The New York herald., 1862-03-25

1--WE nre from out mortars prevented ihe"' A
these facts look like speedy abandonment OF
Island No. 10.
| By the Hansa we have news from Europe to the
| 18th of March, three days later.
Our newspaper files contain full reports OF three
important debates which took place in the English
Pariament-the subjects under discussion being the
efficiency and commercial effects of the Union
blockade of the rebel ports, the rights of bellige
rents and neutrals at sea, and the intent and pro-
| gress of the allied forces against Mexico.
| In the House of Lords on the 10th inst, Lord
Sratheden called the attention of the peers to the
blockade of the ports of the Confederate States,
and moved an address for copy of any CORE
spondence on the subject subsequent to the papers
presented to the House. He brought forward his
motion, he said, for the purpose of ahording Lord
Russell an opportunity of explaining the
policy pursued by the government ON
pressed his conviction that the policy pursued by
the government had obtained the approval of the
country, and said that from the first the
blockade of the Southern ports had oc
cupied the attention of ministers, who had
had two questions to consider-frst, whether the
proclamation of a blockade had been made by
means employed had been sufficient to blockade
SO large an extent of coast. In regard
to the first point the proclamation had
been issued, as laid down by Lord Stow
ell, by the sovereign authority in the per-
son of the President of the United States;
and, in respect to the extent of coast
England had formerly proclaimed q block
ade of q coast not much inferior in extent
to the number and size of the vessels which had
eluded the blockading squadrons, much exaggera-
ton existed, many Of these vessels being only
coasters of small draught running from creek to
creek. He could not give the papers moved for,
for the simple reason that none such existed. He
hoped the North would consent to q peaceful
separation of the South, which would be followed
by the gradual abolition of slavery.
Mr.. Horsfal, member for Liverpool, with Messrs
Golden, Bright and other liberals, advocated q
revision of the maritime code, defining the rights
of neutrals and belligerents at sea during war.
They seemed to require an amplifcation of the
treaty Of Paris, the bases of the proposition of
the late Secretary Marcy, to the extent that mer.
chant vessels of an enemy could carry even con-
trabands of war into the ports Of the enemy, and
that neutral flags of commerce should
be really free flags. The Attorney General
and Sir G. C. Lewis denied the position of the
free traders, as well its expediency; the first
law officer of the crown asserting that the Treaty
Of Paris was not binding on the contracting parties
in case of war between any two or more Of them,
as they would then seize both the ships and goods
of the enemy wherever they could find them.
The English government again asserts that they
Joined in the alliance against Mexico merely for
the protection of English life and property in the
republic, and to enforce the payment of the debts
The affairs of the Allies appear to be confused, not
withstanding the Parliamentary explanation.
CONGRESS.
In the Senate yesterday, resolutions from the
New Jersey Legislature, asking Congressional ac-
ton with reference to the defences of the coast of
New Jersey Pennsylvania and Delaware, and in
favor of State loans for the purpose were referred
memorial from the Philadelphia Board of Trade,
urging reduction of taxes on manufactures was
presented; also resolutions of the Kentucky Legis-
lature, asking a reduction of the tax on tobacco.
Both were referred Resolutions from the Ohio
Legislature, opposed to the settlement of the re-
condign punishment of traitors, were referred.
Resolutions from the Maine Legislature, endorsing
the course of the administration and in favor
of confiscating the property of rebels, we're re-
ferred. Bills to promote the efficiency of
the Engineer Corps and for the removal and con-
solidation of the Kansas Indian tribes, intro
duced. The joint resolution in favor of affording
pecuniary aid for the emancipation of slaves was
taken up, and opposed by Mr.. Salisbury, of Dela
ware. Mr.. Davis, of Kentucky offered a substi
tute, declaring slavery to be exclusively within
the jurisdiction of the people Of the several States
yet that when any State determines to emanci-
pate its slaves, the federal government shall pay
a reasonable price for the slaves and the cost of
colonizing them. The subject was then laid aside,
and the bill to abolish slavery in the District of
Columbia was taken up. The question was taken
on Mr.. Davis amendment, to colonze the slaves
and resulted in tie vote. The Vice President
voted in the negative, and the amendment was
rejected. debate on the merits of the bill then
ensued which was continued until the adjourn
ment.
In the House of Representatives, the credentials
of Joseph S. segar, as representative from the
First district of Virginia, were referred to the
Committee on Elections. A resolution was
adopted directing inquiry as to the expediency Of
working the Western gold mines for the benefit of
the government. resolution was offered asking
Il Il la.a L.. L.