Ethatto BITS torttirings in farligintut.

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.

Hot= OF Loans. Monday, June 14. Minute of Council on Education; Conver- sation—Surrender of Criminals (Convention with France) Bill, withdrawn—Corrupt Practices at Elections Bill, considered in Committee; Government amendment to leave out Counties and Universities carried by 78 to H. Tuesday, June 15. Militia Bill; second reading. Thursday, June 17. Royal Assent by Commission to the Proclamation for Assent- * bling Parliament, Law of Wills Amendment, and sixty-eight other Bills—Ecclesias- tical Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Bill, thrown out on second reading—Enfran- chisement of Copyholds Bill, passed through Committee—Lunatics Bill, postponed to next session—Suitors in Chancery Relief Bill, read a second time—Militia Bill, passed through Committee. Friday, June 18. New South Wales; Protesting Petition from the Legislative Council presented. Holism or COMMONS. Monday, June 14. Mr. Feargus O'Connor—Smithfield Market—Lord John Russell's Review of the Case of Mr. Mather and the Policy of Ministers—Maynooth Adjourned Debate ; Motion to adjourn the House, carried by 109 to 29.

Tuesday, June 15. The Maynooth Debate finally evaporates—Prevention of Crime and Outrage in Ireland; leave for a Bill given to Mr. Napier—Expulsion of Scotch Missionaries from Austria ; Mr. Anstey's Motion " counted out." Wednesday, June 16. Mr. Anstey's "Count-out" canvassed—Roman Catholic Processions ; Mr. Walpole's Statement—Bishopric of Christchurch (New Zealand) Bill; adjourned debate concluded, and BM read a second time by 111 to 84—Mr. Feargus O'Connor transferred to a Lunatic Asylum. Thursday, June 17. Morning sitting. Metropolis Water Supply Bill, considered in Committee. Evening sitting. Petition from the Colony of New South Wales read at the table—Metropolis Burials Bill, read a second time—Metropolis Sowers Bill, passed through Committee—New Zealand Government Bilk read a third time and passed—County Elections Polls Bill, thrown out on third reading. Friday, June 18. Morning sitting. Militia Pay Bill, passed through Committee —Improvement of Jurisdiction in Equity Bill, read a third time and passed—Com- mon Law Procedure Bill, passed through Committee—Case of Mr. Pascoe; State- ment—The Frome Vicar Case; Mr. Ilorsman abandons his Select Committee—Crime and Outrage in Ireland Bill, read a second time, by 118 to 18—Encumbered Estates (Ireland) Bill, read a second time.

TIME - TABLE.

The Lords.

Hour of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment.

The Commons.

Hour of Honr of Meeting. 1.4journment.

Monday .,

5h .(m) 12h 16ra Monday Noon ..... 4h Om eh .(m) 9h Om Tuesday . 5h .... 10h 10M Tuesday lh .... bh Om

w,

711 .... Ith Om Wednesday

No Sitting. Wednesday Noon .... 8h Oat Thursday

bh .... 9h Om Thursday Noon .... 4h Om

6h .(n) 2h ]bin Friday

bh .... 7h Olin Friday Noon ....

eh .(m) 311 45m lh 90m

Sittings this 'Week, 4; Time.1911 20m Sittings this Week, 9; Time. 47h 30m

— this Session, GO; — 123h 90m — this Session, 82; — 549h 58m

LORD JOHN RUSSELL ON MB. MATHER'S CASE, AND OTHER MISCONDUCT OF GOVERNMENT.

On the order of the day for considering the report of Supply, on Monday evening, Lord JOHN Rossini, according to notice, called the at- tention of the House of Commons to "the case of Mr. Mather, and gene- rally to the present state of public affairs." At the outset, he expressed unwillingness to bring questions of foreign policy before the House. When, lately, a protocol upon Neufchatel was referred to by the Foreign Minister, Lord John asked for its production ; but as soon as the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs said it was not possible to lay it on the table, he supposed that state reasons influenced the Government, and he did not say a word more, or press for the production of the docdment. But here the Government has volunteered the publication of all the corre- spondence ; and he felt that if it were left mmoticed now, the lashes might be quoted against Members fortunate enough to be reelected to the next Par- liament, to close their mouths. Having, therefore, recapitulated the facts of the injuries and insulta put on young Mr. Mather, he criticized the diplo- matic correspondence. The first complaint was made to the Tuscan Government by Lord Gran- ville ; but Lord Granville likewise wrote to our Ambassador at 'Vienna, and stated the facts of the case as they had been reported to him. Before the despatch to Lord Westmoreland was sent off to Vienna, accounts bad been received from Florence, in which Mr. Scarlett stated that the Tuscan Go- vernment had engaged to make an official inquiry into the facts : Lord Gran- ville therefore added to his despatch to Lord Westmoreland, at Vienna, a poatscnptwhich informed him of the primary acknowledgment obtained from Tuscany, and that no instructions would be given to him to apply to Austria unless secondarily, and in the event that the inquiry, ordered by the Tuscan Government were 'not fairly conducted," or that influence were used to suppress the truth" : then, her Majesty's Government would look for repara- tion to Austria, and no doubt would receive such reparation. The inquiry promised to Mr. Scarlett was made by the Tuscan Government ; and it wholly corroborated the account given by young Mr. Mather and the brother who was present with him. " Mr. Mather states that he was crossing the street in order to take his breakfast at a coffeehouse ; that the street was very much crowded ; that he crossed between the troops and the band of music ; that there were about fifty people between them ; that in so doing he was struck sharply by an officer on the back with the flat of his sword ; that he turned round and asked the officer why he struck him ; that he immediately afterwards was struck in the face very violently by another officer ; that he was staggering under this blow, and had scarcely recovered himself, when the first officer, who had a drawn sword in his hand, cut him down, and in- flicted the wound to which I have alluded." But a totally different account was prepared and given by the Austrian officers, through Marshal Radetzky, to our Ambassador at Vienna. The officers stated, that Mr. Mather impeded the way of Lieutenant Forsthiiber' who was marching on duty ; and he was touched by Lieutenant Forsthiiber with the flat of the sword, and enjoined to move out of the way. " In complying with this injunction," says Marshal Radetzky, " Mr. Slather, ap- parently without intention, knocked against Lieutenant Baron de Harg ; who, not be- ing on duty, was walking by the side of the detachment. The latter had the imprudence to strike him a blow in the face with his fist. The Englishman, irritated, turned round in a threatening attitude, and with his fist uplifted, after the manner of boxers, against First Lieutenant Forsthtiber, towards whom he advanced; when the latter, fearing to be exposed to a dishonouring insult, from which it necessarily be- hoved him to secure himself, struck him immediately a blow on the head with the edge of his sabre. Mr. Mather, whose wound, moreover, did not seem serious, was carried to the hospital. Although the civilians heard as witnesses by the Tuscan authorities do not represent the matter exactly as I have stated it, inasmuch as they pretend to have remarked nothing, or at least not to have perceived the menacing attitude assumed by Mr. Mather against First Lieutenant Forsthilber, that circum- stance is not the less proved by the depositions of the soldiers ; and there is the less doubt attaching to it, inasmuch as all the civilian witnesses assert that Mather was walking between the band and the detachment, and one of them expressly declares that he had observed that a sharp dispute had taken place between him and the officer in command. The character and conduct of First Lieutenant Forsthiiber not allowing me to suppose that he acted without sufficient reason, I am of opinion that that officer was perfectly in the right, and that he absolutely did nothing but what he was bound to do, to defend himself from an outrage and its inevitable conse- quences." Now those two accounts were wholly conflicting. The Tuscan inquiry corroborated the account of young Mather, but Marshal Radetzky set that account at naught, on the evidence of his own soldiers. Now no pains were taken to produce the depositions of the soldiers, and see whether they were of superior weight to those of the civilians, English and Florentine ; and our Government seems to have taken no means to sift or reconcile the accounts. It might he supposed they would either say, " This is an unprovoked as- sault," or else say, " This seems to have been an accidental encounter, partly occasioned by the conduct of Mr. Mather in threatening an officer at the head of his detachment" : but no; instead of taking one or other of those opposite views, they took both views at once. For Lord Malmesbury wrote to the Tuscan Government- " Now, the evidence which has thus been obtained conclusively establishes that a most unprovoked outrage was committed on an unarmed and unoffending British subject by an officer in command of a military party acting for Tuscan purposes in the Tuscan dominions " :

while to the Earl of Westmoreland he wrote-

" Assuming, therefore, with his Highness, that it was caused by a concourse of fortuitous and unfortunate circumstances,' (contours its circonstances fortuites et malheureuses,) it is, nevertheless, the duty of the Tuscan Government, on whose territory these occurred, to present the sufferer with such a pecuniary compensation so he would have obtained in his own country if his life had been endangered either by a premeditated or an accidental injury."

The conduct of the Austrian Government was very conciliatory. Count Buol wrote to the Earl of Westmoreland-

-In the mean time, he would recommend an an-angement upon the principle of compensation, not for an insult, (for, according to your Lordship's correspondence, that was not the ground upon which you placed this question,) but for an unfortu- nate accident, in which no nationality was concerned."

There is certainly a passage in a despatch to Mr. Scarlett at Florence in which Lord Malmesbury said-

" My determination is that Mr. Mather should get what he would have obtained from an English court, had he been cut down at a review in Hyde Park by accident- ally hustling a violent soldier." (Lord John could not understand how a Man could cut another man down "by hustling a soldier.") But ultimately Lord Malmesbury wrote to Mr. Mather- " Mr. Scarlett has succeeded in obtaining for your son a practical atonement for the unmerited and brutal treatment he received at Florence."

Nothing could have been more fitting and becoming than the tone taken by Mr. Mather. Lord Malmesbury applied to him to assess his son's da- mages. It was quite wrong to do that : Lord Malmesbury was the proper person to do it, and not Mr. Mather. Lord Malmesbury's duty was to seek the competent advice of her Majesty's Advocate, and under that advice to fix what le thought right and take nothing less. But Mr. Mather assented, very reluctantly, evidently from a desire to show to Lord Malmesbury the same deference that he had evinced towards Lord Granville i and he named 50001 as a due punishment for the personal and national injury. There- upon Lord Malmesbury, instead of repairing his blunder by telling Mr. Mather what was a proper sum, wrote to Mr. Scarlett that Mr. Mather de- manded a pecuniary compensation, but that the sum he asked was exor- bitant. Mr. Scarlett informed the Tuscan Government that Mr. Mather had made a demand which was exorbitant ; and he repeated that opinion several times in his official communications with the Tuscan Government. After all, Lord Malmesbury fixed no minimum : he merely told Mr. Scarlett—" You must if possible get 500/. for Mr. Mather; or he should have such a sum as would buy him an annuity. That is what he would have got in England." At last Mr. Scarlett took less than half 5001., and the liberation of the two Stratfords ; an unsatisfactory and unbecoming arrangement, but one not so indefensible as it would have been if Lord Malmesbury had not given him such vague instructions. Mr. Scarlett is a gentleman of considerable expe- rience, and if he had been specifically instructed he would no doubt have asked for what he was told to ask, and not taken a farthing or a word less. Lord Malmesbury wrote a despatch on the 21st of May, which he sent off on the 24th of May, instructing Sir Henry Bulwer, that although her Majesty's Government could not approve of Mr. Scarlett's arrangement, yet they "would not, of course, refuse to recognize it." But after this despatch was sent off, he read some despatches from Mr. Scarlett which had been delivered to him on the 22d of May, but which he had not read till after the despatch written on the 21st was sent off on the 24th ; and thereupon he wrote a last despatch opening up the whole question again, because Mr. Scarlett had given up the pnneiple of Tuscan re- sponsibility, and desiring Sir Henry Bulwer to leave Florence and break off all communication with the Tuscan Government unless it should make what was deemed a sufficient reparation. On the whole, Lord Malmesbury so contrived, that Mr. Mather, who was the subject of the inquiry, and Mr. Searlett, who was the person endeavouring to obtain redress for him, are the only persons who have suffered. Lieutenant Forsthfiber gets off with some applause, and remains very much as he was ; while Mr. blather's character is injured, and Mr. Scarlett has a cruel censure passed upon him. " The only consequence of this proceeding will be, that British subjects, residents and travellers, in Florence, will not have an able and intelligent Minister there to protect them. After the manner in which this transaction has been managed, I really cannot see what can now be done. I received a letter to- day from a gentleman saying that he had some time ago been seized by a Continental Government, and thrown into prison for twenty-four hours : he states that his case was taken up by the noble Lord the Member for Tiver- ton, and subsequently by Lord Granville, who remonstrated with the offend- ing Government ; but that the present Secretary for Foreign Affairs had taken no notice of the matter. The only advice I can give this gentleman—and I take the opportunity of giving it him thus publicly—is not to ask the present Government to interfere in his case at all. If he has a grievance to complain of, I recommend him to follow the example of the great Captain Gonzales de Cordova in a similar position, who, when his Sovereign wanted to pacify him by a gift of the city of Lugo, told his Majesty that he liked his grievance better than the city. As far as Mr. Mather is concerned, the result to him is the offer of a thousand francesconi, which he rejected with disdain ; in addition to which his character as a man of independence and disinterestedness has been blasted by the interference of our Government. All I can say on the subject is, that I will not take the course which Lord Derby did when he saw reason to censure the conduct of the late Government in regard to the affairs of Greece, but I will content myself with protesting against what has been done in Mr. blather's case in terms similar to those which his Lordship then employed. Lord Derby said on that occasion—' Surely it becomes the British Legislature to step forward and say that the Foreign Office of England is not England ; that the highminded generous feeling of this great people is op- posed to measures such as have been taken by the Government of the coun- try ; that we separate our actions from theirs—our feelings from theirs—oar views of justice and good faith from theirs.' I also take leave to separate my feelings, my notions of justice and good faith, from the course which the Government has pursued in this case. I be leave to enter my protest against conduct which seems to me to degrade this Government in the eyes of Eu- rope—against conduct which does not degrade this country, because the country takes far better and higher views than its Government of what is due to its character."

Having disposed of the Mather correspondence, Lord John took up the last portion of his notice, to call the attention of the House to the state of public business. His performance of this task was not a review of Government measures, but a criticism of Government policy. In suc- cession he touched on the evasive manoeuvres which the Ministry prac- tised when they were new in office ; on their continual endeavour at later periods to break through the understanding that the transition session should be limited to the space necessary only for urgent and indispensable measures ; on their later dishonest countenance of supporters who give to the constituency of Lincolnshire hopes of a reversal of the Free-trade policy, while before the constituency of Greenwich they parade a big loaf, and to that of Maidstone say they hope the blessings of cheap bread will be perpetual ; then on the lucid Free-trade financial speech of Mr. Disraeli, supplemented and answered by the eminently obscure speech of his own Premier at the Mansionhouse ; and lastly, on the election-address of Mr. Disraeli, upon whom, so late in the day, the light has broken that public opinion is opposed to Protection, and that a wise statesman cannot defy the spirit of his age, but who nevertheless says that the rent of the land has been reduced by five millions a year, and hints at compensation for the loss. Passing on in his review, he observed that the credit of what the Ministers had actually done was a borrowed credit ; for in- stance, their Chancery reform was prepared by the Commission of the late Government. He denounced the dangerous game pursued in regard to the Education Minutes of Council ; and added his solemn warning, that the yielding up of mixed education, which the new policy involves, will hatch another Maynooth controversy, greater and more serious than the one already pending on the present Maynooth grant. The whole course of the Ministry seemed to him to mark them as equally destitute of principles and eager to adopt and encourage any proposal from any party which offered them an electioneering advantage,—a Maynooth cry from one, amendment of the management-clauses cry from another, in- quiry into mixed education from a third. Nevertheless, enough had crept out to warrant Sir James Graham in saying that the question before the country is one of confidence or no-confidence in Lord Derby's Government. That is the question ; and Lord John anticipated that the coming elections will give a clear answer to that question, hostile to a Government with no principle but that of sailing before every wind. Lord STANLEY addressed himself to the criticism on the Mather corre- spondence; bespeaking indulgence for his first appearance on a question of such magnitude, and premising further, that from the very first this ques- tion had been treated with an amount of prejudice and misrepresentation he believed hardly ever paralleled. The discrepancy in the language of Lord Malmesbury entirely vanished on looking into the whole correspondence. The word " accidental" applied pro- perly to the transaction in a national sense, as the evidence showed there had been no premeditated insult to England ; but the words " brutal and unprovoked" were as perfectly true and applicable as in any case that ever came under public notice to the individual act and injury. Objection was made to our seeking reparation in the Tuscan tribunals : but the question of which power was the one who should give us reparation was of primary im- portance and difficulty. No precedent applied to it, except perhaps that afforded by the presence of our army in Portugal ; but even there the Duke of Wellington expressly stated that our soldiers remained amenable to the Portuguese tribunals. If, moreover, we applied formally for redress to Aus- tria, we gave what we have not yet given, a formal recognition of the abso- lute military occupation of Tuscany by Austria; and there could hardly be a more difficult question than might then have arisen,—namely, the question of how far we should interfere with Austria if the legal tribunals of Tuscany had chanced to aNuit the offenders in manifest defiance of all law and evi- dence. As to Mr. Mather, the Government had not the least intention to in- thtt any damage on his character; and they ought to take, and would take,

the earliest opportunity of bearing testimony to his character ; for if under excited feelings he had not always done justice to the Government, that was no reason why they should not do justice to him. Mr. Scarlett had not been uninstructed as to a minimum ; he had been instructed to take not less than 5001. When he was disavowed, it was not for having taken less than he

should have taken, or for having taken as part of the terms the release of two other prisoners whose release had been promised before, but for having expressly surrendered therinciple of Tuscan responsibility, and accepted compensation as a charity frpom the Grand Duke. Air. OSBORNE was one of those who lamented the course Lord John Russell had taken, because if there ever was a case which ought to be con-

sidered on its own merits separately from the general imbecility of this Government, it was the case of Mr. Mather, and the conduct of the noble- man whom the country had the misfortune to see installed in the Foreign Office.

Asking who had ever heard so lame and impotent a defence as that made by Lord Stanley, he further weakened that defence by dashing away some of

ita supports. What precedent was that of our occupation of Portugal, when in this case Austria occupies Tuscany under an express stipulation that the occupying troops are not to be amenable to any authority but that of the Austnan Minister of War ; and when there is the further remarkable stipu- lation, that those troops are not to leave the country without the mutual consent of both parties—that is, until Austria shall choose Throwing scorn on the peddling spirit which had reigned over Lord Malmesbury'a whole ne- gotiation—the whole drift of which was simply, " You must hold firm lan- guage on the theme of what can be got,"—he especially attacked the un-

worthy manoeuvre by which Mr. Mather had been drawn into an unwilling mention of a sum, and then behind his back damaged in character by repre- sentations that he was the first to suggest a money compensation. That

course had—Mr. Osborne knew it—caused the English to pass by Mr. blather with contempt, under the impression that he had first put the question on the national honour, and then said he was ready to take 5001. "The Aus- trians, so far from expressing contrition, had commended Lieutenant Forst-

hilber's conduct, and he was going about Florence as a sort of hero, as 'the man who had cut down the Englishman.' (".NO, no !") Yes, Mr. Osborne knew it to be the case ; and it was said Lord Malmesbury had given Lieute-

nant Forathriber a step.' The noble Lord had been distinguished through this affair not so much for incapacity as for infirmity of purpose and great ignorance. He had never called on the Queen's Advocate for his opinion, but, having a ready but ungrammatical pen, he trusted to himself alto- gether • and the only man who showed well in the case, and kept up the character of the country, was Mr. blather." There seemed to be " looming in the distance" a chance that Mr. Disraeli would break away from the be company about him. Mr. Osborne advised him, at all events, to send Mr. Scarlett to a quiet place, where there are no foreign troops, and to put Lord Malmesbury on the half-pay list, if there be such a thing in the Foreign Office. He concluded by again expressing his regret that the question had been brought on in its present shape, and that the forms of the House pre- vented him from moving a direct vote of censure on Lord Malmesbury for trifling with the honour of the country, and for having disgraced us in the eyes of the whole Continent of Europe. As Mr. Osborne sat down, he was greeted by loud cheers, and by cries of " Move, move!"

The Marquis of GRANBY now threw in a long statistical speech against the Free-trade commercial policy. He set himself to prove that all classes of the community are suffering from that policy • which ought therefore to be gradually modified, and eventually reversed. As soon as he had poured out the whole of his Protectionist budget, Lord PALMERSTON rose, and disposed of it with a few sentences of con-

tempt. He would not waste the time of the House by a discussion now so idle; feeling sure that Protection is dead, and that the people will act the part of Registrar-General of Deaths over its venerable corpse at the coming election.

He had read with anything but satisfaction the Mather correspondence. The whole case seemed to him, not a comedy, but a tragedy of "All in the Wrong." There was much to criticize in the conduct of all parties but Mr.

Mather and his eon. The late Government was wrong—(Clreera from the Ministerial benches)—the present Government was wrong—(Cheers from the Opposition benches)—and he was sorry that Mr. Scarlett was also wrong. Taking the conduct of the present Government first, he backed the assertion of Lord John Russell, that Lord Malmesbury was very wrong in asking Mr.

Mather to assess the damages; and again incomprehensibly wrong, both in conduct and feeling, in stating to the Tuscan Government that Mr. Mather had made an "exorbitant demand." He was again wrong in confining the formal demand of redress to the Tuscan Government ; for he well knew of the convention between Tuscany and Austria to which Mr. Osborne had re- ferred; and he knew that so strictly had that convention been acted on, that when some drunken Austrian soldiers insulted the Grand Duke's family by hauling them out of their carriage in order to replace them by a staggering comrade, redress was only granted through the trial and punishment of the

men by their own officers. The lesson read to Tuscany was a good one— that if they gave themselves up to a great power, we would not acknowledge that step, but would say we did not care a pin for it ; and would insist on

their own responsibility,. and make them pay another time. But it would have been more impressive if we had gone to the greater power, and said to that state, that responsibility attends power ; if we had taken the handy

mode of saying, " If you overbear this weak country, we will have repara- tion from you for the outrages of your garrison, instead of from the weaker power you have overborne." Lord Malmesbury seemed also to have been most wrong and hasty in disavowing Mr. Scarlett for surrendering the prin- ciple of Tuscan responsibility , for Mr. Scarlett expressly adhered to it. In his reply to the Duke of Castiliagno, on the 11th Apnl, he said- " 1 accept your arrangement ; but as you have thought right to reaffirm your prin- ciple as to the non-responsibility of Tuscany,. I think it right to refer you to my note of the 18th March, in which the principle of the British Government is laid down that you are responsible; and I tell you that the British Government main- tains that principle in all its integrity." Upon the point of the tone assumed to the Court of Vienna, the late Go- vernment was itself open to criticism; for Earl Granville expressly said to the Earl of Westmoreland, "I have no instructions to give you " ; and no application was made to the Austrian Government. That was an error ; for pninit facie the Austrian Government was the party from whom redress should have been demanded ; and if they had shown us proofs that the officer who cut down an unarmed man had done so in obedience to the rules of their service, then we should have been entitled to say to them—" You may make what regulations you like, provided they are not attended with injury to a British subject ; but when a British subject suffers by those regulations, they become improper, and we expect that you shall at all events make an apology." The great error of Mr. Scarlett, Lord Palmerston seemed to think, was his acceptance of the two young Stratfords as part of the damages for Mr.

then because Lord Palmerston had himself, while in the Foreign Offiroe, shown the Tuscan Government that their trial by Austrian court-martini was illegal, and their imprisonment informal ; and accordingly their release had already been promised. But'`this error of Mr. Scarlett only produced another error by Lord Malmesbury, who seemed to think he must adopt all the acts of his authorized agent ; whereas in diplomacy you may always dis- avow your agent if he diverges from your instructions. Lord Palmerston concluded with some remarks on the lamentable unex- ampled system of cruelty, tyranny, and violence of every sort, existing in the Neapolitan and Roman States; and on the serious international import- ance of the continued occupation of Tuscany by Austria and of Rome by France,—a state of things to which he gravely besought the earnest atten- tion of a British Government on terms with the two Governments mainly interested in a decision upon the matter.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opened with compliments to Lord Palmerston on his high authority, and on his excellent tone and temper; and with a small arrow of sarcasm at " the usual airy manner" of Mr. Osborne, the "honourable and gallant" Member for Middlesex. Fol- lowing Lord Stanley over the grounds of his defence of Lord Malmesbury, Mr. Disraeli amplified and enforced that defence, and finished it off with a good point—it was not well to impeach on such a subject, even with a dissolution impending ; and so Lord John Russell seemed to think.

Turning then to Lord John's strictures on general policy, he made a general rejoinder, both defensive and aggressive.

The attack had made early ; and then again. He supposed this was the last forlorn hope : but the drum was muffled, and the fire had slackened ; and he might say confidently that the citadel would not be yielded. Taunts had been thrown out that the credit of Chancery Reform was borrowed : to whomever that credit was due, it was a credit to be proud of; but if it was not doe to the present Government, it had also been disclaimed by the late Government ;for when it was mentioned in Mr. Disraeli's modest list after the new Ministry came in, Lord John received it with a derisive scoff. There were also taunts of using religion and education for party purposes : Lord John remembers "the Appropriation-clause" and shrinks in horror from the repetition of such manceuvres. Mr. Disraeli defended his Buckinghamshire address. He defied the exposure of one word ever uttered by him to the effect that the Corn-laws were for maintaining rent; but he argued, that if rents have been considerably diminished by hasty and unjust legislation, there is a just claim for redress. He contended with lengthened argument, that his position and principles on commercial policy are now what they have ever been. He denied that at any time after the Corn-law and Sugar-law legislation of 1846 and 1847, much as he condemned that legislation, had he ever maintained a recurrence to the same laws that regu- lated those matters before. " I say now, what I said before in this House, that I will not pin my political career or any policy which I think may be necessary to this great and prosperous country, on what is, after all, not a principle, but a measure ; and it is possible that, as a mea- sure of finance, I should be glad as a financier that there should be a moderate fixed duty on corn. But if I find—by circumstances which I do not wish particularly to describe—(Laughter, and " Oh, oh !")— by acts which I have no wish to denounce—that a fiscal proposition is invested with so much popular odium that it would be one of the unwisest things a Minister could do to propose a tax which the people dislike, whether rightly or wrongly, I cannot say I feel myself bound in honour to make that the basis of my policy, and the only measure which is a panacea for a suffer- ing community. Our wish is, that the interests which we believe were un- justly treated in 1846 should receive the justice which they deserve, with as little injury to those who may have benefited more than they were then en- titled to benefit, as is possible for human wisdom to devise. Our object is to do justice to those classes to which we believe you acted unjustly in 1846; and we wish to do that without disturbing the system which is now esta- blished." (Cheers and laughter.) He finished with a backhanded stroke at Sir James Graham. " When the noble Lord the Member for the City of London talks of our being a party without principles, he seems to admit that he is in Opposition without a cry. (Laughter and cheers.) He confesses that nothing is left—no principles, no opinion, no movement, no agitation. What is left to the noble Lord ? With the imagination of a poet—for he is still a poet—at his last gasp, to my great surprise, he discovers a resource. Something we must rally round. We must rally round, he says—it is the only thing he said to us—that pro- found apothegm of the right honourable gentleman the Member for Ripon. The right honourable gentleman has emblazoned upon his standard the origi- nal and inspiring inscription, 'Do not trust in the Government of Lord Derby.' Why, a year ago, upon the selfsame standard was emblazoned, ' Do not trust in the noble Lord the Member for the City of London.' (Laugh- ter.) Sir, we shall survive the want of confidence that is refused us by the right honourable gentleman the Member for Ripon ; and if the only way in which the noble Lord thinks he can make the present Government un- popular—if the only mode by which he thinks he can upset the present Ad- mmistration is to announce to the country that it does not possess the con- fidence of the right honourable gentleman the Member for Ripon—why then, Sir, I must express my heartfelt confidence that this time next year we :hall still have the honour of serving her Majesty." Lord DUDLEY STUA.RT vindicated the character of Mr. Mather ; and stated that several letters in the correspondence had not been included in the papers laid on the table.

The report of the Committee of Supply was then received.

THE Minus Buz.

The second reading of the Militia Bill in the House of Lords was -moved by the Earl of DERBY in a speech of considerable length, particu- larly putting forward at the 'outset the reasons for increasing our national safeguards presented by the state of France and the Continent of Europe. Soon after taking office, he had expressed his confidence in the personal pacific disposition of the present ruler of the French Republic towards this country : subsequent circumstances have tended further to increase and strengthen that confidence : he could not, however, shut his eyes to the frequent changes which have taken place of late years in the government of France ; or to the fact that there are still in that country many unquiet spirits, only kept down by the sternhand of discipline, but impatient of the control to which they are subjected, and among whom in various quarters feelings are entertained by no means friendly to this country.

In his lengthened observations in explanation and defence of the measure before the House, Lord Derby prominently pictured the heavy infliction on the people which the ballot would be ; and took credit for that particular naming of the measure which would dispense with the ballot except as the it He also laid great stress on those provisiods which transfer to funds considerable charges hitherto borne by the counties in organisation and support of the Militia.

uis of LANSDOWNE urged a moderate opposition to the bill, which would raise an inefficient force at an unnecessary cost.

e petting the constitutional repugnance to a standing army, he ty to avow his opinion, that the best, safest, and most efficient ld be found in an increase of the standing army. He thought eserve would be preferable to the force proposed, and not much ve. The Duke of Wzialattrroat spoke with characteristic emphasis in favour of the bill, to the following effect.

"I am certainly the last man to have any hesitation of opinion as to the relative advantages of meeting an enemy with disciplined or with undisci- plined or half-disciplined troops. The things are not to be compared at all. With disciplined troops, you are acting with a certain degree of confidence that what they are ordered to perform they will perform. With undisci- plined troops, you can have no such confidence ; on the contrary, the chances are that they will do the very reverse of what they are ordered to do. But we must look a little at the state in which we stand at the present moment. This country is at peace with the whole world, except in certain parts, or on the frontiers of its own distant dominions, with which operations of war are carried on by means of our peace establishment. You are now providing for a peace establishment : you are at peace with the whole world ; you are providing for a peace establishment. I say that peace establish- ment ought to have been effectually provided for long ago. If it had been, we should not have needed now to be told, as we have been by the noble Marquis, about the number of days and weeks it will take to train the Mi- litia recruits, or about the futility of expecting anything to the purpose from troops with their three weeks', or their six weeks', or what time it may be, training. We have never, up to this moment, maintained a proper peace establishment—that's the real truth ; and we are now in that position in which we find ourselves forced to form a peace establishment such as this country requires. I tell you, that for the last ten years you have never had in your army more men than enough to relieve the sentries on duty of your stations in the different parts of the world : such is the state of your peace establishment at the present time, such has been the state of your peace establishment for the last ten years. You have been carrying. on war in all parts of the globe, in the different stations, by means of this peace establishment : you have now a war at the Cape, still continuing, which you carry on with your peace establishment ; yet on that peace establish- ment, I tell you, you have not more men than are enough to relieve the sen- tries at the different stations in all parts of the world, and to relieve the dif- ferent regimenta lathe Tropics and elsewhere, after services there—of how long do you suppose -?—oft in some cases, twenty-five years, in none less than ten years; and after which, you give them five years at home, nominally—for it is only nominally in a great many cases. There were, for instance, the last troops who were sent out to the Cape; instead of keeping them five years at home after their long service abroad, I was obliged to send them out after they had only been sixteen months at home. My Lords, I tell you, you've never had a proper peace establishment all this time. We are still at peace with all the world; let us, then, have a peace establishment— our constitutional peace establishment ; and, when you have got that, see what you will do next. The noble Marquis, my noble friend, if he will allow me so to call him, i says he thinks he should prefer an army of reserve. An army of reserve! what is an army of reserve ? Is it an army to cost less than 401. each man all round ? If he thinks that possible, I tell him that we can have no such thing. But what I desire—and I believe it is a desire the most moderate that can be formed—is, that you shall give us, in the first instance, the old constitutional peace establishment. "When we have got that, then you may do what you please. The noble Marquis says, very truly, that these 50,000, or 80,000, or 150,000 militiamen, won't be fit for ser- vice in six months, or twelve months, or eighteen months : but I say they'll be fit, at all events, for some service ; and certainly they'll enable us to employ in the field others who are fit for service ; and in time they will themselves be- come fit for service. In the last war we had in service several regiments of Eng- lish Militia, and they were in as high a state of discipline, and as fit for service, as any men I ever saw in my life. It was quite impossible to have a body of troops in higher order, or in higher discipline, or more fit for discipline, than those bodies of British Militia were at the commencement of the present century up to 1810; they were as fine corps as ever were seen : and, I say, no doubt these bodies of 50,000 men or 80,000 men, whatever the number may be, will be so too, in the course of time. Everything has its beginning, and this is a commencement. You must make a beginning here, and see that it will take some months before you can form reserve regiments. The armies of England, who have served the country so well, are your Lordships so mistaken as to suppose that they were ever composed of more than one- third of real British subjects—of natives of this island ? No such thing. Look at the East Indies • not more than one-third of the soldiers there are such British subjects. Look at the Peninsula ; not one-third of the men employed there were ever British soldiers. Yet I beg your Lordships to ob- serve what services those soldiers performed. They fought great battles against the finest troops in the world ; they went prepared to face everything —ay, and to be successful against everything, or this country would not have borne with them. Not one-third of those armies were British troops ; but they were brave troops, and not merely brave—for I believe every man is brave—but well-organized troops. Take the battle of Waterloo ; look at the number of British troops at that battle. I can tell your Lordships, that in that battle there were sixteen battalions of Hanoverian Militia, just formed, under the command of the late Hanoverian Ambassador here—Count Kiel- mansegge—who behaved most admirably ; and there were many other foreign troops who nobly aided us in that battle, avowedly the battle of giants— whose operations helped to bring about the victory which was followed by the peace of Europe, that has now lasted for thirty-two or thirty-foer years. I say that however much I admire highly-disciplined troops, and most especially British disciplined troops, I tell you, you must not suppose that others cannot become so too ; and no doubt, if you be- gin with the formation of corps under this act of Parliament, they will in time become what their predecessors in the Militia were; and if ever they do become what the former Militia were, you may rely on it they will perform all the services they may be required to perform. I recommend you to adopt this measure, as the commencement of a completion of the peace establish- ment. It will give you a constitutional force : it will not be, at first, or for some time, everything we could desire, but by degrees it will become what you want—an efficient auxiliary force to the regular army." (Frequent cheers greeted the Duke in the progress and at the close of this speech.) Earl GREY opposed the measure with a detailed speech ; urging strongly the objections already mooted in the House of Commons on the ground of expense. This point} in reference to the ballot, seems new— The noble Earl forgot to mention one circumstance, which perhaps miti- gated the hardship of the ballot, but which was liable to great objection in another respect. By the act of 1802, every man drawn for the Militia was entitled to claim from the parish in which he lived half the current price of a substitute. Consequently, if 80,000 men were drawn in the next two years for the Militia, the parishes of this country might be exposed to a tax of 1,200,0001. for this purpose, supposing the price of a substitute should rise to 301. He was reminded that this claim could only be made in case the pro- perty of the man drawn did not exceed 5001. ; but of course the property of the great majority would not exceed that amount.

The Earl of ELLESMERE supported the bill, and gave some personal explanations. For a long time his opinions on the subject had afforded amusement to gentlemen at Peace Society meetings ; but now a large majority of the people and both Houses of Parliament displayed a general concurrence in the se-

cessity for such a measure. He thought it would be unfortunate if this conversion and change of opinion should be ascribed to passing events, or to the character of persons in high places. For himself, having held these opinions four years ago, it was unnecessary to say that his views had not been affected by persons, things, or events in France. There were, however, in France as well as in England, many roads to a spurious and temporary popularity : he saw no reason, grounded upon any personal characteristic of Louis Napoleon, that he would use his power in a direction hostile to this country, unless he found that the honour and interests of the country he ruled were concerned in such a movement.

"He had perhaps put the case too strongly, and somewhat irreverently, when he said that if a superior French force were to appear before the Me- tropolis, the Lord Mayor would meet them with the keys of the City at one gate while the Foot Guards marched out at the other. He did not suppose that the French would take possession of Regent Street, or march their troops into the City, so long as it had not capitulated, and the inhabitants determined to defend it. Wherever such a course had been adopted the invaders had suf- fered loss. At Buenos Ayres a body of regular troops had been driven out from the city by men who were little better than savages. This was not the modern practice of war, and all that was necessary to justify his argument was to assume that the English army were unable to meet the invaders in the open field. When Napoleon appeared before Vienna with 100,000 men, in 1805, he did not march his army into the capital at once : a large Austrian army were then in Vienna, and the course which Napoleon adopted was to take up a station where his artillery commanded the town ; the Austrians knew the city would be bombarded unless it capitulated, and the Royal Family, within twelve hours, left the city, the Austrian army retired beyond the Danube, and the municipal authorities came out to Napoleon with the keys : every one felt that the French could not be left to bom- bard the town. But the strongest case was that of Milan in the late war : Charles Albert was under the strongest obligations to the Milanese, and he chivalrously retired before the Austrian army, to defend the capital : he had 20,000 of his best troops there, but when the Austrians came up with a park of artillery, and he felt himself unable to meet them outside the walls, Charles Albert marched out at one gate while the Mayor went out at the other with the keys of the city. The best troops and the best army in the world would be, under the same circumstances, reduced to the same necessity. His allusion to the Foot Guards was not intended to impeach the bravery of that distinguished 'portion of the Army, for he remembered too well their many brilliant services in the field : he had only used the il- lustration to express the impossibility of defending a wealthy, populous, and =fortified capital, from within, when an enemy in superior force were at its gates. With these views, he must give his warmest support to any Go- vernment which took measures to provide for the safety and defence of the country." (Cheers.)

The bill was read a second time.

SURRENDER OF CRIMINALS To FRANCE.

After a question by Lord Thiouoiram, on Monday, the Earl of MALMFs- BURY stated that the Government had determined to withdraw the Sur- render of Criminals (Convention with France) Bill, on the ground of a seri- ous alteration which has just taken place in the law of France. Under that law as it now stands, the French Government would seem to have the power to reclaim any criminal from any part of the world wherever he commit- ted the offence,—though it were not committed on French ground, and though the party were not a Frenchman. Lord BROUGHAM— Yes ; an Englishman in London." Lord MALMESBURY considered4kktittr4ass such a bill now would be extremely dangerous ; and he trounced that the Government has for the present suspe&led the furtl progres; of the measure.

MAYNOOTH. t-.41e•

Nearly at the end of the evening sitting of trofiday, when it was nearly three o'clock on Tuesday morning, the adjourned Maynooth debate came round to its turn. Mr. SPOONER insisted on going on with it then, or on dividing. But such a proposal was strongly opposed. Mr. ROUNDELL PALMER said, he was desirous of expressing his views on the question ; and there were indications that other speakers would rise if there were another opportunity. A motion to adjourn was made, and being pressed to a division, was carried, by 103 to 29. Mr. SPOONER in- timated that he should take that division as the index of the feeling of the House on his original motion.

Next day, Tuesday, Mr. KEOGH asked Mr. Spooner, what day he should fix to resume the debate. Mr. Spoors= now answered distinctly, that he meant to take the division of last night as a division on the main question. " That division showed .clearly what was the opinion of the House; and he did not mean to take any furtbir step in the matter." This avowal brought on a warm skirmish on the motives and tactics of parties, and on the real meaning of the previous vote: In the midst of the melee, Mr. KEOGH reiterated, with details, his charges that the Government, especially Lord Naas, the Irish Secretary, are giving all their influence to several candidates in Ireland who use in their addresses the common phrase, " As to the Ecclesiastical Titles Act of last session, we are perfectly prepared to vote for its repeal." Mr. OSBORNE seconded Mr. Keogh so sharply in the combat of accusations, that Mr. BERFSFORD distinguished him as the " Thersites of Middlesex." Towards the end of the discussion, the SPEAKER intimated that the order for resuming the debate was not on the paper ; and in reply to a question by Mr. HEADLAM, Mr. SrocacEn answered, that he had no intention of giving any notice to place the order on the paper, because he knew it was perfectly useless. So that the main question seems now to have finally evaporated.

ROMAN CATHOLIC PROCESSIONS.

Mr. KEOGH put a question to the Home Secretary regarding a Royal proclamation just published in the London Gazette, and which was in- tended to enforce certain clauses in the Roman Catholic Relief Act, di- rected against Roman Catholic ecclesiastics wearing the dress of their order in public.

Observing that those clauses had lain dormant since the passing of the Emancipation Act, and had never been enforced either by the Duke of Wel- lington Lord Melbourne, or Sir Robert Peel—and quoting from the Morning -aerate", an organ of the Government, some praises of the proclamation for its manliness on the eve of an election--Mr. Keogh asked, first, whether the proclamation would be published in the Dublin Gazette? and secondly, was it intended to prosecute the Irish Roman Catholic ecclesiastics for doing what they had been permitted to do since the year 1829 by every Govern- ment ? or was this merely a set-off against the want of a debate on the ques- tion of Maynooth ?

Mr. WALPOLE corrected Mr. Keogh's recital of the law. The statute referred to two matters,—first, to the appearance of Roman Catholic ecclesiastics in the habit of their order in public ; second, to Roman Catholic ecclesiastics exercising the rites and ceremonies of their religion

except in their usual places of worship or in private houses. Mr. Wal- pole's explanation seemed to show that the proclamation was only ad- dressed to a general breach of the latter branch of the law, which was on the eve of being made by Roman Catholics. Two months ago, the Government heard of a procession of Roman Catho- lics in Ireland where a RomeitCatholic Bishop took part ; where they moved four miles along thb pfglie road, carrying banners, crucifixes, and images of the Virgin and intuit Jesus ; and where there was actual danger that there would be a breach of the peace. The Government wrote to the Bishop, expressing a hope that he had appeared in his dress inadvertently, and without intention to violate the law; and giving him a friendly intima- tion that no notice would be taken of that proceeding, but a warning that if the law were violated again it would be put in force and vindicated. Since that time the Government has not heard of a similar offence in Ireland. No notice will be given in the Dublin Gazette, unless the private warning of the Roman Catholic ecclesiastics in Ireland be disregarded.

But "it came to the knowledge of the Government, that the Roman Catho- lics were going to renew those religious processions along the public high- ways which had been done away with for three hundred years : these were the very words as taken down in evidence ; and it was further stated, that they were going to do this by marching from village to village with banners and emblems of their faith in honour and celebration of the mass of the Vir- gin Mary." Now such processions would certainly " give great annoyance to many of her Majesty's Protestant subjects—(Loud cheers)—and would again endanger the public peace." Therefore the Government had resolved to enforce the law ; "for it must be obvious that these processions, if they were allowed to continue, instead of allaying religious differences, would very materially increase them, and would, I fear, frequently terminate in very serious breaches of the peace."

CRIME AND OUTRAGE IN IRELAND.

In moving for leave to bring in a bill to continue the act originally passed in 1847 for repressing crime and outrage in certain parts of Ire- land, Mr. NA_PIER stated, that if the existing act were allowed to expire, seven counties, two counties of cities, and portions of twelve other coun. ties, now under proclamation, would emerge from the operation of the repressive law ; and the prisoners apprehended under the proclamations, and now awaiting their trials, would be discharged. It would in fact operate as a general gaol-delivery. Several Irish Members—Mr. LAw- LESS, Mr. SCULLY, Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD' Mr. CHISHOLM ANSTEY, and Mr. KEOGH—opposed the measure as tyrannical and unconstitu- tional, and also as become unnecessary, through the decrease of crime in Ireland. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, taunted by Mr. KEOGH with having said in 1846 that be would not consent to pass any coercion measure without reference to the social state of Ireland generally, advo- cated the bill, as not a measure of coercion, but of police ; and he re- minded the House, that Mr. Napier has ready three remedial measures, which the temper of the House had not permitted the Government to bring forward. The motion for leave was carried, by 140 to 19. The bill was brought in and read a first time.

CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS.

Before going into Committee on the Corrupt Practices at Elections Bill, the Earl of DERBY made a speech against consenting to the bill in a shape which would enable the House of Commons to initiate commissions of bribery and treating inquiry without the concurrence of the House of Lords. In Committee, he moved the omission of the words "counties and universities," which had been introduced in the other House by sur- prise. Lord CAMPBELL, Earl GREY, Lord STANLEY of Alderley, the Duke of NEWCASTLE, the Earl of HARROWBY, Lord TRURO, and Lord Cams- WORTH, opposed the amendment ; but it was carried, by 78 votes to 34. Another amendment by the Earl of DERBY, restricting the power of the Commissioners from carrying back their inquiry for such a period "re- trospectively as they should think proper," was carried by 68 to 35. The bill then passed through Committee.

CO1TNTY ELECTION POLLING.

The further progress of the County Elections Polls Bill was opposed by Mr. WA.LPOLE and Mr. J. Smut; at the stage of the third reading. Mr. ROBERT PALMER was very much in favour of its principle, but feared that arrangements under it could not be perfected for the next election. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER suggested postponement till next session; but Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR would not give up his bill. On a division, he was defeated, by 49 to 39; and the bill was thrown out.

COPYHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT.

To the glad surprise of the Reforming Law Lords, the Enfranchise- ment of Copyholds Bill came back from their Select Committee . on Thursday ; and Lord CAMPBELL admitted that it was greatly improved. After a little sparring between the Lord CHarseamon. and Lord Camp- BELL on the conversion of Lord St. Leonards in favour of a measure to which at the outset he decidedly objected, the bill passed through Com- mittee of the whole House.

WATER SUPPLY OF LONDON.

Mr. MowArr made a final opposition to the Government Metropolis Water Supply Bill, on the motion of Lord Joint MANNERS to go into Committee on the measure. In a long speech, he endeavoured to make out that the Thames even above Teddington Lock, as a source of supply, is so polluted as to be seriously hurtful to health ; that the provisions for constant distribution are so insufficient that they will probably fail; and that the prices fixed by the bill will cause an increase instead of a dimi- nution of the aggregate burdens on account of the Water Companies. Lord Emu:norm urged general objections to the main principles of the bill. Mr. Taoism; DUNCOMBE supported the measure, as a good beginning, and attacked the Sanitary Association as a stumblingblock in the way of sanitary reforms. The opposition to the bill was not pressed ; and the House went into Committee. Mr. Mowery induced Lord JOHN MAN- NERS to alter the date at which the Companies are to be forbidden to take their supply from the Thames below Teddington Lock, from August 1857 to August 1855 ; but sundry other amendments, of a similar nature, he could not get adopted. The bill passed through Committee.

BURIALS IN LONDON.

In moving the second reading of the Metropolitan Burials Bill, Lord JOHN MAisrorns briefly recounted the causes of the failure of the act of 1850, and set forth the leading provisions of his own measure. The bill proposes, first, to repeal the act of 1850 ; secondly, to give power to the Home Secretary to close any burial-ground in the Metropolitan dis- trict which he deems noxious to public decency and health; thirdly, to give parish authorities power to replace the closed grounds by others in suitable places; fourthly, to enable Government to offer the temporary use to the parishes of any burial-ground in the Government possession. To meet the case of a number of City parishes desiring to provide a common burial- ground, and the evil of a mortuary parliament of 160 parish representatives, the machinery of the City Commission of Sewers is to be applied to parishes in the City of London, to provide the representative body of those parishes. Lord Esrusurrost opposed the measure, as too important to be carried hastily at this period of the session ; as reposing on parochial manage- ment, which has been proved inefficient ; as heavily expensive ; as re- opening the religious questions, tolerably well closed by the previous bill; and as hindering a better permanent arrangement of the whole subject.

Mr. Timbres DuNcoxas and Sir BENJAMIN HALL thanked the Govern- ment for introducing a measure, and hoped they were in earnest on the subject.

The bill was read a second time.

SMITHFIELD MARKET.

Mr. Wmayta informed Mr. CORNEWALL LEWIS that the Corporation of London have submitted a plan to the Home Office for transferring Smithfield Market to Copenhagen Fields ; they have already got seventy acres of land there, and they are in treaty for more.

ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS REFORM.

The second reading of the Ecclesiastical Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Bill, moved by Lord WODEHOUSE, proposed to withdraw from the Eccle- siastical Courts the cognizance of causes of defamation and brawling, and smiting in the church or churchyard. The Bishop of SALISBURY, for an absent Bishop, moved to postpone the second reading three months : he called the bill piecemeal legislation, which might unintentionally trench on principles most desirable to maintain. The Bishop of OXFORD backed the opposition • but expressed a hope that ho should live to see a complete reform of the Ecclesiastical Courts carried out, bringing back to a reason- able and more primitive state the whole of that which the abuses of modern times had created. The Earl of DERBY countenanced tho opposition, and repeated Government pledges already given to take the whole subject into earliest and most anxious consideration. Earl Fri zwu.max taunted the Bishop of Oxford with the contrast between his professions of radical reform and his acts in opposition to the least be- ginning of reform. Lord CAMPBELL and the Marquis of CLANRICARDE lamented that a bill passed in the other House with the support of both sides, to abate a scandalous abuse, should now be put off for the mere prospect of what may be "looming in the distance." On a division, the bill was thrown out, by 80 to 45.

BISHOPRIC OF CHRIST CHURCH NEW ZEALAND.

The adjourned debate on the second reading of the Bishopric of Christ Church (New Zealand) Bill was resumed on Wednesday morning, by Mr. ADDERLEY ; who explained that he had met the opponent of the bill, Mr. Chisholm Anstey, along with the Attorney-General, in private conference on it.

There were two objections; one of which was that Bishop Selwyn's diocese was described as the "Bishopric of New Zealand,"—an ecclesiastical territorial title which Mr. Anstey contended that the Queen has no legal right to create in a colony, her ecclesiastical supremacy being only founded on statute, and limited to the realm of the United Kingdom. Mr. Anstey wished the Colo- nial bishopric to be described as "a see in New Zealand in communion with the Church of England." Mr. Adderley was willing to concede this; but the Attorney-General, as the legal guardian of her Majesty's rights, would not consent to use any but the usual words, though the bill was not a Go- vernment bill.

The Arronsav-GENERAL defended his position.

Mr. ANNE; on a motion of adjournment, moved collusively to give him the opportunity of making a second speech, enforced his objections to the bill ; both on the ground explained by Mr. Adderley, and on the financial ground that the moment the new Bishop got out to his see a new charge on the Colonial revenues in his favour would be proposed by the Governor.

The adjournment of the debate was moved, and negatived by 110 to 31; and then the second reading of the bill was voted, by 111 to 34.

NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT BILL.

On the motion to read the New Zealand Government Bill a third time, Sir WILLIAM MOLpSwcaTn proposed that all the clauses referring to the sale and management of waste lands be struck out. This proposal was not backed. The bill was read a third time. Sir Witilssi MoLEs- WORTH then moved that the clauses relating to the arrangement with the New Zealand Company be omitted. Here he was " cordially supported" by Mr. Gan:ono:ca. Mr. AOLIONEY and Mr. J. A. Ssern stood up for their Company, and repelled warmly the charges made against it. On a division, Sir William Molesworth was defeated by 99 to 21; and the bill passed.

MURMURS PROM AUSTRALIA.

Lord NAAS presented a petition from the Legislative Council of New South Wales, in which, as the last act of their legislative existence, they protested against the Imperial policy of the 14th of Victoria, chapter 76, on these grounds—

They declare, first, that the Imperial Parliament had no right to tax the people of New South Wales, or to appropriate their revenues, but that all taxation should be made by the Colonial Legislature ; next, that the re- venues arising from the public lands, of which her Majesty is trustee, could only be appropriated to the use of the colony; thirdly, that the Customs and other branches of revenue should be subject to the same control ; fourthly, that the action of the Legislative Council should not be fettered by inter- ference from the Parliament at home ; fifthly, that no Colonial bills should be reserved for the sanction of her Majesty except such as affected her crown and dignity. In conclusion, they declare their readiness, if intrusted with their own lands and revenues, to provide for all the expenses of the colony, exclusive only of the governor's salary.

Lord Naas seemed to be unconscious that the subject matter or tone of the petition was important, and was proceeding to state summarily its drift, when Mr. GLADSTONE suggested, that as it was a document of his- torical importance, it should be read by the Clerk at the table. This was done ; and a discussion arose, in the course of which the interest and importance of the subject wore emphatically declared. The CHANCELLOR of the Excnactuira raised a question as to whether the language of the petition was sufficiently respectful to her Majesty. Mr. GLADSTONE, who had read the petition, saw nothing in it of disrespect. In the end, the petition was ordered to lie on the table.

EXPULSION OP SCOTCH MISSIONARIES PROM HUNGARY.

At the evening sitting on Tuesday, when Mr. Cnisnotm ANSTEY began to launch his resolution, that the arbitrary expulsion from the Austrian dominions, of the Reverend Messrs. Wingate, Smith, and Edwards, was a case calling for prompt and earnest measures on the part of her Ma- jesty's Government, the House was counted out, before eight o'clock.

Next day, Mr. ANSTEY complained of the "count-out," as planned by the Government to stifle discussion on Lord Malmesbury's conduct. More than forty Members were present : Mr. Hume noticed some actually hiding themselves, and there were three members of the Government behind the Speaker's chair. The SPEAKER explained, that no Member is entitled to divide unless he has heard the question put, or can be forced to divide unless he is within the House—which seemed to mean within the glass doors ; and that when

notice is taken that there are notforty Members, the House is incompetent to transact business : but the doors are not locked, and any Member is entitled to withdraw. Lastly, it is irregular to call the attention of the Speaker to Members not in sight of him while be is counting.

Mr. Husra admitted that he had been irregular when, finding the Speaker stop at thirty-eight, he called on him to count three Members behind his chair. Mr. ANSTEY stated that he would propose a motion on the subject on Thursday. On Thursday, Mr. ANSTEY moved a resolution defining the mode of " counting out," and the limits of the House : but it was negatived with- out a division.

Ma. Faaaous O'Conma.

Mr. JACOB BELL presented on Monday a petition from Harriet B. B. O'Connor, sister and next of kin to Mr. Feargus O'Connor, stating that after the medical certificates of Mr. Lawrence and Dr. Tweedie she made arrangements to place her brother in an asylum ; and praying for his liberation from the custody of the Sergeant at Arms. On the motion of Mr. WALPOLE, a Committee was appointed to report on the petition.

The Select Committee, on Wednesday, after examining medical testi-

mony, and after having personal conferences with Mr. O'Connor, reported in favour of granting the prayer of Miss O'Connor's petition, on her un- dertaking that her brother should be removed to the asylum of Dr. Tooke at Chiswick, and be not liberated for the remainder of the session with- out the permission of the House. The report was agreed to, and it was ordered that Mr. O'Connor be discharged from the custody of the Sergeant at Arms without payment of fees.

[At six o'clock, Mr. Feargus O'Connor was discharged from the cus- tody of the Sergeant at Arms, and removed to Dr. Tooke's establishment at Chiswick, in the care of Inspector Beckerson and a party of the A di- vision of Police.]