mail-bags. That there might be no mis- | Mr. Archibald to take, if he should think understanding on the subject, arising out proper-indeed I believe, they asked him in of unofficial communications, it was agreed that special instructions should be issued. Accordingly, on the 31st of October, Mr. Seward addressed the following letter to Mr. Welles : "Department of State, Washington, October 31, 1862. "Sir, It is thought expedient that instructions be given to the blockading and naval officers, that in case of capture of merchant vessels suspected or found to be vessels of the insurgents or contraband, the public mails of any friendly or neutral Power, duly certified and authenticated as such, shall not be searched or opened, but be put, as speedily as may be convenient, on their way to their designated destinations. This instruction, however, will not be deemed to protect simulated mail-bags, verified by forged certificates or counterfeited seals.-I have, &c., "WILLIAM H. SEWARD." Those were the instructions given to American naval officers, and no question arose with respect to them until the other day. I have just received the account of the preliminary proceedings in connection with that transaction. On the 4th of April, Mr. Archibald, Her Majesty's Consul at New York, was summoned to attend the Prize Commission in regard to the Peterhoff, which had been captured, as the IIouse is aware, by the United States cruisers. On arriving at the office, Mr. Archibald was shown the mail-bag taken from the vessel, which was under the seal of Her Majesty's Postmaster General. Mr. Archibald protested against that seal being broken and the bag examined, and required that it should be sent forward to its destination. The United States officers, however, in sisted that the bag should be opened, and that was accordingly done. The bag was found to contain several packages addressed to Matamoras. Nothing more took place on this occasion; and Mr. Archibald reported the matter to Lord Lyons. Lord Lyons immediately applied to Mr. Seward, and stated that the proceeding in question was in violation of the letter of the 31st of October, upon which he relied for the security of mails of this description certified and authenticated by Her Majesty's Postmaster General. Mr. Seward did not pay immediate attention to this remonstrance, but said the subject would require consideration. Subsequently, Mr. Archibald was again desired to attend the prize court, and was there informed by the counsel for the United States that it had been resolved to open the packages found in the mailbag. The Prize Commissioners requested the first instance to open-the packages, in order to ascertain what were bona fide letters, which should be forwarded to their destination, and what were papers referring to the cargo, which should be handed over to the prize court. Mr. Archibald, however, declined to be a party to such a course. If the court chose to order the packages to be opened, he said he would be present as a witness of the transaction, but could not approve or give any sanction to it. Upon this declaration the proceedings seem to have been suspended, and the opening of the packages was deferred. Mr. Archibald at once reported the matter to Lord Lyons. Lord Lyons went to Mr. Seward, and pointed out that, in accordance with the Order of the 31st of October, the letters ought to be replaced in the mail-bag, and forwarded to their destination. According to the latest intelligence which I have received, a telegram had been sent to the prize court, directing that the packages were not to be opened until further orders, but the Government of the United States had not come to any definite determination on the subject. These are the facts of the case as they at present stand. Seeing how very important the question is-seeing that the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown must, of course, be very carefully weighed by Her Majesty's Government before any steps are takenseeing that instructions will be sent out probably by the next mail, but that in the mean time fresh information may arrive which may quite alter the complexion of the affair-under these circumstances, I have to press for the indulgence of your Lordships in forbearing, for the present, to press for the production of the opinions of the Law Officers of the Crown; but to leave the question for the present in the hands of Her Majesty's Government. THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE said, no one could approve more than he did the discretion which the Government had exercised in postponing for the present the publication of the opinion of the Law Officers. He was also glad that the noble Earl had called attention to the agreement of the 31st of October as to the security of the mails. On the 11th of the present month the owners of the Sea Queen, in addressing an inquiry to the Government as to the amount of protection which would be afforded to the mails, referred to the dictum of an American Judge, to the effect that mail letters found on board a British ship could legally be opened in order to ascertain the character of the ship. Now, seeing that by the letter of October last that contention was waived on the part of the United States Government, it would have been courteous in the noble Earl, or in the noble Lord the Postmaster General, to have stated the understanding now in force. He wished to know what steps had been taken by Her Majesty's Government to obtain correct reports of the proceedings of the American prize courts. It was clearly of great importance that they should know whether there was any conflict of law between the prize courts and the United States Government. He understood that a number of ships had been seized, some of them as far back as fifteen months ago, and had been taken into port, but had not yet been brought before the prize court. The reason of that delay was believed by the owners to be the want of evidence against the vessels; but from whatever cause it occurred it was most unjustifiable. some well-considered public Bill on the subject. EARL GREY said, it had been clearly proved, before the Select Committee, that the formation of the railway about which this particular question arose was as certain to improve the land in its neighbourhood as drainage, buildings, or any other works; and there was no more difficulty in ascertaining the improved value of land arising from the construction of a railway, than there was in estimating the effect of any other improvements. It had been also clearly proved that there was very great difficulty in obtaining capital for the construction of this railway without the assistance of the landowners; and though some landowners were able to take shares to a large amount, many were not in a situation to do so unless they were enabled to raise money for that purpose upon their estates. The conclusions of the Committee were unanimous, and derived additional weight from the fact that the Committee was composed of noble Lords who had had great experience in similar matters. EARL RUSSELL said, he was not sure that complete reports of all the proceedings LORD EGERTON OF TATTON said, of the prize courts could be obtained; but that great doubts were entertained by he would take care to remind the British Mr. Derby, the Commissioner for DrainMinister in the United States of the image Works, whether it was practicable to portance of transmitting them whenever fix the additional value given to estates possible. CHARGING OF ENTAILED ESTATES REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE. LORD REDESDALE rose to call the attention of the House to the Report from the Select Committee on Charging of Entailed Estates for Railways [Parl P. No. 80], and to the Evidence given before that Committee. The noble Lord, who was very imperfectly heard, was understood to point to several recommendations of the Report, as showing the difficulty of dealing with the subject by legislation. Lord St. Leonards, who was unable to attend in his place that evening, had writ ten to him to say that nothing could be more objectionable than the scheme which the Committee had recommended. He (Lord Redesdale) had not put himself in opposition to the Report of the Committee; he had done all in his power to see it carried out, and he would continue to do So. But his recommendation would be, that nothing more should be done until the House should be prepared to pass by railways running through them; and if legislative powers were given, they should be clearly defined in a separate Bill brought in for that purpose; and that it should not be left to each separate Railway Bill to insert clauses, differing from each other in cach case; and that the powers of each general Act should be inserted in each particular measure, in the same manner as the Land Clauses Act is applied. LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY thought, in respect of the particular measure which had given rise to this inquiry. as considerable expense had been incurred by the promoters of this Bill, and the evidence was favourable, it would not be unreasonable to allow the measure to proceed to a second reading. It might then be left to the Select Committee which had considered this subject, to say whether the provisions were sufficient to secure that no injury would be done to existing or future rights. THE EARL OF BANDON would warn their Lordships, from the experience he had had in Ireland, that unless some definite rules were laid down, numberless Bills would be brought in by landed proprietors next Session asking permission to encumber their estates for the objects proposed. At the same time, he was rather in favour of the principle proposed to be introduced into the present Bill. LORD WODEHOUSE said, that no doubt in passing a Private Bill with a provision of this kind they would be sanctioning a general principle; and therefore they ought to do it with their eyes open. He admitted he did not see how it would be possible to refuse the introduction of similar Bills if this measure were agreed to. He thought it could not be disputed that a railway would in most cases confer a great benefit upon the property through which it passed; but the essential point was, that there should be security that the owners should receive in increased rents as much as would be sufficient to pay off the money advanced to the railway company. They had already sanctioned this principle in the case of drainage and buildings, and an improvement such as a railway was, in fact, even more permanent, except in the case of a railway not being worked, which, though just possible, was very unlikely. He argued, however, that it would be better that a general measure should be introduced. THE EARL OF AIRLIE said, there could be no question of the value to a particular district of railway communication, but he thought it was to be regretted that the Committee had not more largely consider ed what guarantees ought to be taken for the efficient working of the lines after they had been opened. That appeared to be the weak part of the scheme, and the evidence with regard to it was meagre and unsatisfactory. It was often the policy of large lines to stifle instead of facilitate short landowners' lines running into theirs, either because they brought too small a profit to the main line, or else in the hope of purchasing the branch on easy terms. Sometimes, too, a portion of the stock was issued on the express condition that the holders should not be called on to pay for their shares, the object being to comply with the Act of Parliament and bring into play the borrowing powers, which could not be exercised till two-thirds of the shares had been taken. By this means the line became hampered with a large amount of debt. He hoped, therefore, VOL. CLXX. [THIRD SERIES.] that if any general measure were introduced, care would be taken, not only to insure prudence in the construction of lines, but their efficient working afterwards. EARL GRANVILLE thought that it would be desirable that steps should be taken to obtain a decision of their Lordships' Ilouse upon this subject, but that no good would result from continuing a discussion by which that object would not be attained. LORD REDESDALE wished to urge upon their Lordships the importance of not allowing powers, such as had been referred to, to be introduced in any Private Bill; for if they did, they might depend upon it that they would not obtain public legislation upon it. If such power were granted to one Company this Session, they would have fifty applications for similar powers next year; and if it were found that they could go on in this way, there would be no public legislation, and a crude and bad system would grow up. On the other hand, if they refused to grant powers by Private Bills, there would be a probability of their passing a Public Act, which was a thing much to be desired. If the noble Earl (Earl Granville) wished it, he (Lord Redesdale) would himself bring the matter definitely before the House-probably by way of Resolution. Clause 4 (Conduct of Alkali Works). LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY moved the insertion in Clause 4 of words providing that in respect of every offence after a previous conviction, the owner shall be subject to a penalty not exceeding £100. THE EARL OF DERBY said, that he should have liked to see the minimum as well as the maximum amount of penalty fixed by the Bill; but as the noble Lord had done so much to meet his wishes, he should offer no opposition to the form of the Amendment. Amendment agreed to; Words inserted. Further Amendments made; Bill to be read 3 To-morrow. Bill as amended on Report (No. 81). 2 C House adjourned at a quarter before Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter before Five o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Monday, April 27, 1863. MINUTES.]-NEW MEMBER SWORN-Ion Trant WAYS AND MEANS- - EXCISE DUTIES-considered First Reading-Naval Medical Supplemental Fund INNKEEPERS' LIABILITY BILL. EXPLANATION. ther discussion than it could receive in its MR. DARBY GRIFFITII said, he wishheed to ask if the Chancellor of the Exche quer would take the second reading of the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill after eleven o'clock to-night? In MR. WYKEHAM MARTIN said, wished to offer a few words of explanation in respect to an absent individual. moving the second reading of the Inkeepers' Liability Bill on Wednesday, he read to the House a written statement regard. ing the loss of some notes, which occurred at the Grosvenor Hotel, and he drew certain inferences from the fact that the numbers of those notes were unknown. Since then, the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets had informed him of some facts bearing on the subject of which he (Mr. Wykeham Martin) was previously ignorant. He could only say, that if he had been aware of those facts before, he would never have drawn the inference which he had done, that the notes had not been lost; and he was now fully convinced that the loss actually occurred. PUBLIC BUSINESS-THE FINANCIAL MEASURES.-OBSERVATIONS. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, he wished to state the arrangement of business, so far as depended on him, relating to the financial measures before the House. The Order for the Committee of Ways and Means stood first on the Paper, and would come on immediately after the discussion on the Motion of the hon. Member for Devonport (Mr. Fer. rand), on which the Ilouse was probably about to enter. He proposed to take the Resolutions in that Committee to-night; at the same time, if it were thought that the Resolution on Railways required fur THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, he should be prepared, as far as he was concerned, to bring it on whenever he could. MR. WALPOLE said, he wished to know whether the right hon. Gentleman intended to make any statement to the House with regard to the two clauses in the Bill applicable to Charities with a view to making any alteration in them, or whether his statement would be in support of those provisions? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, his statement would be in support of those clauses. There were one or two minor questions in regard to which he wished to reserve a discretion. One, for instance, was raised with regard to the Patriotic Fund, which, from its peculiar nature, it was thought should be treated exceptionally; but, with regard to the general substance of the two clauses in the Bill, he should propose to take the final judgment of the House upon them. MR. CLAY said, he thought it would be inconvenient to proceed with the Bill after a late hour. LAW AND EQUITY (ENGLAND AND QUESTION. MR. LONGFIELD said, he wished to ask Mr. Attorney General, If the English and Irish Law and Equity Commission | proposed in one part to deal with a local have as yet agreed to any Report on the Act passed as a Private Bill, and it was entire or portions of the subject referred to referred to the Examiner, who had fixed them, and when there is any probability of next Thursday to inquire whether any their labours being concluded, and a Re-Standing Order had been interfered with. port made by them? In the event of his finding that any of the Standing Orders had been interfered with, the Bill would be referred to the Standing Orders Committee to determine what course should be pursued. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL said, he was enabled to state, on the authority of the Master of the Rolls in England, that the Commissioners expected to issue the substance of their Report within a month from that time. ATTACK ON THE LATE MR. FON BLANQUE.-QUESTION. LANCASHIRE DISTRESS. MR. ALDERMAN SALOMONS said, he MR. DARBY GRIFFITH said, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he has any objection to lay upon the table of the House the Papers and Correspondence re-ed to the prevailing opinion that it ought lating to the attack, by which his life was endangered, made on Mr. Fonblanque, the theu Consul General at Belgrade, by a soldier of the Turkish garrison, in or about the year 1856 ? MR. LAYARD, in reply, said, he did not think it would be any advantage to lay on the table those papers. Seven years ago an attack had been made on the late Mr. Fonblanque, then Her Majesty's Consul General at Belgrade, by a half-mad soldier; the Turkish Government expressed their great regret, and inade the fullest reparation. Punishment was also inflicted on the soldier and his accomplices. The matter was so long past that no good would arise from the production of the papers. THE CITY AND METROPOLITAN POLICE. QUESTION. now to unite with Lord Derby's Central Committee; also the number of persons composing the Mansion House Committee; and if there exists a General Committee of the Subscribers to the Fund to whom this Question might be referred ? MR. W. CUBITT said, in reply to the first Question of the hon. Gentleman, he wished to state that the Mansion House Committee was not aware that the opinion to which he alluded was so very prevalent as to justify them in making any change of their proceedings. Contributions from all classes continued to come in, and were placed under their administration. With regard to the second Question, the number of the Committee was nine. It consisted of-The Lord Mayor, President; the Member for Andover, Treasurer; Mr. John Armitage, of the House of Armitage & Co., Australian merchants, Great St. COLONEL FRENCH said, he would Helen's; Mr. Charles Barber, of Barber, beg to ask the Secretary of State for Nophew, & Co., East India and Colonial the Home Department, Whether, hav- brokers, Fenchurch Street; Mr. W. J. R. ing obtained leave to introduce, as a Cotton, of Culverwell, Brooks & Co., hide, Public measure, a Bill for amalgamat-skin, and tallow brokers, College Hill; ing the City and Metropolitan Police, Mr. Dilberoglue, of Dilberoglue, Cavaesy, which, as it related to matters of Po- & Co., Greek merchants, Threadneed o lice, and proposes to deal with the power of a Corporation whose constables are appointed under a private Act of Parliament, must, under the rules of this House, be considered a Private Bill; whe ther or no he means, no notice having been served, to proceed any further with his proposed measure? Street; Mr. Howes, of Cook, Son, & Co., St. Paul's Churchyard; Mr. Lycett, of Dent, Allcroft, Lycett, & Co., Wood Street, Cheapside; Mr. William Morley, of W. & R. Morley, Gutter Lane, Cheapside, Manchester warehouseman. The Secretary was Mr. Joseph Gibbs, a gentleman formerly at the Bar, now private secretary to the Lord Mayor. Messrs. Coleman, Turquand, & Co., the eminent acPrece-countants, generously undertook the periodical audit of the accounts. They had SIR GEORGE GREY said, in reply, that his hou. and gallant Friend was mistaken in the supposition he made. dent had been strictly followed. The Bill |