Year: 1867

threecOrpered constituencies might be appeu 70 & ~


Lord RCdesdale expressed his RTatthoauOn az uIe re-
lection of the acknowledgment schemes of Earl Grey ana
eader ~ the two great parties refused 10 counen
ance any further agitation gamst II for party purposes
the nropoed nnsatsacOry distribution of seats and the
! abolition Of the very useful system OF eompouhuh'S


Earl Russell hoped that whatever might be the merits
or dement's Of the ITSELF it would at least for
some time TO eome effect settlement OF the question
but he could not conceal his fears that II would lead to
great increase corruption among the classes who really
took no interest politics Nevertheless he had no ap


rehepOn that the people would abuse the powers con
erred upon them ana far rs the great body OF the
peope concerned, nc did not think that the nsn


lions of the country in danger. But with regard 10


the distribution of seats he could not agree that the ha
decision rested alleged by Lord Redesdale, with the
B%t though he eceted fiat the distribution scheme was
not extensive he did not believe that tit would lead
with their sudden change of opinion and while he admit
ted that their policy had been successful sand 1t was most
Unprecedented, and he trusted would never be praeuced
again.


The bill was then read q third time.


The Earl Of Derby then the part Of the Government
thanked their ordshps for the in which they had
dealt with the bill During experience Of As years he
never knew bill of such importance being discussed
with so little acerby and party spirit IL was true hat
me OH was gteaV 81 t % 'u t tnt IN ~ c b %


ence in the sound of his ellowcountrymen that
he trusted that the extended franchise now conferred
upon them would place the institutions Of the country
hrmer basis and increase the loyalty aud content
ment OF large portion OF Her Najesiys subjects


The bill then pass,


In the House OF Commons the Representation Of the
People bi amended, brought up from the Lords,
and the motion OF tho Chancellor Of the EXchequcr
the amendments ordered to be printed and to be
taken into consideration on Thursday.


The Chancellor Of the Exchequer stated in reply TO MT
Ayrton, that on Thursday, when he moved that the
Lords amendments TO the Representation OF the People
bill be considered he would take general view OF those
amendments and state the course which the Government
would recommend the House TO pursue respecting theh


TIE RIGHTS OF NEUTRALs.


In the House Of Commons, the 9TH Of August Mr j.
Mil called attention TO the declaration Of Paris Of 1906,
far as it relates to the right of sezng enemies goods
in neutral vessels. He submitted that by that decara-
ton had put away the natural weapon Of maritime
peoplethc right Of making the commerce of our
opponents that had surrendered IL without receiving
any compensation and that unless by resumng this
natural and indispensable weapon placed ourselves on
burdened with the additions which had been made
naval and military establishments, and In spite OF them
should be constantly kept in state Of alarm The step
had taken, however, in joining in this declaration was
not irretrevable; II was not treaty, and we were AT
liberty withdraw from it, He maintained that it
for the general interest of humanity that every country
should fight with its weapon and that II was absurd
to suppose that we should be at war with another hao
and that merchants should at the same time be carry
ing roaring trade with IT, If we were to withdraw
from the declaration II should be III time OF peace ana on
ample notice 10 the other Powers concerned for nc should
feel Inundated as an Engshman II we were to Withdraw
from il only on war breaking out


Mr. Norwood commended that the principle OF the decar
alton of Paris ought to be carried further and be extended
to al private property not eontraDand OF war; whether III
neutral bottoms not.


Lord Stanley said he could not enter into the question
Of what might be done in moment OF extreme danger,
when the existence of the nation in danger.
No could deny that this engagement had materially
altered position both to neutras and begerons
But there was some counter considerations which
bound TO bear In mind, and one was that by eX-
ercsng the power Of selling enemies goods on neutral
ships we necessarily annoyed the neutrals, and tho
risk Of converting them into enemies IL not possible
10 deny that had bound ourselves by this compact 20
all the maritime powers except Spain and the United
and in the which took place between Prussia
and Denmark IN the OF last year between tho Irus
slams and the Ausrans the question did not arise In all
these had been neutral and had been guided by
the principle of the declaration being carried out aud II
would hardly be fair for us TO accept the bcnct OF II
when we were at peace and not be bound by II whcn We
at war II must also be borne In mind that those
who had adhered 10 The declaration had abandoned the
right Of piyaeerng and we had TO consider whether by
repudatng the declaration should not be reyiyngthc
right OF privaeering, by which might be great losers
He did not wish 20 argue IT, however AS matter OF al
pledge TO the other Powers who signed IT, and II would
not be right for us TO turn sharply round and say we
would not be bound by IL. AT any rate we could not
free ourselves from the obligation without long notice


Sir X. Palmer agreed with Mr. MIL that when we were
at ought 10 be at war In earnest ana that the no
ton Of national war and mercantile peace was ab-
sard ana nc agreed with LORD stanfy m & II n6 70 the m


Mr. Labouchere hoped the Foreign Secretary would up
hold the policy OF the late Government Ia this matter
After few observations from Mr d. Griffith, the sub
ExTRADmoN OF CRIMINALS.


On the 9th Of August, IN the House Of Commons, on
the order Of the day for going into Committee the
Expiring Laws Continuance bill, Mr.. NJ Tonens called
attention TO the anomalous and unsatisfactory state OK
our existing treaties OF eXtTadOn with foreign Powers.
He cited the case Of Lamirande, who stole sum Of
money from bank at POitiers, and fed 70 Canada.
where he arrested not on the charge of seangior
the treaty did not apply to tha-but on trnpcd up
charge of forgery to which the treaty did apply, aud he
taken 10 France and sentenced 10 ten years mpTls
Onment. II this could be done no foreigner was sale IN
this country, but he might at any moment be arrested on


tTumped up charge OF forgery with the real object OF
trying him in bis own country for pohtGal ofense Inc
proper was 10 pass act which should settle,
and for all, the principle which these treaties
should be based, and that a reasonable timesay two
months-should be named as the period during which
any man arrested the instance Of foreign Govern
ment might claim the right TO out wilt OF habeas
corpus.


was altogether wrong and that Committee Of the House
should lay down the principles OH which they should be
based.


Mr. Neate thought that more mischievous speech
made in the House than the speech OF Mr. TOrTens
Sir r. Goldsmith amentec that the House should be
called upon TO discuss these treaties without greater fa
eilitles for dsposing Of the matter permanently.


all communities that criminals should be arrested and
punished and he Justhed the course taken IN te Lam


Mr.. ]. s. Mil remarked that the case OF Iamirande
showed strongly that we could not rely on the evidence
rendered 10 us by foreign Governments.


Lord Stanley reminded the House that the bill was Of
very limited character, and merely gave effect copies
of legal documents The Of Lamirande was an nm
satisfactory one, and the diculty he found demand
ing his release that the error committed by
owa authorities. It was said that aman might be ar
rested false charge and then when he arrived In his
own country be tried for political oheDSe He did not
think that possible, but should such case occur
should have fun right TO demand the man back. He
declined 70 follow Mr. TOrrenss argument which went TO
the whole principle Of extradtOD, but he had no obec
ton to the whole matter being considered by commit


The discussion was continued by Sir g. Bowyer and
Mr. Henley, after which the House went into committee
on the bll and its clauses were agreed TO-


MIR. BRIGHT on THE LORDS AMENDMENTS TO THE REFORM


BILL.