!Mutts an Vrurrttings in Varlinnaut.

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.

House OF Loans. Monday, May 14. The Gun-boats ; Lord Hardwicke's Mo- tion—Selling and Hawking Goods on Sunday Bill committed—Consolidation of the Criminal Law ; Seven Bills read a third time and passed. Tuesday, May 15. Royal Assent to the Exchequer Bills (13,230,0001.) Bill, the Enclosure Bill, Marriages (England and Ireland) Bill, Dwellings for the Labouring

Classes (Ireland) Bill ; Pawnbiokers' Act Amendment ; Lord Man. ricarde's Motion. -

Home or Columns. Monday, May 141. Conveyance of Newspapers Bill ; withdrawn—Wine Licence Resolution ; irregular proceedings—Refreshment Houses and Wine Licences Bill in committee—Nuisances Removal and Diseases Prevention Bill in committee.

Tuesday, May 15. Russia and Turkey ; Lord J. Russell's answer to Mr. Locke —Recreation Grounds ; Mr. Slaney's Motion—Living Models ; Lord Haddo's Motion—Tolls ; Mr. Alcock's Motion—Gun-boats ; Sir C. Napier's Motion—The late Priae-light ; Lord Lovaine's Idotion—Improvement and Tenure of Land (Ireland) Bill; debate on second reading, adjourned—Landlord and Tenant (Ire- land) Bill read a second time.

Wednesday. May 16. Annuity Tax Abolition Bill read a second time. Thursday. May 17. Sicilian Fund ; Mr. Hennessy's Complaints—Refreshment Houses and Wine Licences Bill committed—House adjourned till Monday.

THE SUBSCRIPTION FOR THE SICILIANS.

The House of Commons adjourned on Thursday, until Monday, Friday being the Queen's birthday. The motion for the adjournment was, as usual, seized as an opportunity for making speeches.

Mr. Hzessesy called attention to an answer recently given by the Solicitor-General touching the legality of subscriptions in aid of the Sicilians, whereby it appeared that the Solicitor-General had said such subscriptions were not illegaL Mr. Hennessy combatted this opinion, and cited Lord Lyndhurst and other authorities in support of the view that it is illegal to raise money in aid of subjects engaged in hostilities with their sovereign, he bang at peace with England. Mr. Hennessy did not confine himself to the legal point, but launched out into denun- ciations of Garibaldi and some of his followers, one of whom, Zambian- chi' he said, was known as the "Priest Slaughterer" ; and he wound up by accusing Lord john Russell of coming forward to sanction, almost enforce, a filibustering expedition. [This was an allusion to Lord John's despatches to Mr. Elliott at Naples.]

The SOLICITOR-GENF.RAL said, he was asked whether persons who sub- scribed to a certain fund would be liable to legal proceedings ? By "legal proceedings," he assumed "criminal proceedings" were meant. He had meant tole precise in his anevrer

"I considered the. question to be that, if a person who should read this advertisement, and m his own mind approve the result to which it points, and, acting singly and individually, pay money into the hands of any of the recipients named—aye or -no, is he liable to be indicted? My opinion was and is, that he is not My real intention in giving that answer was to express my opinion that an individual who by himself, of his own free will, paid a subscription of this sort would not, by the mere simple fact of his subscribing, render himself liable to an indictment. The question is whether that would be an indictable act. I ant not prepared for one moment to ques- tion the doctrine—though the point is a very different one from that which the honourable gentleman has brought before the House—That persons en- gaged in a conspiracy to foment or excite insurrection in the States of a friendly Power would be liable to prosecution." Mr. Warren-DE minutely questioned this version of the law, and in- sisted on the illegality of raising subscriptions in aid of the Sicilians, or any subjects of a power with whom we are at peace. Mr. EDWIN JAMES asked— 'What clearer evidence can you have of the overt acts of a con- spiracy than the payment of money by one individual, and its receipt by another?" He had no doubt it was conspiracy. It was said the offence is not an offence against the Foreign Enlistment Act; and certainly it is not. "But, there is a question to which the Foreign Enlistment Act does apply, and I ask the honourable and learned Member for the King's County to bring that forward on another occasion. . (Loud and sustained cheering.) I allude to circumstances to which the Foreign Enlistment Act expressly applies, to the case of parties who are now committing offences under that Act by carrying on the enlistment in Ireland of persons who am to be sent over to Rome, and there to join the army of General Lamoriciere. When the honourable and learned Member talks of the slaughter of priests, I think we may say with equal force, that the transmission of recruits to swell the foreign army which is to take part in the massacre of the Pope's subjects, comes equally within the provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act. (Tre- mendous cheering.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL admitted that these acts are contrary to the policy of the common law. "According to the common law of England, any subjects of the Queen who either directly or indirectly may supply money in aid of the revolt of subjects of any nation or Power with whom we are in alliance commit an offence at common law. But, as I before had occasion to stets; there is a very great difference mid a long interval between the enunciation of that principle and the manner in which it is to be carried into execution. In proceedings of a criminal nature, or -which are otherwise founded on any rule of common law, your only guide can be precedent and authority ; and those who speak most confidently on this branch of law would, I think, be quite unable to point out any ease or decision in the books in which there has been any instance of a successful application of the general principle, in the shape of an indictment for this particular offence.

Sir Huom-Ciaeges and Mr. Boyne censured the Solicitor-General for giving a rash and inaccurate answer, and contended that subscriptions to subvert the Government of another state are illegal. [Here some interruptions occurred, other Members asking their little questions and getting their explanations. Then the debate went on.] Mr. HOPE said that, according to the Attorney-General, we cannot enforce our laws on foreigners. The Arrommr-Gexemie rejoined-

" What I stated was simply this, that the common law is applicable to the subjects of England; but it has never been decided that mere foreigners resident in the country would come within the meaning of the words, 'subjects of the Queen.' The better opinion undoubtedly is that any con- duct which in the subjects of the Queen would be entitled conspiracy would in the case of foreigners receive the same designation; but it is difficult to say how far the rule is to lie carried, for let me put this case. Suppose that a natural-born English subject sent 100,000/. to Garibaldi, undoubtedly I should consider that a misdemeanour at c0111/110II law ; but suppose a Sicilian refugee sent the same sum, I should have no confidence in giving an opinion

that that also would be a misdemeanour at common law. In the absence of decisions, the subject does not admit of a more decided opinion."

Mr. MONSELL defended the Pope and General Lamoriciere, and at- tanked Garibaldi and the foreign filibusters. Mr. MaLuss wanted to *now what Government intended to do ? and the O'Donoghue repeated tire question. Mr. BERNAL OSBORNE considered these subscriptions to be illegal. Lord JOHN Hussain declined to pledge the Government to any course. They were asked to prosecute persons who put advertisements in the papers. What evidence is there that those persons ducked their names to be advertised as collectors of money to be expended in making war against the King of Sicily ? He did not remember a case of successful prosecution of persons for subscribing to maintain insurrections. Lord John himself took part in such a proceeding in aid of the Greeks, and, certainly, was not imprisoned. "A movement such as that which Walker attempted in South America, when he sought to invade and to obtain possession of territory, with no higher object in view than his ownselfish interests, is one case; but a patriot fighting for the independence of his country is quite another case. We know that our sympathies and the judgment of history will distinguish be- tween the cases of the filibuster and felon, and that of the hero and the patriot. We had once a great filibuster who landed in England in 1688. He not only received considerable support, but all the people of England flocked around him. ("Hear, hear !" and "Ni! ") That filibustering was successful. These are cases in which it is not sufficient to say that Garibaldi is a man fighting against a Sovereign whom he ought to respect, or that the Pope is endeavounng to maintain his authority by unlawful ex- pedients. It is not enough to say these things in n glib and fluent manner. These questions, whether taken as questions of law, or politics or morals, require much examination before you can affix either moral Maine or moral praise to those who are engaged in them. I certainly would not pledge the Government to undertake a prosecution in this case. Whenever we find that the plain law is openly outraged, it is our duty, undoubtedly, to see that it is enforced. That has been done frequently in came of breach of the Foreign Enlistment Act, but even as to that statute we have found consi- derable difficulties in the way of our carrying it into effect. I will not bind myself by a general declaration of what is the common law, to prosecute those who are raising subscriptions to send money to Sicily." Mr. MAGUIRE attacked Garibaldi and some af his followers, and de- nounced the Emperor Napoleon and Victor Emmanuel as two kingly robbers.

Soon afterwards, the subject was allowed to drop.

THE LANDING OF GARIBALDI.

In answer to a question from Mr. Osnornee, Lord JOHN RUSSELL gave the substance of the information received respecting Garibaldi's landing :— " My honourable friend has asked me a question respecting the landing of Garibaldi, and respecting two British ships which are said in certain telegrams to have protected the landing of thee,. men. Now, I received today from the Admiralty the telegraphic despatch of the officer cora- manaing one of these vessels—theIntrepid. Honourable gentlemen should be informed that there is considerable British property at Marsala, and that from the time when a rising in Sicily was expected, and still more from the time when the report was circulated that Garibaldi was going there, applications have been made both to the Foreign Office and to Admiral Fanshawe' who commands in the Mediterranean, to send ships for the pro- tection of British property where British subjects were to be found. Admiral Fanshawe accordingly sent the Intrepid and the Argus to Marsala. The Intrepid arrived, I think, on the 11th, but had not been there long before two merchant steamers came in with Garibaldi 's force and began to land it. While this was going on, two Neapolitan ships of war—a steamer and a frigate—approached MI'rsala •' but this officer says that, although these ships might have fired upon the vessels and upon the men during their landing, they did not do so. He does not say, not knowing anything of the story that has since been raised, that the English ships did not prevent the Neapolitan vessels from firing ; but he says that, although they had the opportunity of firing upon the vessels and the men they did not do so. He Bays, moreover, that after the men had been landed, and the Merchant steamers had disembarked all the troops of Garibaldi, the officer in command of the Neapolitan steamer came to him and asked him to send an English boat to take possession of those vessels. The English officer, Captain Marryatt, very properly declined to do HO. He had no instructions which authorized him to take these vessels, or to take any part in those proceedings. His instructions were, as the conduct of the British Govern- ment has been, to observe perfect neutrality in the conflict that is going on. Therefore, although this officer does not give a direct denial—not knowing anything of its existence—to the allegation that his ships, being anchored, prevented the fire of the Neapolitan vessels, we may infer from his account that such was not the ease. It does appear that the Neapolitan captain asked him to recall from Marsala any of his officers who were on shore, and he immediately put up a signal for that purpose, and when his officers had come on board, fire was opened on the town of Wanda by the Neapolitan ships. That should be considered as an act of international courtesy on the part of the Neapolitan captain, but it does not at all imply that the

i

English ships were n the way of his fire. It does not appear that the English officer in any way exceeded his duty. He was there for the pur- pose of protecting British interests, and he did no more."

RUSSIA AND TURKEY.

Mr. JOHN Loewe, on Tuesday, put two questions to Lord Sohn Rus- sell respecting the accuracy of recent public statements touching the re- lations of Russia and Turkey. Lord Joan RDSSELL answered-

" In answer to the first question put by the honourable and learned gen- tleman, I have to state, that her Majesty s Government are not in possession of any intelligence to the effect that Russia has concentrated a considerable army on the Pruth, or that the Ottoman Government has assembled a corps d'armee at Widdin. But, with respect to the second question, I have to state, that I received yesterday a despatch from Sir J. Crampton her Ma- jesty's Minister at St. Petersburg, which is very much to the effect stated by the honourable and learned gentleman. I may add, that I have also re- ceived a despatch from her Majesty's Ambassador at Paris stating that he had had a conversation with M. Thouvenel, who spoke to him on the sub- ject, and said that, if any action was to take place, he was of opinion that it should net be an action by Russia alone, or by Russia and France united, but a combined action of the five great Powers."

THE WETE LICENCE Bum.

Before the House resumed on Monday the consideration of the Re- freshment Houses and Wine Licence Bill in Committee, Lord PA.LMERS - TON recalled ottention to an irregularity which occurred on the preceding Thursday. an that evening, the House went into Committee of Ways and Means, end passed resolutions on which clauses were founded. Those resolutions were reported at once to the House *stead of being

reported on a subsequent day. The House did not dissent from that course. But Mr. 13ouverie pointed it out, and Mr. Disraeli took note of it. There is only one precedent for such a proceeding. That occurred during the mutiny at the Nore when both Houses set forms aside to expedite a measure. Urging the propriety of observing the usual forma of Parliament, Lord Palmerston moved that what was done on Thursday should be null and void, and that the resolutions should be reported 011 Tuesday night. He also moved that it should be entered on the journals that notice had been taken of the feet, that on Thursday last a Committee of Ways and Means had agreed to a resolution which, contrary to the rule and practice of the House, was, without urgent occasion, ordered to be reported forthwith to the House, and was therefore reported and agreed to by the House. He put in the words " without urgent occa- sion," because, if such a case as that he had referred to—that of 1797— should occur in which the public interest required that the House should depart from the ordinary practice, they should be at liberty to do as they did then.

Mr. GLAnwroste explained how far he was to blame for the irregularity.. He came into the House on Thursday, and moved the resolution in the Committee of Ways and Means, having no idea that a resolution passed by the Committee could be received by the House on the same day. He had never heard of such a course and believed it to be contrary to the practice of the House. But when the House went out of Committee, the Chairman of Ways and Means asked him "When will you have the resolution reported—will you have it reported forthwith ? ' He re- plied—" We can't do that, can we ? " The answer of Mr. Massey was- " Oh, yes, you can." He then supposed that there had been some al- teration made in the rules of the House, and said—" If it can be done forthwith it will be more convenient," and thereupon made the motion, which was adopted without objection—his object being, of course to reprint the bill with the money clauses as soon as possible, and place it as an entire measure in the view of the House..

The resolutions were agreed to, and the H011/30 went into Committee on the bill; and discussed its clauses throughout the whole evening.

On clause 24, prescribing the hours for opening and closing houses licensed to sell wine by retail, Mr. GLADSTONE moved an amendment, in- tended to assimilate the law with respect to wine licences with the pre- sent law respecting beer-houses, so far as regarded the various arrange- ments as to opening and closing in places of different populations. Mr. Bsucas moved the insertion of words to prevent the opening of "this new class of houses," on " the Lord's Day." Whatever may be the case in London, shops do not open in the country ; but if the bill passed competition would compel them to open and the sanctity of "the Lord's Day" would not be preserved. This amendment VMS keenly disputed. Mr. ESTCOURT said the clause would be a fruitful source of disorder. Whereupon Mr. KER SEYMER asked why these new houses should not be open on Sunday during the hours beer-houses and gin- palaces are open. Mr. JOHN LOCKE, reciting the statute of Charles II., showed that refreshment-houses are entitled to be open on Sunday. Mr. JAUFS said the amendment would give a monopoly to licensed victuallers. He had no sympathy with that miserable hypocrisy which would permit the opening of the Clubs on Sunday, while insisting upon a dreary asce- ticism among the lower orders. Alderman Satomoes said a third species of refreshment-house ought not be opened. Mr. VILLIERS said the corm- try ought to know about what they were dividing. It might go forth that those who voted against the amendment were really promoting the desecration of the Sabbath and Sunday trading. But what was the proposition ? It was not proposed to prevent the opening of refreshment houses, nor to prevent publichouses selling wine, nor to prevent persons sending to the publichouse for wine and drinking it elsewhere, so that a traveller might take a dozen of wine into a refreshment house, and do all the mischief which the honourable Member for North Warwickshire would prevent. (Cheers.) What was the difference in the desecration of the Sabbath between the traveller who gave money out of his pocket for wine and the traveller who found it charged in the bill ? People could get ardent spirits to drink on Sunday. It was said, "Do not let them go to re- spectable house where they can drink wine, but let them go to places where ardent spirits are sold." If with every sort of temptation which spirit and beer houses could hold out there was no country in the world where the Sabbath was so well observed as England, did not that look as if the people were intelligent beings and good Christians who -could pass publichousea without making brutes of themselves ? (Cheers.) He wanted to know where was the evidence of an increasing tendency to desecrate the Sabbath. The honourable Member for North Warwickshire could carry his memory a long way back, and he would be obliged to acknowledge that the people were more sober and decent, and that the Sabbath was better observed than for- merly. There was one way in which they could induce people not to go to drinking houses, and that was by allowing them innocent recreation. But the honourable member belonged to a party who would stop every steam- boat and shut up every railway on a Sunday. The truth was, that since people had been able to get into the country on Sunday there had been less drunkenness in large towns than there used to be. (Cheers.) Mr. SPOONER said he did not want to shut up places of innocent re- creation on Sunday. The more rational recreation there is, the more will the Sunday be properly enjoyed.

On a division, the amendment was negatived by 117 to 82. The clause, amended by the insertion of words prohibiting the sale or consumption of any article whatever during the prescribed hours in the refreshment houses, was agreed to. In clause 26, prescribing penalties, words were inserted to prevent adulteration, or to punish "anyone who shall knowingly sell or offer for sale any wine so fraudulently mixed, diluted, or adulterated."

On clause 33, saving the rights of the Universities, the Vintners' Company, and other bodies, Mr. HARDY moved to omit the words re- lating to the Vintners' Company, whose privilege of setting up houses without a licence is a great nuisance. The amendment, on a division, was negatived by 97 to 90. On the clause providing that the bill should not extend to Scotland or Ireland, Scotch and Irish Members rose one after another to demand its extension to those countries, and the Government gave an implied promise that special bills should be brought in for that purpose. On clause 12, which had been postponed, there arose considerable de- bate. The Government propose to confer on the police magistrates the power of granting licences in London ; and Mr. Amerosr, Mr. Nyli,01.1A,r, Ddir WILLIAM MILES, ML NEWDEGATE, reiterated the olairos of th &sex Magistrates, at least to object to licences. To them rallied Alor man Satouoes, Lord Joan Maxeaus, Mr. Bylia, and Mr. ILEKLEY.. Mr. GLADSTONE then promised to insert words carrying out the wish of the Committee ; but Mr. HENLEY took exception to the conditions on which the magistrates were to exercise their power, and insisted on the necessity of a positive inquiry into character. He moved an amendment intended to give Mr. Gladstone an opportunity of recasting the whole clause. To this Mr. GLADSTONE demurred, and on a division the amend- ment was negatived by 124 to 104.

At this stage the Chairman reported progress. Again in Committee, on Thursday, the consideration of clause 12, re- lating to the mode of granting licences, was resumed, and the struggle against the bill was renewed, Mr. AvirroN, Mr. HENLEY, and Mr. ED- WIN JAMES, taking conspicuous parts. Mr. JAMES moved that the Ma- gistrates should have power to disallow licences on all or any of the grounds on which they now refuse licences to public-houses. Mr. HARDY and Mr. Averox supported the amendment ; Mr. GLADSTONE, Mr. EMI SEYMER, and Sir Joinv SHELLEY opposed it, and on a division it was negatived by 154 to 117. Some other changes were made, and the bill was ordered to be re- ported with amendments.

THE Limn LAND Brims.

On the motion for the second reading of Mr. Cardwell's Tenure and Im- provement of the Land (Ireland) Bill, Sir Joni.; WALSH moved that the bill should be a read a second time that day six months. Approving the principle of the first branch of the bill, which enabled a limited owner of an estate to charge the inheritance with an annuity to be applied to the improvement of the land, he objected strongly to the machinery for carrying it out. To the second portion of the measure, the leasing powers of limited owners, he objected that the owner of the in- heritance was not sufficiently protected against fraud and chicanery. He looked upon long leases in Ireland, he said, with jealousy. With re- ference to the third or tenant-right portion of the bill, he argued that the relations of landlord and tenant in Ireland had greatly improved; that there was no intervening interest, and no reason now existed for any de- prture from the sound principles which should govern those relations. The improvement in the agriculture of Ireland had become most marked ; it was now an agriculture of farmers, not of cottiers and he recom- mended that a process which was working so beneficially should be let alone, and the relations of landlord and tenant left to adjust themselves. Mr. MAGUIRE, Mr. POLLARD URQUHART, Mr. DAWSON, and Mr.

SCUI1.Y' supported the second reading ; but, while replying to Sir John Walsh, that his objections were either unfounded or made upon details, that a Committee could deal with, they all touched on portions of the measure in their eyes objectionable. Mr. GEORGE and Mr. Warrcsinc

criticised the bill, and predicted that it would never become law. Then the debate was adjourned. On the motion of Mr. DEASY, the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Bill was read a second time. This is a measure of law reform. Its object is to consolidate and amend the existing law.

.ANNUITY-TAM BILL.

When the LORD-ADVOCATE moved the second reading of the Annuity- tax Abolition Bill, he met with no Scotch opponent. Mr. HADFIELD Member for Sheffield, was the opposition. He moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months, on the ground that the tax was objectionable per se. On the other hand, Mr. CAIBD, Sir JAMES FEB- Mr. MACKIE, Mr. BLACK, Major HAMILTON, Sir T. COLEBROOK; Mr. Munn, and Mr. BLACKBURN supported the second reading, reserv ing their right to suggest some alterations in committee. Accordingly, the bill was read a second time without a division.

INDIAN AFFAIRS.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE moved for a despatch from Mr. E. H. Lushington to the Commissioner of the Nuddea District relating to the treatment of Natives by European planters in India, and for the report of Mr. Reid to the Lieutenant-Governor, referred Vs in the above despatch, presented two petitions from certain natives in India, praying for legal reforms and for admission into higher offices of Government than are now open to them. The matters to which he particularly wished to call attention were the administration of Justice and the formation of the Legislative Council. The total absence of anything that deserved the name of an administration of justice in India was so notorious that the local courts had been described as terrors to honest and well-disposed persons. It was owing to the unsatis- factory state of these courts that the recent indigo riots had occurred in India, for, while on the one hand the ryots had in many instances been treated like slaves, the indigo planters, on the other, who had invested capital, deserved every protection. The trade in indigo was profitable

enough to the planters, but the natives were averse to its cultivation, as it was not very profitable to them, and yet they were " compelled " in some sort to enter into contracts for the production of a certain amount of indigo at a certain price. Both parties tried to overreach the other, and the result was that hardly a single contract was fairly carried out. Force was there- fore often resorted to by both sides, for, if the planters maltreated the natives in a way to which slaves were strangers, the natives attacked the factories and destroyed much property. Ile recounted the proceedings of the Government in reference to these disturbances, and condemned in the strongest terms the hastily-enacted law of the Government, whereby any man guilty of a breach of contract was declared guilty of a criminal offence. This bad administration of justice, however, did not alone affect the poor ryot, but equally oppressed the highest reminders and rajahs, and in some cases the grossest injustice had been committed by the Indian Government to obtain judgments in its favour. Passing from this subject to the Legis- lative Council, he spoke slightingly of it as a debating society, and declared it incompetent to legislate for India as a whole. Convinced that our Indian empire was in very serious jeopardy, he said it is impossible to continue, as we have hitherto done, in a system by which the natives are excluded from the higher offices of every kind. There is no other example in history of any nation having been so ruled. Local Legislatures and local representa- tive Governments are absolutely necessary for the welfare of the people of India.

The Earl of Emminonouou also attacked the Legislative Council. He considered that the Governor-General and Council, in cases of emer- gency, should have the power of passing instanter any Act of Parliament, and that a consultative body would be a beneficial addition to the Go- vernor and his Council. To this consultative body a certain number of Native gentlemen should be admitted, as it is important that the feelings and prejudices of the inhabitants should be adequately represented, and not almost totally ignored, as at present. He could not concur with the strong denunciations of Lord Clanricarde against the planters. They are as a class a beneficent body of men, and to them much of the imphing ment and prosperity of India is due. There are, of course, except der but he believed that most of the cases of violence which have

brought against them are not chargeable against those who reside their estates, but against men who speculate without any interest in tht land, merely to obtain large interest on their own or on borrowed money. If, however, there were violence on one side, there is great fraud on the other. The complaint of both parties is that in ease of violence, or in case of fraud, neither of them can obtain justice for sixteen months—a prac- tical denial of all justice. If the proposed Indian Income-tax were carried, he trusted some part of it would be expended in a better ad- ministration of justice. He thought that all disputes between planters and ryots should be settled by circuit judges, and suggested the appoint- ment of " protectors " to bring about a compromise between planters and ryots in cases of differences.

Adverting to the conduct of Sir Charles Trevelyan, he passed a high eulo- gium on that officer, and said, Sir Charles would, to the last moment of his life, look back to the publication of his minute as the one he should be most proud of, "because it was at the greatest personal sacrifice that he was enabled, as he thought, to do the greatest service to the country. I will only add, that his last public act, however indiscreet it may be, has raised his character in my opinion' instead of producing in my sentiments towards him any change derogatory to the high estimation in which I have hitherto held him."

The Duke of ARGYLL said there would be no objection to produce the papers moved for as soon as they arrived in this country. He would not agree in the strong condemnation passed on the Legislative Council by Lord Ellenborough ; still, he thought its constitution was not so good as it might be, and that some changes might be requisite. He regretted, also, that he could not concur in the sentiment that Sir Charles Tre- velyan was justly entitled to the praise either of the House or of the Executive Government. The action of the Government in this case was based, not upon the ground of the merit or the demerit of Sir Charles Trevelyan's particular views, but on the conviction of the absolute ne- cessity for upholding the authority of the Government of India, and en- forcing due submission on the part of its subordinates. Lord LYVEDEN condemned the present constitution of the Council, and Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY presented a petition from Calcutta, praying that it might be altered.

THE GUNBOATS.

The Earl of HARDWICKE moved for a return of all the vessels or gun- boats below 1000 tons burden built by contract since the year 1852, with the names and residences of the contractors of each vessel, showing at the same time the year of their construction, the price contracted for, together with their present condition as to seaworthiness. Incidentally, he condemned the practice of appointing as Surveyor of the Navy, now styled Controller of the Navy, officers, who are good seamen, but who know nothing of shipbuilding.

The Duke of Sommescr said there would be no objection to give the information required, but one part of it, that asking for an account of the seaworthiness of all these ships, could not be given, since a large number are in foreign seas—no fewer than twenty-four being in China. The at- tention of the Admiralty was attracted to the gunboats as soon as he en- tered office and men had been employed upon them all last summer. Out of forty-five at Hasler, twenty-three have been thoroughly repaired, and six are in course of repair. The gunboats at work in China and in the coastguard are perfectly efficient, and therefore it is not correct to say no reliance can be placed on any of the gunboats. As to the fraud of cutting off the copper bolts, and driving in two short ends, instead of one bolt all through, he thought that must have been done by the work- men. The offence was the more flagrant, because the Admiralty sup- plied the copper in lengths. In some of the gunboats, green wood was used, and worse, not only green wood, but wood from which the sap had not been removed. That is a great fault, because the material used might easily have been properly prepared. As to the complaint that the Controller of the Navy is not a practical shipwright, the Duke said the question has been discussed over and over again. " We have had shipbuilders as Surveyors of the Navy, and naval men have complained of them, that though they could build a ship they knew nothing about fitting it, and that the vessels which they constructed were not suited to go to sea. In the last arrangement which has been made, the Admiralty took this course. They appointed a practical shipbuilder to attend to the construction of the hulls, a practical engineer to look after the machinery, and a naval man to act with them and to be guided by their advice. So far as I can learn, although, of course, great improvements may still be made, and I think naval architecture is making very rapid pro- gress, the ships which have been built under this system are very satisfac- tory." The Channel fleet, for instance, is composed of very efficient ships. "The reason for changing the title of the Surveyor of the Navy to that of Controller of the Navy is, to show that he is not actually a shipbuilder, but that he is to overlook the other two departments, and to bring the prac- tical knowledge of a seaman to the technical information of the shipbuilder and the scientific ,information of the engineer; and by the combination of the three to give to naval men the assurance that they will have placed under their command the best ships that can be constructed. It is impossible that any of these officers should give to the dockyards the practical inspec- tion which is necessary, and, therefore, I had intended to connect with the department of the Controller an officer who should visit the dockyards, see what is going on, and communicate with the Admiralty more readily than can be done under the existing system. The reason why I have yet made no such appointment is, that a commission upon this subject has been moved for in another place ; and I thought that it would be better and more respectful to Parliament to wait for its report than at once to carry out my own idea."

Motion, as amended, agreed to. Sir CHARLES Nen= returned to the subject on Tuesday, and moved for returns. Ile vehemently asked why the names of those who built the defective gunboats, which had been constructed with short bolts, should be screened from censure. It is wicked to conceal their names. The House should insist on having their names at once. It might be a hard measure, but what sort of measure would the drowning of hundreds of men have been ? How many of our gunboats are fit for service ? The House might depend upon it all were defective. Lord CEATerscE PAGET said the Admiralty had no wish to screen any- body. Before the circumstances were made public in the newspapers- the Admiralty had taken measures to ascertain what power they had to proiecute contractors. It would be unfair to state the names of the gun- boats in wtti ort bolts were found, and of their builders. The law, 'ill of the Crown had been consulted as to the propriety of prosecuting' t .rtai individuals. But to couple their names with fraud would be to decutemn them without a hearing. If there is no legal case, then the 4ernment will not oppose an inquiry by the House.

ti/Lord Lovame said the question had not been put on a proper footing tr the Secretary of the Admiralty. The House did not ask him to say id:tether the contractors were guilty or not, what they wanted was the simple facts. Mr. BENTINCK also asked for information in a direct and official shape ; and condemned the late Government for not adopting prompt measures to repair the gunboats which they knew were defective. Mr. Wnrriminan and Mr. TAYLOR supported the views of Lord Clarence Paget. Sir MICHAEL SEYMOUR Lnlye the gunboats he had commanded in China an excellent character. Lord PALMENSTON said it was only a ques- tion of time. If Sir Charles would wait a few days, Lord Clarence Paget would be able to state whether there would be a prosecution. The returns asked for would not at present give the information required.

Motion withdrawn. THE LATE PRIZE-FIGHT.

Lord Lovange moved for a correspondence between the Home Office and the South Eastern Railway Company respecting the grant of a special train to convey persons to the late prize-fight. He condemned the company for launching 2000 or 3000 of the greatest ruffians in London in a quiet neighbourhood ; and seemed to consider that the di- rectors are liable to penalties as alders and abettors in a breach of the peace. Lord Pe.txmasitox had no objection to the motion, but he must pro- test against the sort of exaggerations in which Lord Lovaine had in- dulged.

"Re has described the railway launching 2000 or 3000 ruffians upon some quiet neighbourhood in a manner that might lead one to imagine the train conveyed a set of banditti to plunder, rack, and ravage the country, murder the people, and commit every sort of atrocity. I am not going to dispute the point that a fight between two men,—not a fight of enmity, but a trial of strength,—is, legally, a breach of the peace, and an act that ren- ders the parties liable to prosecution ; nor whether the persona who go to witness it are not, technically, involved in the charge. But, as far as they are concerned, they may conceive it to be a very harmless pursuit ; some persons like what takes place ; there may be a difference of opinion, as a matter of taste whether it is a spectacle one would wish to see, or whether it is calculated' to excite disgust. Some people look upon it as an exhibi- tion of manly courage, characteristic of the people of this country. I saw the other day a long extract from a French newspaper, describing this fight as a type of the national character for endurance, patience under suffering, of indomitable perseverance, in determined effort, and holding it up as a specimen of the manly and admirable qualities of the British race. All this is, of course, entirely a matter of opimon ; but really, setting aside the legal technicalities of the case, I do not perceive why any number of persons, say 1000 if you please, who assemble to witness a prize-fight, are in their own persons more guilty of a breach of the peace than an equal number of persons who assemble to witness a balloon ascent. (Laughter.) There they stand, there is no breach of the peace ;they go to see a eight, and when that sight le over they return, and no injury is done to any one. They only stand or sit on the grass to witness the performance, and as to the danger to those who perform themselves, I imagine the danger to life in the case of those who go up in balloons is certainly greater—(" hear !" and laughter)— than that of two combatants who merely hit each other as hard as they can, but inflict no permanent injury. upon each other. I think there is modera- tion in all things—moderation m all opinions ; and, although it may or may no the desirable that the law should be enforced—whatever the law may be —still I do not think any advantage is gained or good done either to public morals or public feeling by the sort of exaggerations in which the noble lord has indulged. At the same time, the motion is one to which I see no objec- tion, and therefore I do not oppose it."

Lord LOVAINE rejoined, by granting that all who were present on the occasion in question were not ruffians, for some names had been men- tioned which were not unknown in that or the other House. But if the noble lord had gone down in the same train with these gentry—(Lord Palmerston made a gesture of surprise). Lord Lovaine could assure the noble lord that he went down only as a casual passenger—(loud laughter) —and did not find his fellow-travellers the best company in the world. (Continued laughter.)

Mr. V. SCULLY condemned-prize-fighting. Mr. WILLIAM Ewarer does not object to fighting with gloves on. (Laughter.) Mr. CLIVE defended the directors of the South-Eastern Railway. Sir WILLIAM JOLIFFE con- demned the directors for encouraging prize-fighting, and enlarged on the difficulties of Magistrates. Colonel DICKSON said Magistrates ought to know when to act and when to shut their eyes. He said Lord Palmer- ston Was a political opponent, but if he has one attribute more than an- other which endears him to his countrymen, it is his thoroughly English character and his love for every manly sport. (Cheers.)

Mr. Paula. revived the oldjoke about Lord Palmerston being a" bottle- holder."

Motion agreed to.

SANITARY REFORMS. In Committee upon the Nuisances' Removal and Diseases' Prevention Bill, Mr. LOWE explained the object of the measure, which was to carry out the intention of the laws that there should be in every place a local authority responsible for its health, the law as it at pre- sent stood being defective and unsatisfactory, and the authorities in some places imperfectly organized. There are now many authorities. The bill retains three, all local :—the Local Board of Health, the Municipal Coun- cil, and the Commissioners for Local Improvements. All the Nuisances' Removal Committees were also retained who had complied with the Act in regardlo the appointment of a medical officer. The other authorities, who had shown themselves so incompetent for the task of local management, he had dismissed altogether, and had taken the guardians of the parish as R substitute. That body had always a medical officer in their employment who could be referred to when wanted, and having to relieve the poor were peculiarly fitted to conduct measures for the prevention of disease. Oppo- sition being displayed, Mr. Lowe gave way, and the chairman reported pro- gress.

Suarnve TRADING. Some alterations were made in Lord Chelmsford's Selling and Hawking Goods on Sunday Bill in the Committee of the whole House to which it has been recommitted. In clause 2, providing penalties for the delivery of meat, fish, poultry after nine o'clock on Sunday, the word " ten" was substituted for nine, in order that the sellers of meat, &c., should not be more harshly dealt withthan the sellers of newspapers. Lord WODEROUSE made a stand for an exemption in favour of cigar shop, but was defeated. Lord TEYNIIA.M and Lord Ga..a.xvimit were stftdy op- ponents, but the bill went through Committee. ' CONVEYANCE OF NEWSPAPERS. This bill has been withdrawn by Mr. Gratnrroxn. He sees that there are grounds for an inquiry into the ques- tion of the postal privileges of newspapers. But Sir Rowland Hill, "who has been the life and soul of the Post Office for twenty years," is labouring under a severe illness, and has been compelled to obtain leaveof absence for six months. There is, therefore, no alternative butte postpone the inquiry;

i and as S Rowland Hill may not recover before the end of the session, Mr. Gladstone thinks it best to drop the bill.

IRISH Rzcaurrs FOR THE POPS. In answer to a question from Mr. STEUART, Mr. CARDWELL said it is illegal for any subjects of her Majesty to enter the military sErvice of a foreign power without her Majesty's per- mission. The Government has had their attention directed to the attempts to enlist soldiers for the Pope in Ireland, and is prepared to take any mea- sures that may be necessary to prevent illegal proceedings.

LrvEno MODELS. Lord RADDO moved "That the exhibition in schools of art of-females wholly unclothed ought not to receive the sanction of a public grant of money to the schools in which such practice is adopted." Mothers, he said, actually bargain for the exposure and degradation of their children. The greatest artists of ancient times did not pursue such studies, and Mr. Westmacott has said the vicious practice is an injury to art. Even if it serve art the benefit does not outweigh the injury to public decency.

Sir GEORGE LEWIS said the Government has never interfered with the regulations of any school. Art does not exercise a corrupting influence on the students. The ancient masters studied the human figure, both male and female. The refinement of the age might render the practice impos- sible, but he did not think the House should come to a vote on the subject.

Mr. ADDERLEY opposed the motion. There is only one school of art where nude women sit as models—that of Manchester. An artist must study from life. The first lessons of an artist, in human portraiture were a study of the skeleton, then came the body clothed with its flesh and muscles, and last of all the living model. If the noble Lord thought that a study of the draped figures in these days of bustles and crinolines was the highest study of art in order to arrive at a true portraiture of the human figure, then Madame Tuasaud must be nearest to the noble Lord's beau ideal of a great artist. ("Hear ! " and laughter.) It is nonsense to talk of the inde- cency of a practice, the object of which Lord Haddo did not understand. Mr. SPOONER was grieved to hear Mr. Adderley talk so. The morals of the students must be injured, and the women degraded. The practice be- sides is contrary to the word of God. Lord PALMERSTON said the subject was not a proper one for Parliament- ary interference. To carry out his views, Lord Haddo should bring in a bill to make it penal for anyone, anywhere, to study the female form. Then what is the precise amount of clothing that would consist with Lord Haddo's notions of propriety ? On a division, the motion was negatived by 147 to 32.

TOLLS. Mr. ALeocz. moved that an address should be presented to the Queen praying that she would issue a Commission to inquire and report how far it would be practicable to abolish tolls on roads and bridges and substitute a rate for their maintenance. Sir GEORGE LEWIS, in objecting to the motion, described the financial state of the turnpike trusts. The total revenue is 1,030,0001., or little less than it was in 1849. The cost of repairs is 611,000/., about the same that it was in 1849. The debt is in process of diminution. In 1843, it was 6,932,000/. ; in 1857, it was 5,117,000/. The interest of the debt has decreased from 281,000/. to 175,000/. during the same period. If there were a general desire to abolish the system and resort to a rate, it could easily be done, and he would un- dertake to lay a bill on the table that day week, but he thought it would not meet with general assent.

Pressed to a division, the motion was negatived by 78 to 12.

RECREATION GROUNDS. Mr. BLANEY moved, "That it is expedient her Majesty's Government or Parliament should take steps to inquire how adequate open spaces in the vicinity of our increasing populous towns, as public walks and places of exercise and recreation, may best be provided and secured ; and to encourage and direct efforts, by private subscriptions, voluntary rates, or public grants, to carry out such objects." He entered into the question at great length. Sir GEORGE LEWIS, cheered by the House, declined to follow him, and contented himself with advancing facts to show that the inquiry is unnecessary, that improvements must be pro- posed and paid for by local authorities and local rates and subscriptions ; and that various acts give facilities for doing what Mr. Blaney requires. The design of Mr. Blaney is praiseworthy, but it would not be advanced by adopting his resolution. Motion withdrawn.

THE DERBY Day. Mr. JAMES asked Lord Palmerston whether, as Wed- nesday the 23d was fixed for the celebration of our metropolitan eireenses ludi, he intended to propose that the House should adjourn over that day ?

Lord PamszawroN.—" I rather think one may say that an adjournment over the Derby Day would please the House. In fact, to adjourn over that day is part of the unwritten law of Parliament. (Cheers and laughter.) I am sure that her Majesty's Government do not wish to ask the House to depart from so wholesome a custom. It has been usual to leave private Members to make the proposal, but I think that is not exactly the proper way ; and I mean, therefore, to propose, on Tuesday, that the House should adjourn at its rising until Thursday, the 24th." (Loud cheers.)