said, he wished to ask the President of the Poor Law Board, Whether it is his intention to move for the reappointment of the Select Committee on the Irremovable Poor, with the view of proposing an alteration in the laws of settlement and removal during the present Session?

said, that in consequence of the abrupt manner in which the proceedings of the Committee had terminated, and the incomplete state of the inquiry, he intended to propose the reappointment of the Committee with a view of coming to a conclusion on the subject, and ascertaining what further legislation was necessary.

said, he would beg to inquire, Whether it is the intention of Government to introduce any measure respecting intermediate education in Ireland; and when such measure, if any, will be introduced?

It is my intention to bring in a Bill on the subject of Endowed Schools in Ireland, but I am not at present prepared to say at what time.

said, he wished to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it is, in his opinion, expedient that a diplomatic representative of England should interfere so far in the internal concerns of the country to which he is accredited as to prevent the appointment of a president or commander to a patriotic armed association for the defence of the country, such as the intended Nazione Armata in Sardinia, resembling in principle our own Rifle Volunteers, without the knowledge or authority of his own Government, or without having, as far as it appears, made it distinctly intelligible that such proceeding was entirely his own, and not that of his Government.

I can only answer the question of the hon. Gentleman by saying that I think that the conduct of Sir James Hudson was perfectly right, and very becoming on his part. He has long resided in Sardinia, and he is a person who does not conceal his opinions. He was of opinion that the setting up of an armed force independent of the Government was very dangerous to the continuance of constitutional government in that country, and he made known his opinion to the King and the Government. I think he did what was quite right.

said, he wished on the part of his hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Mr. Horsman) to inquire, Whether the Commission appointed last Session to inquire into the state of the national defences has yet reported, and how soon the Report was likely to be presented to Parliament?

In reply to my hon. and gallant Friend, I have to say that the Report is not yet in a state to be laid before Parliament. Whenever it is in a sufficiently advanced state to be laid before Parliament, I have no doubt that my right hon. Friend the Secretary for War will lay the Report before the House.

said, he rose to ask the Attorney General for Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the late decision in the Court of Queen's Bench in Ireland, to the effect that the Common Lodging-house Acts do not extend to that country; and what course he intends to pursue in consequence of such decision?

said, that the attention of the Irish law officers had been drawn to the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench, the effect of that decision being that the code of law relative to common lodging houses which was applicable to England did not extend to Ireland. The Irish law officers did not concur in that judgment, but as no appeal could be made against the decision of the Court, he should ask leave next week to introduce a measure extending the Common Lodging-house Acts to Ireland.

said, he had to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether the Government intended to explain the provisions of the Reform Bill for Scotland, and to lay it on the table at the same time with the Bill for England and Wales?

Without giving a precise answer to the question, I may state that it is the intention of the Government that the Lord Advocate shall explain the Reform Bill for Scotland on the same day that the Reform Bill for England is brought in.

I wish to ask the Secretary of State for India when the Indian medals are to be issued? and whether, as information has been received of the amount of Lucknow prize-money, he will state what that amount is? and also whether any steps have been taken for the payment of the batta or prize-money to the troops and seamen engaged in the battles of Bushire and Kooshab, in Persia?

said, that the distribution of Indian medals had already begun. Each man's name had to be engraved on his medal, and considerable delay had taken place from waiting for the nominal roll from India. A delay had also taken place in consequence of the necessity for considering whether different clasps should be issued for different services. The question as regarded the relief and capture of Lucknow had only recently been decided in the affirmative, and the distribution was now going on. With regard to the Lucknow prize-money, the whole amount was £143,000; and, having received it, measures are now in progress for obtaining Her Majesty's declaration of prize, which is a necessary preliminary to any steps being taken to distribute it in proper proportions to those who were entitled to receive it. With respect to the last question, the Government received about a month ago a recommendation from the Governor-General of India that batta should be given to the forces employed in the Persian expedition. According to the arrangement made at the time with regard to this expedition, half of the cost was payable from Indian revenue and half by this country. On receiving that recommendation from the Governor-General the necessary application had been made to the Treasury to pay their half of the amount. To that application no answer has yet been received.

said, he rose to call the attention of the House to the case of certain officers of the army who, after having volunteered into the Land Transport Corps, did not receive the promotion that was granted to others who wore similarly engaged in the same service, on the ground of their names having appeared in general orders as appointed until further orders. He wished to say a few words to show the injustice with which some of these men had been treated. It would be remembered that the corps was formed at the end of the year 1855, when Lord Panmure wrote to Sir William Codrington, who was then in command of our army in the Crimea, to organize it. The corps was organized accordingly, and General Wetherall, who made out the commissions for the officers, happened to make them out in different forms. But they all volunteered to serve about the same time, so that there could be no claims from priority, and they all undertook the same duties. Furthermore, he held in his hand letters from General Wetherall, who signed the commissions, stating that the difference in the form was accidental, and that he did not intend to make any distinction between one officer and another. Sir William Codrington had also expressed himself to the same effect. When the war was over, the case of the officers of this corps was brought before the House, and in consequence all of them received promotion, with the exception of those who were named in general orders to serve till further orders. He thought the men who served under this verbal distinction through no fault of their own had good cause to complain, and that their cause was one of extreme hardship, and as such he brought it before the House.

said, he rose to direct the attention of the Government to the state of Hyde Park, and to ask the First Lord of the Treasury what plan the Government proposed for the ornamental cultivation of the space now vacant by the removal of shrubs and growing trees. This was a matter which concerned not merely residents in the neighbourhood, but the inhabitants of the metropolis at large, the parks having been ceded by the Crown for the pleasure and recreation of the public. In 1856, when Lord Llanover was the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests, great complaints were raised about the state of Hyde Park between the Marble Arch and Kensington Gardens, and in consequence a portion of it was planted with flowers and shrubs, very much to the satisfaction of the public. That the House of Commons also approved the arrangement was apparent from the fact that in 1857 £350 was voted for the planting of the parks, and a further sum of £1,000 to be spent on Hyde Park. The shrubs which wore planted having thriven very well, and a very agreeable walk having been formed, the same course was adopted with regard to the ground between the Marble Arch and Stanhope Street Gate. Lord John Manners, upon his accession to the office of First Commissioner, continued the arrangement, and even improved upon it in some respects. Last year the Government entrusted the care of the parks with the rest of the public works to a gentleman whose name would be never mentioned in this House without the deepest feeling of regret, the late Mr. Fitz Roy, who long attended to the private business of the House, and afterwards presided over their deliberations in Committee, displaying all the attributes of a thorough man of business, the strict impartiality of a judge, and the high-bred manly courtesy of an English gentleman. Mr. FitzRoy succeeded to the office in June, but was taken ill in September last, and was not cognizant, he believed, of the steps which had been taken to turn Hyde Park into the absolute waste and place of desolation which it now appeared. One foggy evening in November a large body of navvies were sent into the park, and before morning effected the utter annihilation of the whole of the shrubs, and transformed the well-planted ground between the Marble Arch and Kensington Gardens into a dreary desert. By whom the order for that operation was given the public were not aware, but, in reply to a deputation who had waited on the First Lord of the Treasury, the noble Viscount stated that he had received an intimation from the Woods and Forests of the most extraordinary kind, and that it was the intention of the authorities of that department to transform that portion of Hyde Park which had been referred to into a nursery. He thought that anything more desolate and cheerless than a nursery in the winter time could scarcely be imagined, and he was sure that the residents of Chelsea and Brampton, where nurseries abounded, would concur in that opinion. The noble Lord further denied the statement that the place had been disturbed to meet the wishes of some influential individuals who lived in the neighbourhood, and he could pledge his credit that his right hon. Friend (Mr. FitzRoy,) from his manly tone of feeling, was the last person who would allow the public interest to be made subservient to private influence, come from what quarter it might. He was told that alterations in the park never took place without intimation to Her Majesty or to his Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, the Ranger, and it was said no such intimation in this instance had been made. That, as far as he was aware, was the history of the transaction. He did not wish to attack any one, hut he trusted whoever succeeded the late Commissioner of Works would direct his efforts to repair the scene of desolation which had been caused.

Sir, I am very glad that my hon. and learned Friend has brought this matter under the attention of the House, because I think it is very useful to dispel a misapprehension which appears to have been very generally entertained upon the subject to which the question relates. I must, in the first place, state how very much gratified I am—I am sure every hon. Member of this House must have been—by the testimony which my hon. and learned Friend bore to the memory of our lamented Friend Mr. FitzRoy—a Gentleman who possessed the goodwill and respect of both sides of this House perhaps in a greater degree than has fallen to the lot of most persons who have filled public situations. For myself, I will only say that I have lost a very sincere and valued friend. But great injustice has been done to Mr. FitzRoy by the reports which have been circulated upon this subject. I have made it my business to inform myself upon that which has passed, and I must, in the first place, bog to correct a misapprehension which seems to have been communicated to my hon. and learned Friend as to the answer which I gave to the deputation which I had the honour of receiving. My hon. and learned Friend has been informed that I stated that this strip of ground was to be converted into a nursery. Well, in one sense of the word it was intended to be a nursery, inasmuch as that is a nursery which is filled with children. These walks, as we all know, are thronged with children, deriving health and amusement from the opportunities of exercise and air there afforded to them. But the simple fact is this: The arrangement made by Lord Llanover was one which greatly contributed to the beauty of the place, and to the recreation and health of the persons who frequented the park. It gave an agreeable promenade with flowers and shrubs to look at, and gravel paths well adapted to the purpose for which they were intended. It never entered into the contemplation of Mr. FitzRoy to alter that arrangement. It was, however, found that the ground, not having been prepared in the same elaborate manner in which the ground between Stanhope Gate and Hyde Park Coiner had been prepared, the shrubs that had been put there had not thrived. It was the intention of Mr. FitzRoy to remove those shrubs and to replace them by others; and instead of the flowers that had been put there and had not succeeded, arrangements had been made to provide an ample supply of flowers to be planted there as soon as the season should be fit for such an operation. I am not surprised that those who walked there and saw what looked like a fallow field, not having been informed otherwise, should have become apprehensive that such was intended to be the permanent condition of the ground. But it was no more intended to be the permanent condition of the ground than a fallow field is intended to be the permanent condition in which a farm is to be maintained by the holder. It was thought that the ground having been cleared in that way during the winter would be better adapted to receive those beneficial influences which the atmosphere communicates to an exposed soil, and in the meantime preparations were made for improving the soil by manure, and by the addition of better mould; and as soon as the season shall arrive when operations can be advantageously performed there will be put into it, according to a plan which I have seen, and which was prepared under the direction of Mr. FitzRoy, rows of shrubs, some evergreen and some flowering, and rows of flowers between them, with walks on each side; and I venture to say that when this arrangement shall be completed the public will not only be satisfied with it as gratifying and agreeable to the eye, but will think that it is an improvement on that state of the ground which it is to replace.

said, that the statement of the noble Lord had given him very much pleasure. He thought, however, that in regard to the defence put forth by one of the officers of the Board of Works, that the plants did not thrive as well as was expected, some blame attached to the superintendents of the Parks. All transplanted trees required a great deal of watering, and not one of these received any attention whatever, yet owing to the ground being so carefully prepared they throve wonderfully, and if let alone would have established themselves satisfactorily. But there was another point on which he wished to make an observation. In planting and transplanting the greatest care should be taken not to break the roots, but he thought it would be impossible to replace those shrubs again in the ground, for in taking them up, he observed they were torn up without any attempt being made to preserve their roots. Now, these plants had been brought from Kensington Gardens at an expense of £350; the plants were worth some two or three guineas a-piece, and he should like to know what had been done with them? What was done could not be undone; hut it would be a great satisfaction to the public to hear of the change that had been made, and he hoped it would be persevered in.

said, he rose to call the attention of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to certain statements in The Times newspaper of Jan. 24, in the letters of its "Special Correspondent," from the seat of war on the coast of Morocco, as to alleged or reported misconduct on the part of Mr. Drummond Hay, her Majesty's Consul at Tangier. He should have been quite content to ask the Question of which he had given notice in the ordinary way, but it was absolutely necessary that it should be rendered clear and intelligible, not only in justice to the gentleman whose name was principally involved, but to satisfy those who wished to maintain friendly relations between this country and Spain. Certain papers had been laid upon the table, and by them it would be found that Her Majesty's Government had watched with the greatest jealousy—almost apprehension—the conduct pursued by Spain towards Morocco, and that the noble Lord at the head of the Foreign Office had particularly instructed our Minister at Madrid, Mr. Buchanan, to demand explanations, on the part of our Government, of the Government of Spain upon two material points, the one was as to the time during which the Spanish Government would occupy Tangier in case their troops should obtain possession of that town, and the other was whether Spain would endeavour to make and retain any new acquisitions of territory on the shores of Morocco. He thought the noble Lord had properly discharged his duty in making those inquiries, and demanding those assurances. He would only trouble the House with two short extracts, which would satisfy them—and he was sure that the noble Lord was already satisfied—that the conduct of Spain towards this country was characterized by a spirit of loyalty and conciliation. Writing to Mr. Buchanan on the 15th of October the Foreign Secretary said:—

"Senor Collantes, in his reply of the 6th of October states that when once the treaty of peace which should put an end to the hostilities between Spain and Morocco should be ratified, the questions now existing being settled favourably, and therefore definitely, the Spanish Government, in fulfilment of their intentions, would not continue in the occupation of that fortress [Tangier], in the supposition that they should have found themselves obliged to establish themselves there in order to secure the favourable issue of their operations. You will state to M. Collantes that Her Majesty's Government accept with pleasure this assurance, as conveying the declaration which, by my despatch of the 22nd of September, you were instructed to ask for.

And Senor Collantes, writing from Madrid on the 21st of October, used these words:—

"The Government of the Queen my Sovereign, who have given so many and such marked proofs of their conciliatory and upright spirit in the different incidents which have sprung from the question with Morocco, will not vary the intention, which they had formed from the beginning of that question, not to occupy any point on the Straits whose position could afford to Spain a superiority dangerous to the navigation. In this matter their ideas have been always so disinterested and loyal that they cannot believe that any doubt can have been conceived with regard to them."

No answer to this despatch appeared in the papers; but its language was so fair and so loyal that the noble Lord, if he did send any answer, could not but have given it in the same terms as before, and expressed his entire satisfaction. Seeing, therefore, that Spain had done all in her power to disarm the suspicions and satisfy the apprehensions of our Government, it would be conceded that the least to be expected from our Government was that it should avoid even the semblance of hostility or unfairness towards Spain, either in its diplomatic language or in the acts of its agents in Morocco; and if any belief existed in the minds of the Spaniards that they or their agents had not acted with perfect fairness and impartiality the British Government ought to be very glad of an opportunity of removing it. Such an opportunity he would now give to the noble Lord by reading an extract from a letter of the Special Correspondent of The Times at the seat of War in Morocco, published in that paper on the 24th of January, This was the extract:—

"The Spaniards persist in complaining bitterly of Mr. Drummond Hay, to whom they impute divers practices unfavourable to their cause. He is accused of supplying the Moors with ammunition, of assisting them with his counsels, of superintending (himself in a Moorish costume) certain of their preparations. It is further stated that he has had to do with the engagement of two English engineers, who construct military works. The vessels which convey cattle from Tangier to Gibraltar return thence with powder and other warlike stores. It was by his direction that the Moorish batteries at San Martin aimed the other day at the screws of the Spanish steamers employed in bombarding them. If they did not succeed in hitting them it was their fault, not that of the British Consul at Tangier. Mr. Hay also draws up the Emperor's diplomatic documents addressed to foreign Powers. Of the truth or falsehood of the above charges, of all or any of them, I know nothing whatever.…. But it is well to let you know of the accusations in question, because they are not mere matters of gossip and camp talk, but are seriously brought forward and maintained by persons in responsible and important positions here, who declare that they know them to be true, and give it to be understood that they are derived from trustworthy agents of the Spanish Government; also, because I am not without reasons to believe that the information in question, whether true or false, obtains credit from the Government. The exasperation felt against Mr. Hay is great, and if the Spaniards get to Tangier I would advise him on their approach to leave that place. It has been insinuated in some quarters that in acting as he is said to have done, and to be doing, he is only obeying the orders of his superiors; but a more general belief, or at least the one I most frequently hear expressed here, is that he is merely pursuing the bent of his inclinations, and that his Government either does not know of or does not heed his conduct."

Of the truth or falsehood of these charges he had no means of judging; but it appeared that these rumours had obtained credit with the Spanish Government, and that there was a strong feeling of exasperation against England in high quarters in that country. That the charges were grave enough to demand a prompt explanation from the British Government, he ventured to think the House would admit. If they were unfounded Mr. Hay ought to feel indebted to the Special Correspondent of The Times for giving him an opportunity of denying the charge; but if any of them were true the Government had no other course to pursue but to express at once in the strongest terms their indignation at and repudiation of such conduct, and at once to dismiss from their service an individual who had so unworthily betrayed the trust confided to him. Before sitting down he could not refrain from expressing his warm sympathy with that gallant nation which had once been the strongest bulwark of Christendom against the Mahomedan, and he rejoiced to see that in this contest with the Moors—whatever might have been the origin of it—she was displaying her old historic valour and the lofty and enthusiastic spirit which had formerly distinguished her as a nation in bygone times. He wished therefore, to ask, whether any facts had come to the knowledge of the Government which would justify the belief that the British consul had in any way violated that strict neutrality which should be maintained by the official representative of this country in relation to both of the belligerent powers, Spain and Morocco.

said, that as he was in possession of certain information derived from very good authority, which he should be happy to show any Gentleman who desired to see it, he hoped the House would allow him to interfere for a few moments between them and the answer to the Question of the hon. Member for the purpose of stating one or two facts which would place Mr. Hay's conduct in a different light from that in which it was represented by the extract just read by the hon. Gentleman. With regard to Mr. Hay's partiality, that gentleman had strongly urged upon the Moorish Government the necessity, not to say the propriety, of sparing the Spanish prisoners, and through his interference the Moorish authorities had offered a price of £3 for each living Spaniard brought in, whereas the price formerly given was £1 for each head. Through his exertions the lives of a number of Spanish prisoners had been spared. It was through his intervention that the families of Jews and Spaniards had been permitted to depart unmolested from Morocco with their property; and in consequence of his having remained on the spot, with the sanction of the British and Spanish Governments, the houses of the persons who had so left were protected and the Roman Catholic chapel was secured from outrage. As illustration of the good effects which had resulted from the presence of Mr. Hay, he might mention that a Moor had been flogged round the town for attempting to enter a house forcibly, and that in December last, when a French vessel was wrecked some distance down the coast, that gentleman most promptly sent the authorities to the spot, had the mariners rescued from the violence of the natives, and sent them to the French Admiral and Consul at Gibraltar. These were facts which he believed to be authentic, and he had felt it his duty not to withhold them from the House when the character of an absent official appeared to be impugned—at least, when it had been made the object outside that House of malignant aspersions.

Sir, I have studied how to frame the Question which I am about to put in a way which shall not be considered as expressing a querulous distrust, but rather, so far as is capable of being accomplished in a matter of this kind, something like confidence in the present Administration, and at the same time to indicate an opinion that we ought not to enter upon the discussion of the budget in the absence of that knowledge which, more than any other, is important to enable us to come to a right decision. On Monday next the House of Commons is to be called upon to give its sanction to a Treaty which is to bring us into more intimate relations with the Em- pire of France, and we are to be asked at the same time to consider those arrangements which the Chancellor of the Exchequer will produce to us with a view of meeting the vast expenses which we have been obliged to incur in consequence of the present state of Europe. The cause which makes it necessary to incur this outlay is no secret to any man; everybody is aware that it has arisen from the fact that in the present phase of the French Revolution, a vast concentration of power has taken place, and that the Emperor of the French wields the whole resources of France, not through Statesmen or Ministers, but in a way which makes it impossible to know what his intentions are, except in so far as one is able to divine them from the probable use of the great armaments which he is preparing. I sincerely believe that almost the entire of Europe, including the great country of France, fervently desires the continuance of peace; but I cannot forget that last year Europe, including then as well as now the great country of France, desired the continuance of peace with an intensity equal to that by which it is at present animated. That wish was frustrated by circumstances which are so recent that it is needless further to allude to them; but what occurred may be stated in one short sentence—Austria madly and foolishly began the war, but it was the Emperor of the French who began the quarrel. It is not for me to say whether Europe has been taught or misled by the experience of last year, but to every hon. Gentleman holding correspondence with the Continent it must be known that a general idea is prevalent that the peace of Europe is again about to be disturbed, and that schemes are on foot for altering territorial arrangements, independent of those modifications which may have to be carried out in Italy. Although there may be other grounds for these apprehensions, the anxiety that is felt is mainly due to the armaments existing throughout Europe, and it may be readily believed that the uneasiness which prevails on the Continent speedily makes itself felt in this country. It is, of course, to be observed that there may have been exaggeration as to many points which we have heard; for those who busy themselves in communicating intelligence to England are, for the most part, unfriendly to the present Government of France, and to view all the actions of the Emperor with a jaundiced eye. But it does appear to mo that it must rest in the power of Her Ma- jesty's Foreign Office to dispel this anxiety in a great measure, or, if not to dispel it, at all events to convert what is now a vague sentiment of fear into a rational, wise, and persistent vigilance. My observation of the military preparations of France enables me to make one remark, which may exercise, in one respect, a reassuring tendency. Many persons entertain the opinion that wild incursions, descents, and small expeditions of a marauding character may be attempted on our coast, and that in this manner, without any serious consequences to either country, great mischief might be effected. Now, Sir, to do justice to the present ruler of France, I do not believe that it is consistent with his policy to do anything in a small way; and, therefore, if I could be convinced that no large armaments were in preparation, I should rest assured that the peace of Europe was not about to be disturbed. Great preparations cannot be made in an hour, and cannot go on in corners, so that if I should succeed in obtaining from the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) anything like an assurance that no vast preparations are at present going on in France, it follows that we have established a great ground of security. Unfortunately, the information which reaches me as a private individual is not of such a reassuring kind as I should hope to receive from the noble Lord. It is the practice of the French Government to make known their intention to raise new levies some time beforehand to the prefects of the departments; and I am informed that they have received notice that a levy of 140,000 men is to take place for the purpose of what is called remplacement. I am also told that the Emperor of the French has for the present refused to give the conge to some 40,000 men who, under ordinary circumstances, would have been sent to their homes some weeks since. The consequence is that by this new levy and by the retention of this large body of trained soldiers, the military forces of France will be next spring on a most formidable footing. I am assured—though this in like manner is, perhaps, an exaggeration—that the Emperor of the French will then be prepared to take the field with a force of no less than 600,000 men. In addition, I have been informed that great preparations are being urged forward for the supply of horse transports on the north coast of France. Then, if I turn from the military to the naval armaments, I find that this unfortunate battle of the dock- yards, if I may so call it, is being carried on with unceasing pertinacity: and that at the very moment when the hon. Member for Rochdale, (Mr. Cobden) was carrying on what he supposed to be a very friendly intercourse with the Emperor of the French, His Majesty was devoting his mind, with great earnestness, to a pursuit which would indicate that he was preparing for some species of conflict which would have to be decided by iron vessels. When such are the reports which reach the ears of private individuals, I think I am not doing wrong in giving the noble Lord an opportunity of correcting what I hope may turn out to be very false and exaggerated statements, thereby enabling us to enter upon the discussion on Monday with that knowledge which it is most important for us to possess of the preparations which the Emperor of the French is really making. I do not make anything like a complaint against the Emperor of the French; I merely desire the information as a dry piece of statistics, which will enable me to arrive at the conclusion that I shall next week be called upon to form more satisfactorily than any other information could possibly do; and it will be to my mind more cogent than any speech with which the matchless eloquence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer may lead him to favour us. I shall therefore conclude by asking the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it will be consistent with the interests of the public service to communicate to the House any of the information which has reached the Foreign Office in respect to the military and naval preparations of the Emperor of the French; and if so, whether such information can be communicated before the financial statement which it is proposed to deliver on Monday?

said, he wished, before the noble Lord answered the question, to ask him whether the Treaty of Commerce had been ratified—as he supposed it had been—and whether that Treaty had been signed, as was reported, by an hon. Member of that House, who was, however, not responsible for the transaction, as not being at all connected with the Ministry. He wished also to know whether the Treaty would be laid on the table between this and Monday.

said, With respect to the first question put by the hon. Member for Dungarvon (Mr. Maguire), I can have no hesitation in stating that Mr. Drummond Hay is a gentleman of the high- est honour and character. He, with other members of his family, have been long in the service of the Crown. He has, therefore, had much experience of public life, and knows too well his duty to the Crown to take any course inconsistent with the general and avowed policy of Her Majesty's Government. From his long residence in Morocco—indeed, I believe he was born there—and his kindness to all who hold any intercourse with him, he has gained to a great degree the respect of the people of that country, not only of the Foreign Minister of the Emperor of Morocco, who was formerly a merchant, but of the wild tribes of natives who so frequently made incursions into the Spanish settlements. Having this influence, I believe that he, according to instructions from Her Majesty's Government, endeavoured to prevent the breaking out of war between Spain and Morocco. He endeavoured to prevent this war by advising every concession he thought possible, till he was told by the Moorish Minister that, whatever advice might be given, Morocco could not, consistently with the honour of the Sultan, make any further concessions. Mr. Drummond Hay did exert himself to the utmost, and used the influence he had so justly acquired to prevent the outbreak of hostilities. Since that time, it being the policy of Her Majesty's Government to be neutral in the war, his conduct has been in strict conformity with his instructions, as the representative of a neutral Power. The hon. Member has read a report from the correspondent of The Times newspaper, a very respectable gentleman, I believe; but he is in the Spanish camp, and can hear nothing but what he is told by Spaniards. They have stated various matters, which the correspondent repeats, but he says that he knows nothing of them, and admits that he has no proof of them whatever. I have not heard from Mr. Drummond Hay since he had an opportunity of seeing these statements in the newspaper, but I have not a doubt they are one and all entirely false, I do not believe that Mr. Drummond Hay has violated his duty or taken any part in the war. The Spanish Minister did on one occasion state to Mr. Buchanan that complaints had been made of the partiality of Mr. Drummond Hay; but he gave no instance of such partiality, nor any proof of it whatever. We are aware that the Spanish Government in this war has obtained the aid of British merchants, and that the Spanish army has been sup- plied with British stores and provisions. Any complaints, therefore, of a violation of neutrality might more justly be made by the Government of Morocco than by the Government of Spain. I believe that the conduct of Mr. Drummond Hay has been entirely free from blame. I do not wish to say which party in this war is right; but I cannot sympathize with the enthusiasm of the hon. Gentleman in regard to it. I do not think, because one party is Christian and the other Mahomedan, we ought to give the former all our sympathy, without reference to the causes or merits of the quarrel. I will now refer to the questions of my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Bridgwater (Mr. Kinglake). He has stated much with regard to the late war in Italy, and the present state of Europe, which this is not the proper occasion to discuss, but which may hereafter come under consideration. All I can say with regard to the other part of the subject is, that we have in Paris a very able Ambassador, and a military attaché to the embassy, possessing great knowledge and experience of the French army. From neither one nor the other has Her Majesty's Government received any account of any extraordinary military preparations in France. As for the statement of 600,000 men to be in readiness for the field by the spring, there is nothing at all to corroborate it. A great number of men may be called on to serve in the French army by conscription, but it must he remembered that a general conscription takes place in the course of every year. The hon. and learned Gentleman must recollect that the peace of Zurich has not long been signed, and the Congress that was summoned for the purpose of rendering the pacification of Italy solid and durable, has not been held. It is therefore desirable, while peace is so recent and the affairs of Italy have not yet settled down, to use every means to prevent a renewal of the war, or any collision in Italy that might excite it. Her Majesty's Government has recently been engaged in efforts to secure the permanence of that peace; and I can state that everything that has been done has proved most satisfactory. We have represented to the Government of Sardinia the danger of any collision with Austria on the territory of Venetia or elsewhere; and I have to-day received an assurance from the Sardinian Government that it will do nothing tending to provoke a renewal of hostilities. On the one hand, there is rea- son to believe that France is far from desirous that there should he any renewal of the war; and the Government of the Emperor is exerting itself earnestly and unremittingly to secure the solidity and permanence of the peace. On the other hand Austria, though unwilling, as might be supposed, to acquiesce in the present state of Italy, is by no means disposed to renew the war by making any attack on the Powers in possession of the country. Without venturing to predict what will be the course of events in the next year, I may say that the present aspect of affairs is favourable; nor is there any reason to suppose that France is making the enormous military preparations my hon. Friend has referred to. With regard to the naval arsenals of France and the great activity described as prevailing in them, we all know that a great change has taken place in the character of naval warfare. It is made a matter of speculation in books and pamphlets what the character of the next naval war will be, and every one seems convinced that it will not resemble the nature of those that are past. The Government of the late King of the French, Louis Philippe, drew up a plan for increasing the strength of the French navy; every ruler of Franco, for nearly the last 100 years, has endeavoured to increase and strengthen its marine. They have all considered, naturally enough, that France ought to be a great maritime Power. There is great activity also in our own docks and armaments. Both England and France are endeavouring to be strong at sea, not with a view to any rivalry, but from a belief that each nation ought to maintain its ancient character. I cannot say, therefore, that the naval preparations of France ought to be a matter of jealousy to us. If the two nations agreed that there should be no such preparations and no strong navy, we might expect France to follow our course in that respect; but, while France determines to make herself strong at sea, and we like to have a strong navy also, I do not think it is a reason why the two nations should have any dispute with each other. In reply to the question of the hon. and gallant Member for Dungannon (Colonel Knox), I have to state that the ratifications of the treaty which he mentions will take place to-morrow (Saturday), and that a copy will be laid on the table of the House on Monday next. I may add that the persons who were employed, and who received full powers to negotiate that treaty, were Lord Cowley and Mr. Cobden.

said, he rose pursuant to notice to call the attention of the Secretary of State for War to the hardships entailed on the officers, noncommissioned officers, and men, of the embodied militia regiments by their sudden disembodiment. He could not but regret that regiments which it had taken such time, trouble, and expense to bring to their present state of discipline should be wantonly disembodied. A sufficient reason for such a step was, he might be told, to be found in the fact that a certain number of regiments of the line were about to return from India; but it should be borne in mind that those regiments were but mere skeletons, and would, as a consequence, by no means supply the deficiency which the proposed disembodiment of militia would create. Perhaps he might be told that economy must be considered, and that, to use a familiar phrase, they must "cut their coat according to the cloth;" but he could not admit the force of that argument, especially when he saw the expenses that were incurred in other departments of the State. He could not understand how, under any circumstances, economy could justify injustice. It was a great hardship that the senior officers, who had in many instances sacrificed their domestic comfort,—that the junior officers, many of whom had frequently spent three or four years in learning the duties of their position,—and that the sergeants and men, who had nobly come forward at the call of their country, but whose training had unfitted them for the discharge of those duties which they had previously performed, should receive so sudden an intimation that their military services were so soon to be dispensed with. Perhaps they would be told that this was a time of peace; but after the statement just made by the noble Lord, he thought it was too soon to disband this portion of so newly-raised a force at present. He would give all credit to the Emperor of the French as a loyal ally, and as the last man to attempt the invasion of this country; but, great man as he was, he was still the creature of circumstances. France had entirely delivered herself up to the will of one man, and a country in such a case could not be implicity trusted on every oc- casion. He (Colonel Dickson) did not, of course, mean to contend that the militia should be made a permanent institution of the country, but he was at the same time prepared to maintain that the various regiments of which it was composed ought not to be disbanded without sufficient notice. The subject was therefore one which he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would take into his consideration and place the militia on such a footing that they might know what duties it was intended that they should perform.

said, he rose to call attention to the Commission for inquiry concerning the laws of Jersey, and to inquire of the Secretary of State for the Home Department why the Commissioners had not pursued their inquiries in Jersey since August last? why had they not already investigated the law affecting land tenure, and concerning bankruptcy and insolvency in the island? also, Whether the Commissioners were continuing their labours, and when their Report would be made? A Commission, embracing these topics, had been appointed by the late Government, and the announcement was received with great joy by the inhabitants of the island. Ever since August last, however, they had ceased to pursue the investigation, and great inconvenience had in consequence been occasioned. He might add, that when they adjourned they had arrived at a point of the inquiry which was of great interest to the inhabitants of Jersey—the law connected with the tenure of land—and that he could discover no good reason why they should have allowed a period of more than five months to elapse without resuming the duties which they had been appointed to discharge. It was of great importance to the district that this Commission should be speedily executed, and two Royal Commissions, involving much more labour than this, had, since it was issued, completed their inquiries and made their Reports. The adjournment had been made to January, but January had passed and nothing further had been heard on the subject. In these circumstances he had felt it his duty, at the request of the inhabitants of Jersey, to call the attention of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to the delay which had taken place.

said, a Commis- sion, consisting of three persons, at the head of which was Sir John Awdry, a retired Indian Judge, bad been appointed to inquire into the laws of the island of Jersey. The Commissioners visited the island in the course of the summer and autumn, and at the end of August they left the island. Having brought their inquiries to a conclusion they had since been employed in the preparation of their Report, and he had been assured by the Secretary of the Commission that it was in a state of forwardness, and that it would be presented at no distant period. With regard to the questions of land tenure, and of bankruptcy and insolvency, the Commissioners had made inquiry on those subjects, and were in possession of documentary evidence on those matters. The hon. Gentleman was doubtless aware, that though he had a strong opinion as to the policy of assimilating the law of Jersey to that of England, the people of Jersey had a strong attachment to the old laws and traditions of their country. When this Commission was appointed he believed it was understood that it should not sit longer than a year. He was not, however, at that moment able to specify the particular time when the Report would be ready.

^* rose to call the attention of the House to the importance to the commerce and manufactures of this country of opening up the navigation of the river Godavery, and to ask the Secretary of State for India what were the intentions of the Government in respect thereof. The hon. Member said the Godavery valley is one of the richest portions of Central India, and has an area about four times that of Ireland. It abounds in iron and timber. It produces corn, rice, oil seeds, and sugar; but what he particularly wished to call attention to was, that it also produced flax, hemp, and cotton. The manufactures of this country were increasing so rapidly that the consumption of raw materials was overtaking their production. It was, therefore, natural that our manufacturers should look to those places which could supply them with the raw materials, especially if they happened to be, as in this case, under the dominion of the British Crown. Hon. Gentlemen connected with the linen trade of Ireland and Scotland would inform the House that the progress of that important manufacture was absolutely stopped for want of an adequate supply of flax and hemp, and as regarded cotton, who could look with unconcern at what was now passing in the Southern States of America, especially when he reflected that eight-tenths of the cotton consumed by our manufacturers last year came from those States? Some Gentlemen perhaps might say, that this was a Manchester question, and no doubt it was. But he asked the House whether a manufacture, which amounted to upwards of £60,000,000 per annum in value, was not also a question of great national interest and importance; and was it not the duty of Parliament to secure, as far as possible, this vast manufacture from accidents in the supply of the raw material? There was abundant evidence that India could furnish all the cotton we require. Dr. Forbes Watson, the botanist of the India Department, estimates that India already grows nearly double the quantity of cotton grown in America. India, however, had to clothe 200,000,000 of her own population, and she had only a small quantity left for exportation. The principal discouragement to growing cotton for exportation was the enormous expense of conveying it to market; to obviate this, good roads and cheap water-carriage were wanted. As an illustration of the state of the roads he would read a short extract from a letter from Line and Co., of Madras, dated in October last. They said:—

"If Government will only give us roads in the Tinnivelly district, our exports would increase rapidly. It is a melancholy sight to see heavy cartloads of cotton dragged across country; the produce is so bulky that in swaying from side to side it strains carts to pieces, and the bullocks drag it over mounds of earth, and through ditches and ruts, in a way which is painful to witness. AH this loss of carts and cattle, and the delays of such a mode of carriage, must of course be borne by the cotton. It is difficult to estimate the annual loss both to the district and the trade."

The roads all over India were in a similar condition, and we were entirely shut out from the finest cotton district of India by the bad state of the roads and the cost of carnage. The American planters had great advantages in this respect over those in India. Cotton was brought 1,000 miles down the Mississippi to a port of shipment for one-eighth of a penny per pound, or about 5 per cent on its value. From Berar the carriage by bad roads costs 100 per cent, on its value. The river Godavery leads to Berar, where the largest quantity and the finest quality of cotton is grown. Captain Haigh, a gentleman of great ability, who was examined before the India Colonization Committee, and who had surveyed the Godavery, stated it could be made navigable for a distance of 500 miles for about £300,000, and that cotton could then be brought from Berar to a port of shipment for one-eighth of a penny per pound, thus placing the American and Indian planter on the same footing in respect of the carriage of cotton. Since Captain Haigh had given his evidence he had visited the navigable rivers of Europe, having previously visited all the river and water communications of America, and he returned with the conviction that there were fewer obstacles to be overcome in the Godavery than had been overcome in European rivers, and before his return to India he felt it his duty to address a letter to the Secretary of State for India, to endeavour to impress upon him the importance of opening up the Godavery to the commerce of this country. In this letter he pointed out, in addition to the commercial, the advantages of this great work in a military point of view. Besides the saving in time in the conveyance of troops and stores by the river, the saving in expense would pay the interest on the outlay of making it navigable. He further stated that the Government would be large gainers by the increased sale of salt. Salt was a Government monopoly in India. It was to be regretted that the necessities of the Government had compelled them to place an additional tax upon this indispensable of life; but the greatest tax which the people of India had to pay on salt was the cost of conveyance. Captain Haigh stated that salt sold at Nangpore at 90 rupees per ton, and sometimes as high as 160 rupees in that district. The Government price for salt was 25 rupees, and if the Godavery were navigable it could be carried at 5 rupees a ton. The opening up of this river, therefore, would enable the people to pay the increased tax on salt, and still to obtain it at less than half the price they paid for it at present. The increase in the consumption would be enormous, and of course the gain of the Government would be in proportion. The increase in the revenue on salt is estimated at £64,000 a year, an amount that would pay the interest on the outlay on the river more than three times over. He (Mr. Smith) ought to state that there had been much controversy on the part of the civilians in India as to the practicability of opening up the Godavery, and as to the profits on the works of irrigation. His hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen (Colonel Sykes) late chairman of the East India Company, was of opinion that it was impracticable to make the Godavery navigable. The hon. Member for Dumbartonshire (Mr. Smollet) says "that such projects as the opening up the navigation of the river Godavery in order to reach the cotton fields of Berar seems to be an undertaking of the most impolitic character, inexpedient in the present financial condition of India, and of very doubtful utility when completed." But Sir Charles Trevelyan, the Governor of Madras, in order to test these various opinions had visited these districts, taking with him engineers and scientific men, and on his return he stated in a minute that he considered the works of such great public importance that he should feel it his duty to visit them every year whilst he remained Governor of the Province. He said the Godavery ran through the most fertile region of Central India. That the opening of this river would be equivalent to the opening of a new trade to the extension of which no limits could be assigned. He (Mr. Smith) thought he had proved the practicability and importance of opening up the Godavery. This great work would enable us to obtain ample supplies of cotton conveyed at a cheap rate from the finest district in India, and would do much to preserve us from those accidents which may arise to the supply of this important raw material. For these reasons he wished to ask the Secretary of State for India what were the intentions of the Government in this matter, and if he answered that it was their intention to open the navigation of the Godavery, he would further ask when? It was necessary to make this inquiry as to the time when the work was to be commenced, because Sir Charles Trevelyan, while he strongly recommended it, added that he hoped the state of the revenue would soon enable the Government to proceed with the work. Now, were they to wait until there was a surplus revenue for the commencement of this work? It had been the policy of the East India Company to make their public works out of the revenue, but he (Mr. J. B. Smith) hoped that would not be the policy of the Queen's Government in India. He could give many instances of the injurious effects of this policy, but he would only mention one as a sample of scores of a similar kind. Tankaria Bunder, in Western India, was a place where there were considerable shipments of cotton. For twenty years there had been complaints, that for want of a wharf there, cotton had to be rolled through the mud to the boats, the consequence was, that the cotton was more or less damaged by the wet. It was estimated that the loss sustained in this way amounted in twenty years to £10,000. Now, the cost of making a wharf was only £2,000, and the Government bad at length consented to execute this small work, but if they had to wait until there was a surplus revenue, they might continue to roll cotton in the mud at Tankaria for twenty years longer. It was a false policy to make reproductive public works out of revenue, since it was always impossible to calculate when a work was commenced how long it would be before it was finished. It was notorious that public works in India cost in many cases double the amount they would have cost if the means of completing them had been uninterruptedly provided. The only legitimate fund for reproductive public works was loans, and he had no hope of seeing any great improvement in India, until that course was adopted. The finances of India were at present in a very embarrassed condition, but he (Mr. J. B. Smith) was not one of those who had any fears that India was unable to discharge all her obligations great as they were. When he saw the vast undeveloped resources of India, and the poverty of the people, it appeared to him that the only way to extricate the country from its difficulties was to increase the tax paying power of the people by means of increased and cheap facilities of conveyance, and by great public works, which could not be executed except by public loans for the special purpose.

said, he was anxious to say a few words in reply to the Questions which had been put to him in the course of that discussion. With regard to the disembodiment of the militia regiment, which the hon. and gallant Member (Colonel Dickson) so worthily and successfully commanded, he could only say it was always very painful for the Government to come to a decision that would be distasteful or operate to the prejudice of individuals; but the interests of the public service necessarily overrode all considerations of that kind, and he had taken the earliest opportunity of communicating to the gallant Officer the conclusion at which they had arrived. He had stated last year, in moving the Army Estimates, that in his opinion a large and continuous embodiment of the militia, in time of peace, was radically wrong in principle. It was unwise to anticipate the resources which ought to be kept in reserve for periods of emergency, and the militia was a force only required when the regular army was abroad. Holding that opinion, he followed the course that he had announced—namely, that of gradually disembodying the militia regiments in proportion as the regular troops were available for taking their place. This operation was necessarily very uncertain, and was retarded in the present instance by the requirements of India, and to the demand upon our regular force caused by the recent unfortunate calamity in China. With regard to the claims of officers of the Land Transport Corps, a Committee of that House had sat, before which was brought the case of certain officers who had entered that corps under very peculiar circumstances, and who at the conclusion of the Crimean War were dismissed from that service. The Committee went carefully through the matter, and divided the cases into certain classes, making recommendations as to the manner in which those different classes should be treated by the Government. The War Office, then presided over by his predecessor, applied to the Treasury for the funds requisite for carrying out those recommendations; and after a good deal of correspondence all the claims were satisfied which were recommended by that Committee. That corps was raised on the distinct understanding that it was only to be continued during the Russian War, and engagements for two years, with very high pay, were given in certain instances. On the return of peace it became necessary to dissolve the corps; but the case of those officers to whom a Committee of that House recommended that compensation should be paid differed from that of those officers of whom the Committee took no notice, and with respect to whom it made no recommendation. Among others there was the case of men who had given up situations in the Civil Service which carried the right to a pension, and who, when they lost their position in the Land Transport Corps, were left without the expectation either of the pension which their civil situation would have given them, or of the half-pay which military employment conferred. There were other cases to which he need not particularly refer, but the position of those gentlemen was this, that they were merely appointed "until further orders." The hon. Member had quoted a letter from Colonel Wetherall to show that these gentlemen were to be treated in the same manner as the others. But in this impression Colonel Wetherall was entirely wrong, for the arrangement was only a provisional one, and the gallant Officer could have no means of knowing what course the Government intended ultimately to take. To illustrate how little claim existed on the part of the officers in whose favour the Committee did not report, he would mention a single instance. Lieutenant Delamere, a very respectable person, was an ensign in the 21st Regiment of Foot, when he joined the Land Transport Corps, of which he was made a captain till further orders. He, however, still remained on the strength of his regiment, so much so that he actually received promotion in it during the time he was acting as captain in the Land Transport Corps. He became a lieutenant, and was sent back to his regiment. He stands in no worse position than anybody else; he gained his promotion. But to make him a captain over the heads of all the other officers, who were constantly under fire and in the trenches, while he was not, would surely be very un-just. The House of Commons, therefore, having given this subject its best consideration, and the recommendations of the Select Committee having been adopted—in carrying out which, indeed, the Government had gone even further than its own sense of justice might, perhaps, have induced it to go—he thought they could not now reopen the question of the claims of these officers.

observed that after what had fallen from the hon. Member for Stockport (Mr. J. B. Smith), he wished to say that his hon. Friend had evidently mistaken his opinions as he was a strenuous advocate for the opening of all communication in India, by land or by water, though he thought that ought to be done with the means of the country. His opinion had always been that the opening out of the Godavery was quite practicable, because nothing was impracticable to engineering science, but that the cost of its execution would exceed reasonable bounds. But recurring to the questions he had to put; the recent mutiny had deranged Indian finance. The interest on the Government loans was in 1856 and 1857, 4 per cent, but the Government had immediately to open a 5 per cent loan. Finding that even that increase would not take, they were obliged to offer 5½ per cent., with an undertaking not to pay off for 26 years. They consented also to accept the new loan half in paper and half in money, thereby raising the previous loans to 5½ per cent. Still, these terms were found insufficient, and the Government in India were obliged to write to the home authorities for assistance. Very luckily, there was a better appreciation of the real capabilities of India in the money-market of this country than in that of Calcutta; and the result was that the 5½ per cent, loan while at a discount of 4 per cent in India, was a few days ago at a premium of 5¼ per cent. in England. The finances of India were now paying 5½ per cent. for a loan that could be obtained here at 4 per cent. The five per cent loan open in Calcutta now stood at 103. All contributions to it were to the damage of the finances of India, and he therefore desired to know whether it was the intention of the Secretary of State to direct that it should be immediately closed. He also wished to be informed by the right hon. Gentleman whether the unanimous recommendation of the Governor-General and his Council that batta should be granted to the troops of the Persian expedition, as had been done in the case of the first Burmah expedition, of the China expedition, and of the capture of Delhi and Lucknow, would receive his sanction; and whether the three officers of the 3rd Bombay Native Light Cavalry, who so greatly distinguished themselves in the charge upon a regiment of Persian Infantry formed in square at the battle of Kooshab, near Bushire, would receive the Victoria Cross?

said, he was anxious to call the attention of the Chief Secretary for Ireland and the House to the concluding paragraph of the Report of the Select Committee of 1858 on county rates in Ireland, containing the recommendation that the Government should take into consideration the propriety of sanctioning half the medical relief expenditure of the Irish Poor Law Unions to be charged on the Consolidated Fund, in a manner similar to that practised in England and Scotland, instead of throwing the entire burden of the outlay upon the ratepayers. That Committee was composed of thirteen Members, six of whom were English and Scotch, and it was presided over by the hon. Baronet the Member for East Somersetshire (Sir W. Miles). The Report of that Committee completely justified the view of the case taken by the late hon. Member for Antrim, a gentleman always remarkable for his assiduity in protecting Irish interests, who moved for that inquiry in June, 1858. He was happy to say that during the last year the State made itself responsible for the expense of certain criminal prosecutions and the maintenance of misdemeanants, as also the costs of prosecutions, and the expenses of witnesses at assizes and sessions, a burden which had been previously thrown upon the local rate-payers. He did not think it necessary to refer to that part of the Report relating to schoolmasters, in respect of whom a certain modified assistance had been given by the National Board of Education in Ireland, when the schools of the Union were placed under their inspection. He would confine himself to the case of the half medical relief in respect to which the Report stated that that Committee were of opinion that though no promise had been held out by the late Sir Robert Peel that the half medical relief in the Irish poor-law unions should be secured under the same law as that relating to England and Scotland, nevertheless, inasmuch as the system in regard to Ireland was alterered in the month of January, 1852, so as to assimilate the law of Ireland to that of England and Scotland, the Committee recommended the House to take into consideration the case of the half-cost of the medical men in those unions, with the view of throwing the payment upon the Consolidated Fund. Now, it never was alleged that any such distinct promise had been made by the late Sir Robert Peel, but it was considered but justice that this expense should be defrayed in the same manner as that of Scotland and England. The number of dispensary districts was 716, at an average cost of £45 each, being the half salary of the medical officers which varies generally from £80 to £90 per annum. The whole sum amounted to about £32,000 a year. That sum was not large, but it was still important as regarding equal justice to all parts of the United Kingdom, and the payment of which by the Consolidated Fund would give a practical relief to the poorer ratepayers. Since 1846, Ireland, until last year, received no credit for the remis- sion of those local charges which were recommended by the late Sir Robert Peel, in his statement on the subject of the corn laws. He was, however, unwilling to blame the successive Governments for this omission. He thought the blame more properly rested upon the Irish grand juries, who neglected making the demand for such relief. He therefore appealed to the right hon. Gentleman for his assistance in effecting a remedy for those complaints, and for his support with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, himself a member of that Select Committee, to obtain, under the prospective financial arrangements of the nation, a parity of exemptions in the local burdens of the two countries.

said, in the course of the year just expired the Treasury had given full effect to the recommendations of the Committee referred to by the hon. Gentleman, upon which they had been unanimous. With regard to the concluding paragraph of the Report to which the hon. Gentleman called his attention, he would remind him that the recommendation contained therein was only carried in the Committee by a majority of four to three, the chairman, upon whose report it was an amendment, having been precluded from voting, so that it might be said that the Committee were tolerably equally divided upon the point. The Committee, were, however, unanimous in that part of their Report regarding the financial arrangements of 1846 as to certain remissions of taxation of local rates. As regarded the expense of certain prosecutions and the maintenance of prisoners, the Government had already acted upon the recommendations. Sir Robert Peel had promised two allowances out of the Consolidated Fund to Great Britain, namely, one half, the charge of the medical officers, and one-half the charge of schoolmasters in unions. His hon. Friend (Mr. Dawson) asked for a sum of £32,000 to put Ireland in a particular respect on an equality with England; but Ireland was allowed the moiety formerly paid by the ratepayers of that country towards the maintenance of the constabulary. Pursuant to Sir Robert Peel's promise, the entire expense of the constabulary in Ireland, amounting to an annual sum of £350,000 per annum, was now paid out of the Consolidated Fund. England received no corresponding sum to that; a circumstance which he hoped his hon. Friend would consider when asking for a sum of not one-tenth that amount, on the ground that Ireland ought to receive equally with England the advantage of a particular payment out of the Consolidated Fund. On the whole, he thought Ireland had no reason to complain.

said, he rose to ask the Secretary of State for India, Whether Her Majesty's Government had given their consideration to the importance of introducing into the Legislative Council of India representatives of the Commercial Class and the class of British settlers, as well as of the Natives of India? also to the importance of an annual statement being made by the executive Government in India of the financial state of the Government, and of the publication of the same for the information of the public in India?

said, he wished to ask the Minister for India a Question relative to a projected treaty with France, enabling that country to draw a supply of labour for her colonies from our Indian territories. Knowing that Sir Frederick Rogers was in Paris last year for the purpose of arranging the terms of the treaty in question, and that he returned to England without having succeeded in the object of his mission, he had hoped and imagined that the design had been entirely abandoned. But certain remarks by a noble Lord in "another place" on Friday evening last had shown him that the scheme was still under consideration. He would briefly state what the project was. Shortly after the emancipation of slaves in the French colonies, consequent upon the revolution of 1848, similar results took place to those which were experienced in our own plantations. The emancipated negroes showed a natural repugnance to that agricultural labour which was their lot during slavery, and retired in large numbers from the estates. It was also well known that the remedies so confidently suggested in our own case of high wages on the one side, or Government interference on the other, proved unavailing to induce them to return. Accordingly, the French planters were obliged to follow the example of our own, and to look elsewhere for a supply of labour. The French Government thought these colonies of suffi- cient importance to make their restoration a public measure, and a more extensive system of immigration from the coast of Africa was established. How that scheme was conducted the blue-book published last Session abundantly testified. We found complaints from the west coast of Africa of so-called "free emigrants" brought down in chains, of the territory of Liberia violated, and the civilization of various African communities checked, and not only the flag, but even the uniform of France degraded by a revival of the slave trade. Similar transactions on the east coast soon led to the unfortunate collision with Portugal, which was fresh in the memory of the House. The fact was, indeed, that in the present condition of Africa a free emigration from that quarter was impossible. With the exception of some few places, where the population was scanty, and not fit for agricultural labour, an emigration from Africa necessarily implied a renewal of the internal slave trade. The conduct of Prance in this affair was most embarrassing to England, and the Earl of Clarendon, and after him the Earl of Malmesbury had addressed strong remonstrances to the Emperor on the subject of the emigration scheme. They saw, no doubt, that the perseverance of France must necessarily lead us to the alternative of a rupture with our powerful neighbour, or of acknowledging that we had been forced to abandon our traditional policy, because it would have been impossible to continue repressive measures on the coast of Africa if one Power were allowed openly to defy them. Though he could quite well imagine that Her Majesty's Ministers were glad of any opportunity of escaping from this dilemma, he must protest against the plan they adopted of furnishing the French colonists with labourers from our Indian possessions, as a sort of bribe for giving up the African emigration. The House knew how strict and jealous were the regulations with which our emigration of coolies from British India to the West India Islands was rightly surrounded. Unlike emigrants from our own shores who were considered able to protect themselves, these people were watched and guarded like children. From the moment of agreeing to indenture themselves to British colonists to that of setting foot again in their native India, officers of emigration at every port, stipendiary magistrates in every district, made them the object of their vigilance and solicitude. So stringent was the practice, that the noble Lord the Member for Kings Lynn, when in office, thought it his duty to disallow a Jamaica immigration ordinance, which deviated, though slightly, from the prescribed model. In common justice to our own colonists and to the Indians themselves, we should be as strict and uncompromising in regard to France. But could the Government say this was possible? He might be told that the French would give up their own Passenger Act and adopt ours, and that our consuls might act as emigration officers in the ports of the French colonies. But was it probable that so jealous and sensitive a nation would allow the interference of foreign officials to be more than nominal? Again, he might be told that the authorities would guarantee their proper treatment, but who was to watch the authorities in a case in which the interest of the whole community would be on one side? He did not say that the emigrants would be ill-treated, yet it was but the other day that the Governor of St. Louis was surprised by the appearance of a French war steamer in hot pursuit of free immigrants escaped from Guadaloupe, and with an account of others having been drowned in the attempt. And for how long were these poor people to be indentured? It could not be for less than five years—a long time in the history of slavery; and were we prepared, in the event of any of the emigrants being ill-treated, or their liberty improperly curtailed, to insist upon their restoration? The example of Spain showed we were not. We knew from the report of our own Consul that slaves, at the rate of 40,000 a year, were introduced into Cuba, contrary to express treaty with Spain, for which we paid her, and yet we did not demand that they should be restored to liberty. Upon these grounds he wished to ask the Secretary of State for India whether Her Majesty's Government still contemplate legalizing the exportation of natives of British India as indentured labourers to French colonies?

asked the Vice-President of the Committee of the Privy Council for Education if, in preparing the Estimates for public education, there will be any objection to state separately the grants proposed for schools in Scotland, distinguishing the amounts proposed for schools connected with the Established Church, the Free Church, the Episcopal Church, the Roman Catholic Church, and the Ragged or Industrial Schools, instead of including them in one gross sum for public education in Great Britain.

said, that the question to which the hon. Member for Stockport (Mr. J. B. Smith) had called their attention was of great importance to the commerce and manufactures, as the opening up of the navigation of the river Godavery would be of great benefit in developing the resources of the country for a distance of 500 miles. The question, had not escaped the attention of the Government, for the letter of Captain Haig which had been referred to was a report which he (Sir Charles Wood) desired that officer, a gentleman of very great intelligence and well acquainted with the subject, to make, being anxious to see in a condensed shape the result of all the information obtained as to the practicability of opening out the river, great portion of which Captain Haig had himself surveyed. Since that Report had been made Captain Haig had been authorized to commence the works for the removal of the first barrier, provided an objection of a serious nature could be got over. The barrier first to be removed was in the Nizam's territory, who was to a certain extent an independent Prince, and it would be absurd to commence works in a territory not belonging to the Indian Government, and where that Government could not protect the persons employed. It was, therefore, necessary that measures should be first taken to remove the obstacles to the work arising from that circumstance. Directions had been given to the Indian Government to enter into communications with the Nizam for the purpose of obtaining the requisite command of the territory, and when that was accomplished measures would be taken for the removal of the first barrier, which would open the navigation for 250 miles. With respect to the question of the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Sykes) concerning the closing of the 5½ per cent loan, he had to say that, immediately after he became Secretary for India, he directed that no measures should be taken to raise any further loan there without the consent of the Home Government. However, having regard to the nature of the loan, the Government, on considering the question, doubted whether it would be consistent with good faith to close the 5½ per cent loan before the end of the Indian financial year, and, therefore, no directions had been issued to close it earlier than that period, unless the entire sum raised should have been paid before that time. Seeing that not quite £2,000,000 had been raised up to the present time, he did not think there was much chance of the entire sum of £5,000,000 being taken before the end of April, at which time the loan would cease. As to the piers on the west coast of India, for the embarkation of cotton, three would be constructed in the course of the ensuing year. To the other question of the hon. Gentleman he had already given an answer. He had stated that the arrangement as to the grant of batta to the troops of the Persian expedition was, that one-half of the charge was to be borne by India, and the other half by this country. He had, in consequence of the recommendation of the Governor General, applied to the Treasury on the subject, but had not yet received an answer. The subject involved in the first question of the hon. Member for Dumfries (Mr. W. Ewart)—the constitution of the Legislative Council—was, no doubt, a matter of considerable importance; it had engaged, and it would continue to engage the attention of the Home Government, but it was involved in considerable difficulty. Representatives of Calcutta, settlers and Native Bengal merchants, might be introduced into the Legislative Council, but the important class of landowners far up the country would not really be represented by the Native merchants. As far as that class was concerned, the Indian official servants constituted a far better representation. He had no objection to a financial statement or approved estimates being published in India; and this was done the other day, the Indian Government having published the estimates for the ensuing year; but he had objected to the publication of the estimate actually given, as from not having been corrected here, it gave an inaccurate view of their financial state. With respect to the question of the hon. Member for Shoreham (Mr. Cave) respecting the exportation of natives of India to French colonies, he might state that when he came to the India Office he found that a treaty was being negotiated with the French for the purpose of allowing the exportation of coolie labourers to those colonies in the same manner as the exportation had been legalized in regard to the British colonies, it being hoped that by that means an end might be put to the system of slave trade— for it amounted to that—which had been carried on upon the eastern coast of Africa to the French colonies. The question was not concluded, but he could assure the hon. Gentleman on the part of the Government that in any arrangements that might be made, every care would be taken to promote the comfort and health of the coolies.

said, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Treasury when "Models of gasholders measuring a cubic foot, and such multiples and decimal parts of the said cubic foot," "with proper balances, indices, and apparatus for testing the measurement and registration of meters," would be deposited at the office of the Controller General of the Exchequer, in pursuance of the terms of the third section of the Act 22 & 23 Vict. c. 66, commonly known as the Act for Regulating Measures used in Sales of Gas?

said, that in answer to the question put by the hon. Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Black), he should be very happy if it were in his power to adopt the mode of making out the Education Estimates suggested by him, but he hoped to be able to show him that it was impossible to do so. The hon. Gentleman was aware that the Estimates for Education differed in some respects from other departments, The Government was in this condition, that they offered grants to various bodies on certain conditions, and it was in the power of the latter to accept whatever they pleased. The Estimates, therefore, had to be founded on the best conjecture that could be formed of the amount of money that would be accepted by the public. The accounts were at the same time exceedingly complicated, and it would be very difficult to frame them in the way specified by the hon. Gentleman. The Estimates were under eleven heads—such as for buildings, books, pupil teachers, schoolmasters, and the like, and putting the sums for each of these heads together they endeavoured to arrive at as correct an estimate as possible of what was likely to be required for the year. If the proposition of the hon. Gentleman were adopted, however, they would have to multiply these eleven heads by five, making in all fifty-five heads under the five distinct bodies among whom the grants were divided. That would not only make the matter more complicated, but it would expose the Estimate to a much greater risk than at present of being fallacious, because, when they estimated on a large scale, they were more likely to be accurate than when they made up a great number of small details. There was another reason against the proposition of the hon. Gentleman. The principle of the present system was, that each denomination, in receiving the public money for its own educational purposes, was content to waive its objections to all other denominations which it believed to be in error, receiving it too. It was a sort of truce, by which every particular denomination waived all objections to others getting the public money on consideration of receiving it for themselves. Now, if the proposition of the hon. Gentleman were adopted, it would be found that debates would take place on all the grants. It would be impossible to keep peace among the different bodies. They would have a regular hunt, each denomination turning out to hunt down the others. That would not be a desirable state of things. The hon. Member had asked for an account of the expenditure; but he would find that this was usually given in the tables annexed to the Estimates. He wished the hon. Member would distinguish between estimates and accounts. An account in the fullest detail would be willingly given, but he (Mr. Lowe) greatly objected to breaking up the Estimates into a number of small portions, merely for the purpose of giving an opportunity for a great number of debates on merely denominational questions. For these reasons he could not comply with the request of the hon. Gentleman.

observed, in reply to the question of the hon. Member for Dudley (Mr. Sheridan), the Act of Parliament to which he had referred imposed upon the Treasury duties which that department was unfitted to discharge. The object of the Act was to supply the public with a standard measure of the foot of gas, and the Treasury had called the Astronomer Royal to their assistance, and with that assistance a model gas-holder bad been prepared as prescribed by the Act of Parliament, and it bad been deposited in the office of the Exchequer. The Act further required that copies of the model should be sent to the Lord Mayors of London and Dublin and the Lord Provost of Edinburgh, and those copies had been sent, The whole duties thrown upon the Government had, therefore, been duly performed. He believed the Astronomer Royal was the only person who really understood the Act of Parliament, and he stated that it was very defective, and he doubted whether it would be of practical utility without further legislation. At present the Government had no power to compel private companies to avail themselves of the models provided, and therefore it would remain a good deal with the local authorities of the different towns as to how they would apply the measure and prevent fraud. The Astronomer Royal was devoting his attention to the subject, and he would shortly make a report to the House, and then it would be seen whether further legislation would be necessary.

said, he did not wish to add another to the twenty speeches they had heard, but could not help calling attention to the example they had had of the moderation of hon. Members in making use of the privilege they had of putting questions and making speeches on the Motion for adjournment till Monday. They had been taken over the whole of the world, and had heard discussions on almost every conceivable subject. They began with an airing in the parks, and then took a sail-down the river Godavery; from thence a journey to Morocco was deemed advisable, and then a trip to Jersey. Then, after travelling over a great part of the world, they amused themselves with discussing such matters as education estimates, exportation of coolies, and some thirteen or fourteen subjects of similar interest. He could not think this was a course of procedure calculated to add lustre or dignity to their proceedings. Friday was fixed for Orders of the Day; but these had been neglected in order that hon. Members might have an opportunity of bringing forward questions on which they happened to take an interest. Such a course of proceeding must be thought by any stranger who happened to be present unworthy of the first assembly in the world.

said, if the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman had been carried, it would have been of the utmost possible convenience to the House in passing the Estimates. It had been rejected, but he would call upon the Government to go on with the Estimates on Mondays,' and to give up their precedence on Fridays.

said, the object of the Bill was to give persons holding certain Indian securities in this country the power of taking out letters of administration, but he thought the Government had lost sight of the fact that there were notes issued in India upon which interest was received in this country, and it would be a great convenience to the holders of those securities if the same privilege were extended to them.

said, that if a person lent money at Bombay or Madras, and died possessed of property at Calcutta, administration granted at one place was of no effect in the other. Power ought to be granted by this Bill so that one administration should suffice, whether the property was in India or in England.

said, that the questions of details raised by the hon. Members could best be discussed in Committee on the Bill. In reply to the question relative to the loan, by the Act of 1858 a loan of £8,000,000 was authorized to be raised on debentures. By the Bill of last year power was given to raise £7,000,000 by way of debenture, of which £5,000,000 had been raised when he came into office. After he had assumed office, he proposed to raise £5,000,000 more by debenture or stock, and at the time he obtained that power he stated, that there was an unexercised power of raising £2,000,000 as well as the £5,000,000 he proposed to raise. Instead of raising the latter amount by debentures, he raised it by stock. That operation bad succeeded better than anybody had expected. He postponed taking any steps with regard to the debentures until after that period. His object was to add to the stock and not to the debentures to the extent of the other sum of £2,000,000; it being acknowledged that the larger amount of stock the better, and his desire being not to add to the debenture debt. He had therefore issued debentures for £1,000,000 for a limited time, moaning to convert them into stock (which would be saleable as it was wanted) after the period of the debentures becoming payable. A second issue of debentures had taken place, which were not yet payable; but it would be satisfactory to the country to know that the western portion of the empire was about to make a considerable investment in the stock of the eastern portion of Her Majesty's dominions. He was happy to state that the Governor General of Canada had applied to him for upwards of a £1,000,000 Indian stock, to be appropriated for that colony. Independently of pecuniary considerations, it was a satisfactory thing that one portion of our colonial empire was prepared to take the surplus stock of the other. He had therefore willingly acceded to the request, and Canada had taken the whole of the first £1,000,000 issued on debentures, and a considerable amount of the second £1,000,000 of debentures, which would become payable in April. It was a gratifying circumstance that £1,300,000 of the second £2,000,000 of the Indian loan should be taken by the Canadian Government. The remainder would he available whenever it might be thought desirable that it should be taken by the public, for which there was no hurry. He was happy to say that the greater portion of Indian stock which had been created was taken, not by the great capitalists, but by persons of moderate means, and it had now passed into the category of permanent investments. That was the most satisfactory way in which the stock could be held, and it showed the confidence which was felt in the future of our Indian Empire. Motion agreed to. Bill read 2°.

said, he regarded the measure, on the whole, as a very valuable one, and thought the hon. and learned Member deserved the thanks of the House for the care and attention he had bestowed on a subject of considerable obscurity, which did not lie within the usual reading of even an accomplished practitioner at the bar. There was, however, one point in the Bill he wished to bring under the notice of the House. Although the monarchy of Great Britain was a constitutional and limited one, still the law assumed that the Crown was actually sovereign and supreme, and that no subject could sue the Crown. That, however, was merely a technical view of the matter, and, practically, the Crown submitted to be sued, but not in the ordinary way. The subject must approach the Crown by the presentation of a Petition to the Home Office, which was referred to the Attorney General, who, if he approved it, wrote on it "Let right be done." Having received his sanction, the action, could be proceeded with in the ordinary way. In the measure before the House it was proposed that the reference in the first instance should be made, not to the Attorney General, but to the Lord Chancellor, for the purpose, he presumed, of having the permission given by a judicial officer. Now, there was no reason whatever why the application should be made to the chief of any court of law, and if the Lord Chancellor were fixed upon as referee this inconvenience would arise, that he might be called upon to hear as an appeal a suit which he sanctioned in the first instance. It appeared to him that the application had better be made, as at present, to the Home Secretary, and through him to the Attorney General, and he hoped, therefore, the hon. and learned Member would consent to modify his Bill with that view in Cammittec.

said, he could not but admit that the proceeding by Petition of Right was somewhat cumbrous, but he doubted whether, as had been stated, it amounted to a denial of justice. He was willing, however, to give his approval to the general principle of the Bill, although he concurred with the right hon. Baronet (Sir G. Lewis) in the belief that the petition should be referred, as at present, to the Attorney General, and not to the Lord Chancellor. The privileges which the Crown possessed, such as choosing the venue in any suit with a subject, fixing the time for the trial to take place, and so on, he thought ought to be retained. At least, that was a question which would require careful consideration in Committee.

remarked, that he saw no reason why an individual in a suit between himself and the Crown should not have the same right to obtain justice as in a suit with another subject, and therefore cordially supported the valuable measure of his hon. and learned Friend.

said, that there were not wanting precedents for proceeding directly against the Crown. In matters connected with India a subject could bring an action against the Government as represented by the Secretary of State for India, and in the same way a suit could be instituted in Scotland against the Crown in the person of the Lord Advocate. Again, great inconvenience in cases where the Crown had to be sued in connection with matters relating to the Crimeam war having arisen, the War Office, in the case of contractors, sanctioned actions against the Government in order to surmount the difficulty. He did not, however, propose to establish the power of bringing actions directly against the Crown. The form of a Petition of Right was an essential feature of the measure, and he had introduced provisions expressly to guard against frivolous and vexatious proceedings on the part of subjects. He had thought it much more desirable that the petition should he submitted to an independent judicial mind, than to a law officer of the Crown, who might afterwards be called on to take part in the trial. The Bill, as originally introduced, did not provide for a reference to the Lord Chancellor; but a clause was subsequently embodied in it making such a reference necessary in all cases—the object being that the Lord Chancellor, as the highest judicial officer of the Crown, should nominate the court in which petitions were to be tried, and exercise a control over the proceedings.

said, in explanation, that his objection had not been answered by the hon. and learned Member. Under the present law there was no power of suing the Crown, except by a petition addressed to the Crown, and by previous consent given through the Attorney General to the institution of a civil suit against the Crown. The hon. and learned Member, by this Bill, said he maintained the Petition of Right; but he addressed the petition, not to the Crown, but to another quarter, and gave the Lord Chancellor, who was a judicial officer, the power of saying "Let right be done," instead of allowing that power to be exercised by the Attorney General. His (Sir G. Lewis's) objection to that was, that while retaining the form of the Petition of Right, the hon. and learned Member had substantially altered its character. He would suggest that when the Bill was in Committee it would be well to consider whether it would not be desirable to replace the name of the Attorney General for that of the Lord Chancellor.

complained that the hon. Member who had charge of it (Mr. Ayrton) had never stated its objects, and he asked him to do so.

said, in the last Session he had fully explained the objects contemplated by it; that he felt it altogether superfluous to repeat what he had then said. After having been amply discussed and considered it was passed by the House, but time did not admit of its being carried in the Lords. The first object of the measure was to repeal a statute which was passed under the threat of an invasion by France during a time of great tumult. The House, he thought, could hardly desire to continue the stringent provisions of an Act which was intended to give the Executive Government of that day additional powers of maintaining the peace of the country. It was necessary at that time, when an invasion was threatened, to take stringent measures to prevent correspondence with the enemy. Some classes of people, who were supposed to be mischievous, were required to register themselves, and so be brought immediately under the cognizance of the Government. Everything printed was registered under the eye of the Government, in order that no treason or sedition might be hatched. He trusted that society in this country at the present day was not to be considered in such a lamentable state as to render the continuance of such restrictions necessary. The Bill also sought to repeal a statute which provided that persons publishing newspapers should enter into recognizance for their good behaviour, as it were, and which did that in a manner, as he submitted, at variance with one of the first principles of law. Was it not monstrous, he asked, that, because a man undertook a laudable occupation, he was, at the very outset of it, to be treated as if he had been convicted of a crime? The Bill repealed a third statute which rather aggravated the evil to which he had just alluded by increasing the amount of the recognizances. That was the whole scope of the measure. The subject had been investigated both by the present and the late Government, and after consulting with the law officers of the Crown they came to the conclusion that all these were gratuitous and unnecessary restrictions, and ought to be dispensed with.

said, that understanding the Bill was exactly in the form in which it passed last Session, he should advise the House to agree to it.

said, he had no objection to the Bill, but he thought it right to object to the passing of a mere piece of paper of which the House knew nothing.

said, he had to move for leave to bring in a Bill for the Limitation of Actions and Suits by the Duke of Cornwall in relation to real property, and for authorizing certain leases of possessions of the Duchy. Some time previous to the year 1856 a question arose as between the Crown on the one hand, and the Duchy of Cornwall on the other, as to the property and rights in certain mines and minerals in the county of Cornwall lying between high and low watermark, on the shore of the sea, and under the beds of tidal streams or arms of the sea. The question being one of some importance, was referred to the decision of Sir John Patteson, one of the late Judges of the Court of Queen's Bench, and in 1856 he delivered his award and decided the question in favour of the Duchy. Another question of no moment, as to the title to minerals under the bed of the sea, was decided at the same time in favour of the Crown. Application was made in 1858 to confer on the award of Sir John Patteson the authority of Parliament and public law, and accordingly the Cornwall Submarine Act was passed, confirming that award. In the course of its passage through that House, how-ever, it was suggested by Gentlemen connected with the county of Cornwall that unless a further provision was added at some period to the Bill, injustice might be done, arising from a doubt which existed in various places as to the real proprietorship of the property. It appeared that an idea had even been entertained that neither the Crown nor the Duchy were entitled to the mines and minerals in question, but that they were the property of the neighbouring landowners, and in many cases expenses had been incurred with reference to the improvement of property which the parties would entirely lose unless a provision were made to give them some advantage which they did not at present possess. It was therefore urged that as they were about conclusively to determine that the property was in the Duchy, the Act of George III., which imposed a limit of 60 years, upon the legal maxim, Nullum tempus occurrit legi, ought to be applied to the Duchy, and an assurance was given that on an early opportunity the consent of Parliament should be asked, to put the Duchy, in respect of nullum tempus, on the same footing as the Crown. In redemption of that assurance the present Bill was proposed. It contained two short clauses—one extending the nullum tempus Act to the Duchy, and the other empowering the council of His Royal Highness, during his minority, to make certain leases. The leasing clause was to prevent any loss falling on persons embarking their capital in mines in respect of which there might be a disputed title.

, in the absence of the hon. and learned Member for Dundalk (Mr. Bowyer), said that he wished to move that the Return presented on the 17th day of August, 1857, in pursuance of an Order dated the 9th day of June, 1857, containing correspondence relating to the Roman Catholic chaplaincy of the workhouse of Bailieborough Union, be printed.

said, he felt it his duty to oppose the Motion. The correspondence had been moved for three Sessions ago by an hon. Gentleman, who, however, abstained from moving that it should be printed. It was at that moment upon the table, and consisted of a mass of paper nearly one foot in thickness; but whether it would be desirable to print it was a point for the House to consider. The question under discussion was, he be- lieved, whether the salary of a Roman Catholic chaplain to a workhouse should be £20 or £30. It was true that the cost of printing the Return would only be about £200; but as when it was printed few hon. Members, and certainly not he, for one, would read it, and as the hon. Member could see the Return in manuscript in the library of the House, he (Sir George Lewis) thought he was only acting in the interest of the public in proposing to negative the Motion of the hon. Gentleman.

observed, that since the Return had been ordered the Irish Bishops had communicated with the Government as to the salaries of Roman Catholic chaplains in workhouses; and the correspondence in question, although relating to an individual case, had a general interest

observed, that the correspondence referred to took place in 1857.