sent to Mr. Bishop's pardon, but had re- | favour, release Mr. Bishop." I repeat, mitted the hard labour, and had com- therefore, I have been a better friend to muted the service in the galleys to im- him than the noble Marquess in bringing prisonment in a fortress. In the begin- the case before your Lordships and the ning of the year, on the 3rd of February public, and so far rather committing the 1863, Mr. Bishop was transferred from Italian Government by the course he has Naples to the fortress of Gavi, at the foot taken. The Italian Government have of the Appenines. On the 14th of Feb- considerable dread of my noble Friendruary, an Attaché to Her Majesty's Le- he is a very formidable person to them; gation at Turin was sent to Gavi to see and he can hardly expect the Italian GoMr. Bishop. The climate was stated to vernment to release one of his friends bebe too severe for him. Mr. West was, cause he is his friend; but, at all events, on the 23rd of February instructed to my good offices have not been withheld. make a strong protest as to the treatment My noble Friend has reverted to the time of Mr. Bishop as a political prisoner, and when we were both in Italy, living together again to request his release in the strong- as friends. That is a time to which I can est manner. The result was, that on the always refer with pleasure. At the same 28th of February last the Minister for time, my noble Friend says that the society Foreign Affairs informed Sir James Hud- in which I mixed was different from that son that Bishop would be transferred to with which he was familiar, mine being an infirmary at Alessandria; and, that on of the kind called "Liberal." That is the first fitting occasion he would propose very true. My noble Friend had a perhis pardon to the King. On the 5th of fect right to have his own friends and March, Sir James Hudson reported Mr. political associates in Italy; but I thought Bishop's removal to Alessandria; and since the society I mixed with much more pleathen we have heard nothing more about sant, because those Italians with whom I him. We have the Foreign Minister, associated were full of knowledge in literahowever, declaring that on the first fit- ture, full of all taste in regard to art, and ting occasion he would propose his pardon therefore, setting aside their opinions, they to the King. Now, my Lords, I ask, is made a very agreeable society, to which this a case in which the noble Marquess I was very happy to be admitted. I can fairly represent me as having been can remember, when they complained of indifferent to these applications on behalf the illegal things that were done by of Mr. Bishop? Mr. Bishop had involved the Grand Duke, I said, “ Why don't himself in the political troubles and con- you send up a petition?" "Oh," they said, spiracies of Italy. Everybody knows that" but that is illegal. Not more than three a man who engages in a treasonable conspiracy does so at his own risk; he perils his life for an object that he thinks worthy the sacrifice if he should fail. Mr. Bishop being found with these letters in his possession, he was duly brought to trial by the Italian Government, before a duly-constituted tribunal; he was convicted by the jury, and sentenced by the judge according to law, which sentence has been commuted; and we have since received the assurance from the Italian Government, that on the first fitting occasion they will propose that he shall be pardoned. I cannot help believing your Lordships will think that I have been a better friend to Mr. Bishop than the noble Marquess who has to-night brought forward his case. I must say I think that Her Majesty's Government have adopted the best course they could in reference to this matter. I said, on one occasion, to the Italian Minister, whom I knew very well-"If you would do me a personal persons are allowed to petition, and we should be punished. Besides which, it is a principle with us not to exceed the law in any way." There was nothing very treasonable in that. I certainly did understand, that if ever there should come a time of crisis for Italy-if the Grand Duke joined Austria against Italy—it was not likely their loyalty would stand that test, because, as they said, "We are for Italy above all." The Grand Duke did, unfortunately, decide for Austria and against Italy, and the result is known. A friend of mine, Signor Salvagnuoli, came to me when my noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Derby) was at the head of the Government, and asked me, "What if we endeavour to oppose Austria? Would the House of Commons be ready to assist us?" I said, "Not the least in the world. There's no chance of their assisting you at all." Upon which Signor Salvagnuoli replied, "Then, our only chance is to go to France." I replied to him in the words of an Italian sonnet, which warned them against using the sword of another nation to work out the freedom of their own; but, at the time, I had not the smallest doubt, that if Signor Salvagnuoli, Count Cavour, and other Italian patriots could obtain the assistance of France in their endeavours to overthrow the domination of Austria in Italy, they would gladly accept it. And I must say that I am not now prepared to blame either of those men for that or rather to make it a reproach to their memory, for they have now both departed this life. If, as they believed, and as I believed (for I had witnessed the proceedings of the Governments of Italy at that time), these Governments, and especially that of Naples, were a disgrace to Europe, and a source of suffering and misfortune to the people under them, I am not surprised that these men should have availed themselves of any means within their reach for getting rid of them. With regard to the present state of Italy, I have nothing to add to what was so well said by my noble Friend on the cross bench (Earl Grey). The Italians are making a great experiment to carry on the Government of Italy, one and free. They are endeavouring to give effect to their constitution; and I say, may they prosper in that attempt! There was, as my noble Friend truly stated, a Revolution in this country, of which we are very proud, and by which we gained our liberties. Yet many people think that the conduct of our Government after the Revolution was not altogether without fault. Some people think that the execution at Glencoe was a harsh measure, and that unnecessary severities were exercised after the surrender of Limerick. Certainly, all the acts of our own Government at that period were not so scrupulously without fault or spot that some foreign Government might not have had much to say against it. I really think, my Lords, that the time. has come when we ought to respect this Italian Government, and not attempt to interfere with the decisions of its tribunals, or the general conduct of its administration. The Italians are a nation of extraordinary quickness and talent, now engaged in building up a Government which shall give to every man freedom, and thereby open the way to prosperity and happiness. We should all rejoice in the prospect that lies before them, and not attempt, like my noble Friend opposite, to find out particular defects, and endeavour to cast blame on them for what is perhaps the inevitable consequence of the changes that have taken place. THE MARQUESS OF NORMANBY then replied. As his noble Friend accused him of constantly depreciating the Italian Government, he would ask him whether he read the authentic and official reports of what took place in the Turin Chambers, because it was upon those documents that he founded his accusations against that Government. One of the King's Ministers boasted in the Turin Parliament that he had himself conspired in 1859. In the same Chambers it was stated, on the authority of a Parliamentary Commission, that in a year and a half 4,000 persons were killed in cold blood by the King's troops. Moreover, according to the declaration of a public man made in the Turin Parliament, there were now 18,000 political prisoners in Naples. Would his noble Friend call that an improvement? These were some of the things which made the rule of King Victor Emmanuel in Naples so different from that which everybody two years ago expected it would be. He was not to be deterred from telling the truth, and he must claim to exercise his privilege as a Member of that House whenever he thought that circumstances demanded it. He had lived longer in Italy than his noble Friend, and he ventured to say that in his opinion the independence of that country was as assured as its unity was impossible. House adjourned at a quarter before Eight o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Monday, May 11, 1863. MINUTES.]-PUBLIC BILLS-Second Reading— Church Building and New Parishes Act Amendment [Bill 82], and committed to Select Committee; Sale of Mill Sites, &c. (Ireland)* [Bill 105]; Drainage and Improvement of Land (Ireland) [Bill 106]; Poor Removal (No. 2) Referred to Select Committee-Church Buildings [Mr. Herbert] [Bill 96]. and New Parishes Act Amendment [Bill 82]. Select Committee nominated-Partnership Law Amendment [Bill 26]. Committee-Prison Ministers [Bill 24]; Customs and Inland Revenue [Bill 91] (on Re-Committal); Inland Revenue [Bill 97]; Marriages Registration (Ireland) * [Mr. Monsell] [Bill 39]. Report-Prison Ministers [Bill 24]; Customs and DIVISION OF THE NORTHERN CIRCUIT. QUESTION. MR. HADFIELD said, he would beg to ask Mr. Attorney General, Whether the Government intend to make any, and what, alteration in the existing Circuit arrangements; whether such arrangements will be completed before the next Summer Assizes, and will include a Winter Circuit, and in what places; and whether, on account of its extent and population, Yorkshire, like Lancashire, will have the privilege of Assizes in three towns, and, particularly, whether the Southern section of the County, comprising the Wapentake of Strafforth and Tickhill, will be allowed the privilege of an Assize Town? MR. LAYARD said, in reply, that a protest was sent to the Pasha commanding the fortress, but a copy of that protest was not sent to the Foreign Office. He had requested that a copy should be supplied to the Foreign Office, and he did not at present see any objection to lay it on the table of the House. Upon receiving it, however, he would communicate with his hon. Friend on the subject. BRIGANDAGE IN SOUTHERN ITALY. QUESTION. MR. HENNESSY said, he wished to ask a question of the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Three Despatches had been received from Mr. Odo Russell on a matter involving the relations of this Country with France, and also involving questions of personal honour. The first of those Despatches was to the effect that certain brigands had crossed the Papal frontier in French uniforms. The second Despatch from Mr. Russell stated that he had been mistaken-that no such event had taken place, and withdrawing the statement. The third Despatch, of which they only heard the other evening, was, it seemed, to the effect that the second Des statement, and informed Her Majesty's Government that what he (Mr. Russell) had first stated was correct. The question he (Mr. Hennessy) therefore desired to put was, Whether that third Despatch, of so serious a nature, had been communicated to the French Government? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL said, in reply, that the alteration in the existing Circuit arrangements had been for some time under the consideration of the Government, and that some alteration should take place could not be doubted; but the difficulty was to determine upon the par-patch was incorrect. It reiterated the first ticular arrangements to be made. Various projects had been under consideration, and within the last few days a written statement had been received by the Lord Chancellor from the Lord Chief Justice and the two other chief Judges, containing important suggestions on the subject. These suggestions demanded the fullest consideration. Time had not been afforded for that consideration, and it was hardly likely that any arrangements would be completed before the next Summer Assizes. In this stage of the inquiry the other questions put by the hon. Gentleman were rather premature. BOMBARDMENT OF BELGRADE. MR. DARBY GRIFFITH said, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether a written protest against the bombardment of Belgrade was not made and signed by the English and European Consuls, on the 17th of June 1862, which does not appear in the Blue Book on that subject; and, if so, whether it will be laid upon the table of the House? MR. LAYARD: The hon. Gentleman has given me no notice of his Question. Perhaps he will repeat it to-morrow. GREECE-THRONE OF GREECE. QUESTION. MR. BAILLIE COCHRANE said, he would beg to ask, Whether any final decision has been come to respecting the Throne of Greece, and whether Prince William of Denmark has accepted it or not? VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: There is no final decision, but I have reason to think that arrangements will be concluded to make Prince William King of Greece. THE VOLUNTEER FORCE. SIR WILLIAM SCOTT said, he would beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, Whether the Act 44 Geo. III., c. | which there was, perhaps, more religious 54, or any regulations for the conduct of animosity than in any other in England, the Volunteer Force, framed under the and the effect of the Bill would be to proprovisions of that or any other Act relating duce the greatest discord among the magisthereto, renders Volunteers amenable to a trates, and great antagonism again between Military Court of Inquiry, or to Military them and the county ratepayers. He did Law, when they are not under arms, on not share in the sentiments of the Protestant duty, or in the uniform and accoutrements Alliance, that the measure would underof the corps? mine the influence of the Church of England; but he could not understand why the Government, in introducing it, should not have made it a condition that a gaol should be established in some central part of the kingdom to which Roman Catholic prisoners should be committed, where the necessary provision should be made for their religious instruction. He begged to move the omission from the clause of the words which provided that the payment of those chaplains should be made out of the county rates. THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON said, in reply, that no Volunteers, except members of the permanent staff, were amenable to military law, unless when they were called out for actual service, nor was a Volunteer amenable to a military Court of Inquiry. It was within the power of Commanding Officers of Volunteer Corps, if they thought fit, to summon a Volunteer Court of Inquiry, which had only power to take evidence and report for the information of the Lord Lieutenant of the County. GUNPOWDER IN EDINBURGH CASTLE. QUESTION. Another Amendment proposed, in page 2, line 12, to leave out from the words "such sum," to the word "expenses," in line 15, inclusive. MR. BLACK said, he would beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, What fect of the Amendment would be to take SIR GEORGE GREY said, that the efhas been the average quantity of Gunpow-the payment out of the ordinary rule. At der kept in the Castle of Edinburgh during present the cost of the maintenance of the last twelve months, distinguishing the various forms in which it has been made prisoners was borne by the country, but the cost of the establishment was a up, and whether the quantity will not be local charge. If the Amendment were diminished; and whether there will be any carried, an exception would be introduced objection to furnish Copies of any Reports to the general practice. As to the which may have been made on the suberection of a central prison, it would not ject of this magazine by Officers of the Royal Engineers during the last four years? get rid of the objection urged by the hon. THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON said, establishment would still have to be borne Gentleman (Mr. Packe.) The cost of the in reply, that he had not all the inforby the different localities ratably in promation asked for by the hon. Member, but the quantity of powder now stored in portion to the number of Roman Catholic convicts sent by them to the central prison. Edinburgh Castle was 250 barrels, which MR. BENTINCK said, he apprehendwas to be the maximum. The Lord Pro-ed that the object of his hon. Friend vost of Edinburgh had been made acquainted with the arrangements. PRISON MINISTERS BILL-[BILL 24.] COMMITTEE. (Progress May 7th.) Bill considered in Committee. (In the Committee.) Clause 3 (Additional Ministers in Prisons, and Regulation as to admission of Minister). MR. PACKE said, that as one of the oldest chairmen of Quarter Sessions in the House, he could not but deprecate the charge imposed by the Bill upon the county rate. He represented a county in (Mr. Packe) was to secure that there should be no power of paying those clergymen out of the county rates. What he objected to, and what he understood his hon. Friend to object to, was that the ratepayers of this country should be called on to pay taxes in the imposition of which they had no voice. Had the Amendment which he himself proposed on a former occasion been adopted by the House, the heart and soul of the Bill would have been extinguished. The same result would follow from the adoption of the Amendment of his hon. Friend. He looked on the Bill as the result of a political cabal; and he believed it to be the stepping i stone to a great object which the Roman provisions of the Bill might not be proCatholic priests in this country had for vided out of the Consolidated Fund. His years been endeavouring to accomplish- hon. Friend, of course, could not move a namely, that of putting themselves on an clause to that effect, but it would have to equality with the clergymen of the Church be done by the Government, and it would of England. certainly have great effect in preventing the heartburnings which would probably arise out of the operation of the Bill. He had supported it all through from motives of justice; but he thought it was wise to do everything to make it work as smoothly as possible. If the Government would give any hope of considering the point, he would recommend his hon. Friend to withdraw his Amendment. SIR GEORGE GREY said, he was ready to go to a division; but if the object of the Amendment was of as comprehensive a character as it had just been described to be, notice of it ought to have been given to the House. MAJOR HAMILTON said, he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether there was any ambiguity in the manner in which the word "they" was used in the end of the clause, which might render it doubtful whether the prisoners and not the justices might not order the payment of the clergymen? SIR GEORGE GREY replied, that he did not think there was the slightest possibility of any such interpretation being given to the word. COLONEL SYKES said, he also wished to ask whether any clergyman to whom the Bill would apply had asked for remuneration for attending a prisoner of his own persuasion? If not, the taxation proposed by the Bill was unasked for. SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY said, he desired to inquire whether the right hon. Baronet the Home Secretary had considered the question of having the money to be paid to those clergymen provided out of funds to be voted by Parliament? SIR GEORGE GREY said, that if the payment were made in the manner referred to by the hon. Baronet, that would be the establishment of a new financial principle in connection with the county gaols of the country. With regard to the question of the gallant Colonel behind, he presumed that no such application had been made, since under the existing law the justices would have no power to grant any remuneration. MR. BLACK said, that in the case of the repeal of the annuity tax a great deal of opposition was raised to the penny rate, the object of which was to support members of the Established Church of Scotland; whereas if it had been for the maintenance of Roman Catholic priests, it would not have been in the power of all Edinburgh to extinguish it. MR. HENLEY said, he thought it was well worth the consideration of the right hon. Gentleman whether the small sums which would be required to carry out the 1 MR. SCOURFIELD said, he had opposed the Bill throughout, not on religious grounds, but on account of the administrative and social difficulties it would create. If it was desirable to pass the measure, it was desirable to carry it into effect by such means as would secure the result sought to be accomplished, and at the same time produce the smallest amount of irritation. He believed that the Bill as it then stood would in the majority of instances fail in securing the object for which it was framed; and, in the instances in which it might be successful, it would always encounter the greatest amount of opposition. The success of the measure did not depend upon the exigencies of the case, but on the particular reading of different bodies of magistrates; and if the subject had to be discussed by quarter sessions and boards of guardians, a great deal of irritation would be produced. It was a remark of M. Guizot, "There are some subjects on which publicity and discussion throw light, and some subjects on which publicity and discussion only throw fire;" and he (Mr. Scourfield) believed that the appointment of Roman Catholic priests to gaols under the Bill would be a subject of the latter class. He was sure that the Bill as at present framed would do the Roman Catholics more harm than it could possibly advantage them, and he should think that in those special cases where the appointment of Roman Catholic priests to guols might be necessary they might contrive out of the existing elements to find a solution of the question; but he could conceive nothing more absurd than to make a man's spiritual welfare dependent upon the number of his own denomination in the same condition with himself. As a chairman of quarter sessions, he had always been anxious to prevent quarter sessions being made a debating society; but |