, and that
the sooner he took himself off the better. The fellow only
observed that he (the butcher) might, at all events, be civil,
and walked out of the shop with the leg of mutton. In
about twenty minutes after, the lad whose duty it was to
watch the shop front missed the joint ; and, calling out to his
master, asked if he had sold the leg of mutton. The latter
replied not, but finding it gone, the mortifying truth at once
occurred to him that he had been "regularly done" out of
the excellent joint.

DOUBLE BIGAMY.—On Tuesday last, Richard Belcher.
f Little Wittenham, was brought before the Rev. N. Dod-
an, under the following circumstances, which possess a
egree of impudence rarely,
we hope, to be met with :—lt
ppears that in the year 1828, the prisoner, Richard Belcher,
was married at Newington, Oxon, to a woman named Gar-
diner, and lived with her until the year 1839, when, after two
days' acquaintance only, he married a secoad person, named
Lucy Warren, at St. John's Church, Lambeth, who had some
property belonging to her, and some hundreds in ready cash,
no doubt the inducement to Belcher. From thence they (the
last wife and Belcher) went to Jersey, where they, lived about
six months, and the first wife came over, and was introduced
to Lucy Warren as the man Belcher's cousin, and stayed there
some little time, and soon afterwards returned to England
alone. Shortly after that, Belcher and the second woman
(for wife she is not legally) came to England, and resided at
Little Wittenham, where the first wife was living, Belcher
declaring to the poor woman Warren, that he was previously
married, and living in the same house with both women, the
first of whom only he treated as his wife, having taken pos-
session of the latter's property. Mr. Martyn,
of Jersey,
to whom Lucy Warren is related by marriage,
11 was not right, came to England, and finding
s correct, succeeded, after a most diligent and
and he now stands committed for trial at the next assizes for
praiseworthy investigation, in bringing Belcher to justice,
Berks for Bigamy:—Berkshire Chronicle,

HOUSE OF LORDS.-FRIDAY

ord BROUGIIAM called the attention of their lorpships to
the state of the municipal corporation of the city of London,
with a view to its reformation. In doing this it was not his
wish to speak with bitterness or disrespect of the corpora-
tion of London. Indeed it would be most ungrateful of him
to do so, because on a certain memorable occasio❑ he had
been presented, together with his noble friend (Lord Den-
man), with the freedom of the city, and was in consequence
a member of that corporation himself. This, however, could
not blind him to the enormous abuses which prevailed in that
corporation—abuses, some of which were so glaring that,
after his statement of that night, he would predict they could
not exist for a single year. The noble and learned lord then
entered into a lengthened statement of the abuses he referred
to, as well in the mode of election of the responsible mem-
bers and officers of the corporation, as in the general manage-
ment of its enormous revenue. He denounced the system of
city police as dreadful, and said that if the intention was to
invent a system the best calculated to promote vice of every
kind a better one for that purpose could not be devised than
that existing in the city of London. The administration of
justice in the city was decidedly bad. The aldermen, &c.,
were a remnant of the old feudal system. The Duke of
Lancaster had given up his judicial jurisdiction—in Durham
also this jurisdiction had been given up—in fact throughout
the kingdom these local jurisdictions had been abandoned,
and yet in London two aldermen could try men for their
lives at the Central Criminal Court. The aldermen, &c.,
had also the power ofappointing no less tha❑ six judges—one
chosen by the aldermen alone, and the other five by the
Court of Common Council. Those judgeships were can-
vassed for, and when Lord Denman contested the common
sergeantcy with Mr. Bolland he ran a great risk of defeat,
because the latter gentleman was city pleader, and those who
wished to succeed him in that office got their friends to vote
for his elevation. A similar influence defeated Mr. Hill.
Was it right that the appointment of judges should be de-
pendent upon such influences and motives. The noble and
learned lord then strongly denounced the practice which pre-
vailed of persons asking advice from city magistrates, and
thus making exparte statements, when the parties whom
they complained of had not the remotest idea that their con-
duct was to be subjected to such a public investigation.
There were a nest of magistrates in the city who were fond
of hunting out what they called swindlers; their imperfect
knowledge of the law not telling them that swindling is a
term unknown to the law, and those magistrates were conti-
nually listening to stories got up for the express purpose of
extortion, from the fear of parties of being dragged before
the public, however innocent might have been their conduct.
If they persevered in this conduct after this warning, he would
tell them that the Court of Queen's Bench would take cogni-
sance of their proceedings, and put an end to the usurpation
which they thus exercised of the jurisdiction of higher courts
of justice. The noble and learned lord concluded by moving
that an address be presented to her majesty, praying that her
Majesty would be graciously pleased to direct the report of
1834 to be taken into consideration, with a view to the re-
formation of the corporation of the city of London.
The LORD CIIANCELLOR said that his noble and learned
friend should have given a more definite notice of his object
before be sought to pledge the house to an extension of the
municipal corporation reform bill to the city. He concurred
in all that had been said as to the impropriety of the conduct
of magistrates who listened to charges which they had no
power to determine, and hoped that what had passed would
put an end to the practice.
Lord CAMPBELL did not think the city of London so bad
as his noble friend had represented it to be. It was a repre-
sentative government, and no doubt abuses had crept in,
which he hoped to see reformed.

Lord BROUGHAM then said he would withdraw his me
tion, and bring it forward it, another shape.

Lord f3nouonAm presented a petition from the Marquis
of Townshend, and his brother Charles V. F. Townsbend,
containing allegations against a person named John Mar-
getta, who had, it was alleged, falsely assumed the title of
Earl of Leicester, although not legitimate.
The petition was referred to a select committee, and their
lordships adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY.
Sir R. PEEL assented to the production of the papers
moved for by Lord Palmerston relating to the Ashburton
treaty, with the exception of such parts as were confidential.
The right hon. baronet also said he would, on Monday,
state the course he would adopt with respect to the question
of privilege.
Lord STANLEY, in reply to a question from Mr. LABOU-
CHERE, said there was no truth in the rumour that in the
measure relating to the importation of Canadian flour a clause
was to be introduced for the purpose of excluding flour ma-
nufactured from grain grown in the United States. It would
be sufficient if the flour was manufactured in Canada to con-
stitute it colonial flour. He did not expect to be able to in-
troduce the ❑ew measure before Easter.
Lord PALMERSTON, in reference to Mr. Roebuck's charge
of falsehood against the Simia proclamation, in which it was
stated that Shah Soojali would " enter Afghanistan sur-
rounded by his troops," observed, that the proclamation was
fulfilled within six months of its date but, even if it had
never been fulfilled, that circumstance would not have im-
peached the proclamation. Shah Soojah had entered Canda-
har, " surrounded by his troops," which were partly com-
posed of Hindostanees and partly of Affghans.
Mr. ROEBUCK said his charge was that the proclamation
had been drawn up for the express purpose of delusion ; and,
in support of this charge, he quoted a letter from Col. Dennie,
in which thaf lamented officer declared that Shah Soojah had
not a single Affghan in his whole army. He would ask if
that army was not cbmmanded by British officers, and paid
out of British funds?

Lord PALMERSTON admitted that it was commanded by
British officers, but it was paid by Shah Soojah, by means
of a subsidy from this country.

In reply to a question from' Mr. EWART,
Sir R. PEEL said that he was unable to give any further
information respecting any alteraiton of the sugar duties
than he had formerly given.
In reply to questions from Mr. A. SMITH,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that Govern-
ment was in possession of every information respecting the
value of the opium seized in China, and he would lay the
whole of the paper,: beforc ratilutzicnt, i" order that an
opinion might be formed as to the proper course to be pur-
sued.
In reply to a question from Mr. EWART,
Sir R. PEEL said that it was not his intention to take any
step with respect to monopoly of the growth of opium in In-
dia until he should have art opportunity of ascertaining the
opinion of Sir H. Pottinger.
The house then went into a committee of supply, and the
navy estimates were proceeded with.
A discussion took place as to the propriety of paying more
attention to building steam ships of war, Sir C. NAPIER
declaring that we had never built one in this country that
could be called good, or that could keep the machinery in
anything like safety. In fact a cannon ball would go right
through the boiler of any of them, and cause an explosion,
and the men below would be cooked before they could reach
the deck.

Captain Rous also condemned the system of giving the
command of our fleets to old men, who, from being ashore
for 10 or 20 years previously, had lost two thirds of all the
nautical skill they had ever acquired. He also condemned
the constant violation of the rules of the Admiralty by the
captains of vessels proceeding to the Mediterranean, taking
with them their wives, families, carriages, horses, &c. The
ships in that service being generally in port, enabled the offi-
cers to reside ashore so continuously, that they became ut-
terly unfit for service. For his own part, he would rather
take any gentleman brought up in St. James's-street for an
officer in a ship of his, than he would take an officer brought
up in such service as that of the Mediterranean.
A discussion was raised as to the propriety of reviving the
office of deputy accountant-general of the Admiralty, Mr.
Labouchere, Mr. Baring, and other hon. members objecting
to such revival, the necessity for which was, however, advo-
cated by Mr. Sydney Herbert and Sir James Graham, who
read a letter from the accountant-general proving the neces-
sity of the revival of the office owing to the great increase of
of busirxss in that department.
Mr. C. Woon proposed a reduction of the vote in order to
take the opinion of the house upon the propriety of the re-
vival of the office, but on a division Mr. Wood's amendment
was negatived by a majority of 124 to 45.
The house was occupied with the discussion of the esti-
mates during the remainder of the evening.