POSTSCRIPT.
SATURDAY.
Several interesting questions were asked last night in the House of Commons. Lord Joan MAN:sees wished to know whether, under the treaty of Paris, Russia has or not a right to rerect the forts on the East- ern coast of the Black Sea ? Lord WILLIAM GRAHAM, reading a letter from Sebastopol, to show that ships immersed in its waters do not suffer from the ravages of the worm, inquired whether the Russians will be al- lowed to raise the ships now sunk in the harbour of Sebastopol, and 'brine them through the Dardanelles to any other part of the Russian • dommions ?
In reply to these questions, Lord PALMERSTON stated, that the forts on the Circassian coast were simply works of defence, and not naval ar- aentils ; and that "there is nothing in the treaty which would preclude the Russian Government from exercising its own discretion with regard to those military forts." To the second question he replied, that if the Russian Government prefer raising the ships sunk in the harbour of Se- bastopol, damaged as they necessarily must be, and bringing them round to add them to her naval force in the Baltic, Instead of increasing that force by the addition of new and more efficient ships, he did not think we could object : neither could we object to the Russian proposal to bring the two ships of the line at Nicolaieff round to the Baltic. Another question, not connected, however, with the conclusion of peace, was put and led to a conversation under cover of the motion for the adjournment of the House. Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR, objecting to the playing of bands in the Parks on Sundays, asked whether any mem- bers of the bands who might object from conscientious motives would be released from duty ? Before any member of the Government could reply, Sir Ds LACY EVANS pointed out the delicate character of the question : he did not yield to any one in respect for religious feelings, but this wife a question of military discipline ; if Lord Robert's principle were chnfirmed, where would it end The Marquis of ELANDFORD described the band- playing as a "nuisance," interfering with the quiet enjoyment of the "privacy of the neighbourhood." If a Colonel had conscientious ob- jections, he might send the bandsmen with their swords but without their instruments, the latter being the property of the officers. Mr. WIGRAM and Mr. ADDERLEY joined with the Marquis in deprecating the introduction of foreign customs. Besides, does not the band-playing contravene the principle of the vote of the House on the opening of the British Museum ? They should bring the question to a distinct vote befere Sunday band-playing become a settled institution at the mere will and pleasure of the First Commissioner of Works. The same views were strongly supported by Mr. WALPOLE. On the other hand, Mr. OTWAY and Mr. HzNay Dinnolorrn advanced arguments in favour of the practice. Sir RENJAMOI HALL denied that the principle of the vote on the British Museum had been contravened. He did not think a nuisance" had been created in Kensington Gardens ; but he retorted upon Lord Blandford that there had been assemblages of people in Hyde Park that amounted to a real desecration of the Sabbath. Lord Falai:Regrow said that Lord Robert Grosvenor's question was simply one of military discipline, and he could not entertain it. He adopted the responsibility of the course taken by Sir Benjamin Hall.
There was nothing new in bands playing in the Parks. " My recollection must greatly mislead me if I do not remember that, in early times, bands used to play in Kensington Gardens on Sunday. A baud plays regularly at Wind- sor on Sunday; a practice continued from the time of George the Third, who was a monarch known to be attached, above all others, to the religious institutions of the country : and therefore there is no novelty in the mat- ter." The presence of bands would not lead to Sunday-labour, but the re- verse. "If I think that it would be inexpedient for the House to consider questions of military discipline, I regard it as of more importance still that we should abstain from discussing questions of religious doctrine." (Loud cheers.)
In reply to Mr. GLYN the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he should have preferred to make his financial statement before Easter, but it was impossible to calculate the amount of Ways and Means until the amended estimates were before the House. They are now nearly ready ; but as every day before Whitsuntide is occupied, he proposed to fix Mon- day the 19th for the Budget.
The House was for some hours occupied in making progress with the Police (Counties and Boroughs) Bill in Committee. A discussion arose on the propriety of disfranchising constables ; but although many Mem- bers objected to that step, the Committee agreed to insert words in clause 6 disqualifying borough constables from voting in Municipal as well as Parliamentary elections, and negatived an amendment for omitting words inflicting penalties on any constable who should try to influence the choice of electors. The penalty, however, was reduced from 20/. to Si. A division was taken on clause 10, authorizing the appointment of in- spectors • but the clause was carried by 190 to 100. At clause 11, it was agreed that the Chairman should report progress.
The Fire-Insurances Bill was, after some adverse discussion, read a second time, by a majority of 133 to 31. The bill is intended to protect the revenue ; the complaint of its opponents was that it does not reduce the duty.
On rising last night, after a brief sitting, the House of Lords adjourned until Sunday ; to meet then "for the purpose of attending divine ser- vice at Westminster Abbey, that being the day appointed by her Majesty's proclamation for a general thanksgiving."
In the House of Lords on Monday, the following address is to be moved by the Earl of Ellesmere, and seconded by Lord Glenelg- " That en humble address be presented toher Majesty, to return to her Majesty the sincere acknowledgments and thanks of the House for the im- portant communication which her Majesty has been graciously pleased to make to this House of the general treaty concluded on the 30th of March, between her Majesty the Emperor of Austria, the Emperor of the French, the King of Prussia, the Emperor of Russia, the King of Sardinia, and the Sultan, by which peace has been ree'stablished between her Majesty, the Emperor of the French, the King of Sardinia, and the Sultan, on the one part, and the Emperor of Russia on the other. To assure her Majesty, that while we -should have deemed it our duty cheerfully to afford her Majesty the fullest support if it had, unfortunately, been found n to continue the war, we have learned with joy and satisfaction that her Majesty has been enabled to reEstablish peace on conditions so honourable to her Majesty's Crown, and Which so fully accomplish the great objects for which the war was undertaked. To express to her Majesty the great satisfaction which we feel, that while OnTse alliances which have so materially contri-
buted to the vigorous and successful prosecution of the war, have been equally effective in the consolidation of peace, the Powers which have not taken any active part in the war have combined with the belligerents, and have given by their sanction and accession additional firmness to the ar- rangements by which the repose of Europe is in future to be protected from disturbance. To state to her Majesty, that we rejoice that, notwithstanding the great exertions which the late war rendered necessary, the resources of the empire have remained unimpaired. To express a hope that the peace now concluded may, under the favour of Divine Providence, long continue to shed its blessings over Europe; and that harmony among governments, _ and friendly intercourse among nations, may steadily promote the progress of civilization, and secure the welfare and happiness of mankind."
A similar address will be moved in the House of Commons by Mr. Evelyn Denison ; but Mr. Robert Phillimore has given notice of moving an "additional paragraph,"—expressing regret that the right of the Crown to capture enemy's goods in neutral sliips _should have been , surrendered by treaty, without giving Parliament an opportunity of ex- pressing its opinion.
Previous page
