BRITISH KAFFRARIA.-QUESTION. MR. ARTHUR MILLS said, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether any Memorials or Petitions have been recently addressed to Her Majesty's Government by the inhabitants of British Kaffraria respecting the proposed annexation of that Province to the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope and, if so, whether there will be any objection to lay such Documents upon the table of the House? MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE said, in reply, that certain petitions had been received praying that British Kaffraria might not be annexed to the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope, but it was considered that it was but a small community and not old enough to judge for itself in this matter. The Governor of the Cape of Good Hope was taking measures for annexing that community to the Colony. Under present circumstances it was not advisable to produce the correspondence. THE NAVAL RESERVE AND THE BLUE ENSIGN.-QUESTION. MR. CAVE said, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, When the decision of the Lords of the Admiralty will be made known respecting the use of the Blue Ensign in merchant ships partly officered and manned by the Naval Reserve, according to the terms of their Lordships' letter of the 5th February 1863 ? LORD CLARENCE PAGET said, that when many shipowners of London asked whether, under certain conditions as to their ships being partly manned by officers and seamen of the Royal Naval Reserve, their ships would be permitted to carry the Blue Ensign of Her Majesty's fleet, the Admiralty replied that it would allow them to carry the flag with a certain device in it, so as to denote the flag of a Naval Reserve ship. The shipowners of London objected to the device, and, in fact, declined to carry such a flag, as they wished for one without any special device. Since then he understood that many shipowners had expressed a desire to be permitted to carry the blue flag under the conditions prescribed by the Admiralty, with the device suggested. In reply to a similar Question, of which notice had been given by the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Lindsay), he had to state that communications were going on between the Admiralty and the Board of Trade as to the issue of precise regulations for the use of the Blue Ensign by ships partly manned and officered by the Naval Reserve. VACANT GROUND AT CARLTON TERRACE.-QUESTION. SIR JOHN SHELLEY said, he rose to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether a Report was made to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests by a Sworn Surveyor of the value of the site of the Stables lately pulled down at the east end of Carlton Terrace; whether any public intimation was given that that site was in the market, in order to ascertain what value the public would be disposed to give for such a valuable piece of ground; and whether he has any objection to produce a copy of any such Report, together with the Lease of the site as granted to the present lessees, Sir Morton Peto and Messrs. Trollope? MR. PEEL, in reply, said, a valuation verified by a declaration in the usual way, was made of the property referred toabout three-quarters of an acre of landand was valued to let upon building leases at about £1,400 a year. A number of applications were made for the ground, and, after several of the applicants had refused the terms offered by the Government, the property was let at a rent which was declared to be its full value. If that full value had not been obtained, steps would have been taken to offer the ground for public tender. There would be no objection to produce the valuation of the surveyor and the declaration. As to the leases of the site, the houses must be completed upon it before the lessees would be entitled to receive leases. Afterwards SIR MORTON PETO said, that as his name had been mentioned in a Question put on the subject during the earlier part of the evening, he wished to say, that so far from having derived any advantage from the lease which he had obtained from the Government of this particular site, he had gone to the officer of the department to say that he did not require it, and that the disappointed parties were welcome to it at the price which he had paid for it. SIR JOHN SHELLEY said, his hon. Friend had misunderstood the object with which he put the Question. In these days, when they were looking everywhere for an eligible site for public offices, he thought that such a site as Carlton House Rise | Mr. Christie had shown, under all the cirought not to be disposed of by private con- cumstances, "a reckless disregard of truth tract, or for any less price than the utmost which is not characteristic of a gentleman, which the public would give for that pur- and certainly not commendable in the repose. He was glad to hear that his hon. presentative of the English nation." After Friend, who was a good judge of the value, that passage had been quoted, it was said had given a full price for it; but he be- by the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. lieved it would have fetched a larger price Bramley-Moore) that some colour had had it been generally known to be in the been given to that assertion by Mr. Chrismarket. He hoped that by putting the tie's conduct. I have therefore taken Question he should not be understood as upon myself, as the language was most implying that his hon. Friend was in any painful to Mr. Christie and his friends, to way to blame. put this notice on the paper. It is, I know, the universal habit of Gentlemen in CUSTOMS AND INLAND REVENUE BILL. this House, when they know they have QUESTION. MR. LYGON said, he would beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he intends to persevere in the Motion of which he has given notice, to move, in the event of this Bill passing the Committee that night, the remaining stages? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE QUER said, his intention was to give the noble Lord the Member for Stamford (Lord Robert Cecil) an opportunity, on the Motion for the Third Reading, of raising a discussion upon the notice he had announced. Owing, however, to some defect in intimating that intention, the Order was set down for going into Committee. Under these circumstances it would not be regular to proceed with the subsequent stages, and he should not propose to go further than the Committee that night. BRAZIL - CONDUCT OF MR. CHRISTIE. QUESTION. MR. MONCKTON MILNES: I wish to put a question to the noble Lord at the head of the Government respecting the conduct of Mr. Christie, Her Majesty's mi nister at Brazil, and the circumstances to which my question refers affect the personal credit and honour of a public functionary. I must ask the House to allow me to briefly state the facts of the case. It seems that a gentleman, holding the office of Minister of the United States at the Court of Brazil, had addressed to Earl Russell a letter impugning the honour and credit of Mr. Christie. Any correspondence of that kind, of course, would be only of a private character, and therefore would not be deserving of the notice of the House. But in the report of what took place upon a former occasion in this House I find that the words of the despatch have been quoted in the House, to the effect that given pain unnecessarily to any person ward to set themselves right. I had hoped alluded to in debate, at once to come forthe hon. Member for Lincoln would have done that. fore I have no resource but to ask the GoHe has not done it, and therevernment, in the person of the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether there is anything that he is aware of in Mr. Christie's conduct to give any colour whatever to the conduct in the matter of the Prince of assertion quoted; whether Mr. Christie's Wales and her Majesty's ship Forte has received the full and entire approbation ther the letter of General Webb has reof Her Majesty's Government; and whe ceived taken into consideration by Earl Russell? any countenance, or has been VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: As to Mr. Christie, he sat for some time as a Member of this House, and there are many hon. which he performed his duties here. I can Members who will recollect the ability with only say that Mr. Christie is a gentleman and a man of honour; and, as to his veracity, no man can question that veracity with any semblance whatever of truth. With regard to General Webb, I know nothing of him, and therefore I shall say nothing. But as to his letter, this I will say that it was no doubt treated by my noble Friend at the head of the Foreign Office with the entire disregard which it justly merited; and if any such letter had been written by a British diplomatist, I am quite sure that my noble Friend would, without hesitation, have instantly dismissed that person as having proved himself totally unfit and unsuited to hold any commission under Her Majesty. With respect to Mr. Christie's conduct in the matter to which my hon. Friend alludes-that is to say, in the nego tiations and in the demands made upon the Government of Brazil-I have the satisfaction of stating that that conduct has been fully and entirely approved by Her Majesty's posed it was impossible to quarrel with Government. Mr. Christie acted with great him. But he is included in the batch. judgment, and with all the forbearance Now, allusion has been made to an extract which is compatible with a proper and that I read to this House from a letter faithful performance of the orders which written by General Webb to Earl Russell. he had received, and therefore there was I thought I was justified in reading that no ground whatever for imputing to him extract, because General Webb holds the anything to which any foreign Government same position in Rio Janeiro that is held could take the slightest objection. But it by Mr. Christic, and therefore was his is a well-known practice in countries which equal in all respects. He also had a quarare in that peculiar state of progress in rel with Mr. Christie, and he took the which Brazil happens at the present mo- means of making this known in a despatch ment to find itself, that when their injus- to Earl Russell. That despatch had betice or misconduct obliges a foreign Go- come public property. It has been lithovernment to use compulsion in order to graphed and extensively circulated, first obtain the redress which has been denied to privately, and then in New York through friendly representation, they endeavour to the medium of the press. It was also pubtake their revenge by pouring forth every lished in England, and therefore I could sort of calumny upon the agent who has not see that I was not justified in reading been the instrument of the Government to the House an extract from the despatch using those means. I can assure the of General Webb. I also quoted from Mr. House, however, that such proceedings Christie's own despatches to show that he never will, in any degree, damage a British never would admit anything that was stated representative in the opinion of Her by the Brazilian authorities. It was no matMajesty's Government. ter what was said or done, he would receive MR. BRAMLEY-MOORE: After the nothing, heed nothing, but relied entirely statement of the noble Lord, and after upon his own statements, many of which I being alluded to in so personal a manner am led to believe were erroneous; and, as I by the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. M. stated on a former occasion, his conduct was Milnes), I may be permitted to make some such as to give some colour to the charges observations. I certainly feel some sur-made against him by General Webb. Now, prise at the statement of the noble Lord Sir, in support of this, I beg to call the atthat Mr. Christie has conducted matters intention of the House to a despatch of Mr. Rio Janeiro with so much moderation. Christie's dated Rio Janeiro, 15th of FebWhy, Sir, people there are perfectly capa-ruary 1863. In this despatch there are ble of judging.["Order!"] I beg, Sir, to put myself in order, to move the adjournment of the House. It is perfectly notorious in Rio Janeiro, where there is a community capable of judging much better of the action of the Government than we who are at a distance, that Mr. Christie's conduct in Rio Janeiro and in respect to the Brazilian Government was anything but moderate or conciliatory. If any hon. Member has carefully read the volume of despatches relating to the question, he will have seen that there is a tone of arrogance and insolence to the Government of Brazil altogether unprecedented on the part of a Minister of England towards a foreign Go-haste, published it in the Gazette along vernment. Why, it is notorious that Mr. Christie's irritability of temper has caused him to quarrel with every diplomatic body in Rio Janeiro. He quarrelled with the Austrian, the Russian, and the Prussian ministers, and even with the Pope's Nuncio. [Laughter.] I mention the Pope's Nuncio particularly, because he is well known to be so mild and gentle that it would be sup distinct statements made to Earl Russell conveying to his mind that he (Mr. Christie) had the support of the merchants as a body in Rio Janeiro. This despatch was accompanied by a document signed by a number of the merchants, which also conveyed to the mind of Earl Russell that the wealth, the intelligence, and the respectability of the body of merchants in Rio were embodied in that address to Mr. Christie, and so much importance was attached to this address of the merchants as showing that Mr. Christie's conduct had met with general approbation, that when it reached England, the Foreign Office, in all possible with Earl Russell's own despatch. The statements in the despatch of Mr. Christie, I venture to state, and I do so of my own knowledge, were most inaccurate and erroneous, and were calculated to convey a totally wrong impression to Earl Russell and the public mind, and unfortunately it did convey a wrong impression. Many parties out of doors spoke to me in reference to it, and said, "There is Mr. Christie alto- have been much better informed. There gether exonerated from blame as well as can be no doubt whatever that a great deal the Government in the transactions with of personality occurred between Mr. ChrisBrazil." Permit me to state, that in the tie and the authorities in Rio Janeiro; and, address which Mr. Christie received, and I believe, from all the accounts I have rein his despatch to Earl Russell, it is stated ceived, that he has made this, to a certain that the number of houses in Rio Janeiro extent, a personal question; and from his are forty, and that the eighteen whose making it a personal matter have resulted signatures were attached represented the most serious consequences, not only to the wealth and intelligence of the place, and British trade with Brazil, but to the whole that this address, therefore, would be a community. The conduct of Mr. Christie most satisfactory document for Earl Rus- has given great power to the Republican sell to receive. Why, Sir, this statement party there, which may even endanger the conveyed to the noble Lord's mind and existence of the monarchy, the only mothe minds of the British public that Mr. narchy existing in that part of the world; Christie had received the approbation and and I say, that instead of sending out Misanction of the British merchants of Rio nisters of such a temperament as Mr. ChrisJaneiro. I deny this altogether. So far tie, we ought to foster and encourage a from this being the case, forty of the old Government like the Brazilian Government, houses of Rio Janeiro, combining the re- which has shown such perfect good faith in spectability, the wealth, and the intelligence all its engagements. I do not at all know of the place, refused to sign it at all; and on what grounds the noble Lord can say consequently to say that the eighteen sig- that the conduct of Mr. Christie merits the natures to the address represent the British most perfect and unqualified approbation community there, and to convey to Earl of the Government. Mr. Christie sent one Russell's mind that Mr. Christie had the of his attachés home in disgrace, but he approbation of the British community in was sent back, though on his arrival there Rio is altogether erroneous. Mr. Christie Mr. Christie refused to see him-an event may have said this in ignorance and good calculated to have a bad effect on British faith, but from his position he ought to interests. We know also that he left Rio have been better informed. In another without taking leave of the Emperor. I part of that despatch Mr. Christie said think I have given sufficient reasons to there were a few dissentients, and they justify me in saying that Mr. Christie has would take every means in their power to made a great number of exaggerated statelead parties in England to believe that he ments and even mis-statements. If he has had not the community with him. In this done this in good faith and ignorance, I despatch he makes use of these words :- believe that he ought to have known bet"Unanimity can never be expected. Al- ter; but British interests have suffered most all respectable Englishmen here, I severely at his hands, and it will be a very believe, understand the question and their long time before the same amicable reladuty.' I entirely concur in this remark. tions can be restored between the two The Englishmen in Rio are a highly intelli- countries. It is the opinion of the large gent class, and they not only understand majority of the British community at Rio and have a thorough knowledge of the that this state of things is owing to Mr. Chrisquestions at issue, but, as Mr. Christie tie's want of tact and management, and says, they know their duty. They did the unfortunate irritability of his temper. know their duty when forty of the most It was a case in which special tact was nerespectable houses in that city refused to cessary in conducting negotiations with sign the address to him, and altogether Brazil, because this charge about the murwithheld their sanction from his conduct.der of the seamen has never been substanLooking at the inaccurate impression conveyed by Mr. Christie on this subject, I say it is not a far-fetched conclusion to suppose that it gives colour to the statement that he has committed himself to other inaccuracies. I do not charge Mr. Christie with having made wilful misrepresentations, but he has made misrepresentations; and if he has made them in good faith, then I say that in his position he ought to tiated-there never has been a tittle of evidence to prove it, and the grounds on which Mr. Christie made the charge rested on the statement of a gentleman whom he himself states to have been labouring under mental delusion. I do therefore say, that what has arisen out of this we may attribute entirely to Mr. Christie's mismanagement, and therefore I do not see that I have any apology or explanation whatever to make for having read an extract from General would secure them against future dangers, Webb. General Webb was Mr. Christie's on the other they may have thought it equal in position. He wrote a despatch to convenient to find fault with the British Earl Russell that was made public through Government on account of measures which, the press in both countries, and became, in truth, they were very glad to see adopttherefore, public property; and I maintained. That I believe to be the real state of that I was justified in making a quotation the case; but, undoubtedly, a great mafrom it in this House. The hon. Member jority of those merchants openly expressed concluded by moving the adjournment of the House. VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: Sir, I do not wish to delay the House by prolonging this discussion, but I must object to the grounds on which the hon. Member who has just sat down is desirous of placing the judgment to be formed on Mr. Christie's conduct. The hon. Member asserts what I have no doubt he believes to be quite true with respect to all the merchants in Rionamely, that they have expressed their disapprobation of Mr. Christie's conduct. [Mr. BRAMLEY-MOORE: I said a large majority of them.] Well, a majority, large or small, but I contend that is nothing to the purpose. It is not for a body of merchants in a foreign country to judge of the expediency of orders transmitted from Iler Majesty's Government at home to be executed by an agent abroad. It is for the Government to judge of a matter of that kind, and not for those on the spot engaged in commerce. But my information differs entirely from that of the hon. Gentleman. He says the majority of the most respectable merchants disapprove, I will not say Mr. Christie's proceedings, because they were the proceedings of Her Majesty's Government, Mr. Christie having done what he was ordered, and having no other alternative than to perform that duty. I am informed, not by Mr. Christie himself, but by other persons on whose judgment and truthfulness I have the greatest dependence, that a large majority of the British merchants at Rio entirely approve the proceedings of Her Majesty's Government; but whereas it happens that the custom of trade in Brazil is such that those persons who trade there have always large sums due to them by the Brazilian merchants, it is possible, that entirely distrusting the Brazilian Government, some of those British merchants may have thought that those disputes might place their debts in danger; and that while on the one hand they were glad the British Government had adopted measures such as their approval of what Mr. Christie had orders to do. The hon. Gentleman has that the charge with reference to the stated what I was sorry to hear repeated murder of the crew of the Prince of Wales was founded on the evidence of a gentleman whose mind was not in such a state as to justify Mr. Christie in acting on his statement. Now, Sir, that is a very unjust, a very ungenerous, and a very unfounded observation. I believe Mr. Vereker was for a short time suffering under an illness to which anybody-even the hon. Member for Lincoln-may be liable, but which in no way altered his permanent state of health or rendered his testimony less deserving of credit. Though we have no positive evidence on the subject, we have reason to believe that the crews landed on the beach, and, though carrying arms for the protection of themselves and their property, were overpowered by the people of the district, who, with lassos, dragged them from their shelter, and then murdered them in a barbarous and inhuman manner. The Government have no evidence to enable them to assert that as a positive fact, but I believe it is exactly what happened. MR. E. P. BOUVERIE: Sir, the hon. Member for Lincoln has stated that he felt himself entitled to quote in this House a certain statement, made by a person called General Webb, because it had been circulated elsewhere. Now, that statement was a calumnya calumny on the character of an honourable and an absent man. Therefore, I hold the hon. Gentleman had no right to make that quotation and give it the circulation which every statement made in this House acquires, being himself privileged as a Member of Parliament from being called to account for having endorsed such an assertion. I think nothing can be more natural than that a gentleman like Mr. Christie, known to many of us as having been a Member of this House, and also known as a gentleman of high character and honour, should feel much offended at finding that such a statement as this of General Webb-to which I believe no man in his senses attaches any weight-should |