be printed. * (Scotland), and Statute Labour Roads and Bridges (Scotland) Transfer*; and re-committed [Bills 127 and 128]. portant portions of the evidence should also | Committee-Statute Labour Roads and Bridges (Scotland) [Bill 63]; Statute Labour Roads LORD LLANOVER said, that as Chair-Report-Statute Labour Roads and Bridges and Bridges (Scotland) Transfer [Bill 64]. man of the Committee, he did not object to the utmost publicity being given to their proceedings; but he thought the Motion now made an unusual one. The Committee considered every scheme brought before them with respect to railway accommodation in Dublin, and the decision at which they arrived was the unanimous decision of the Committee. THE EARL OF DERBY understood that the Bill was originally introduced to establish a central terminus in Dublin in communication with all the railways in Ireland, it being proposed to form a connection with the northern railways by a bridge over the Liffey. The Admiralty had objected to that part of the scheme on account of the navigation; and the consequence would be that all the railways in the north of Ireland would have no additional communications by the operation of the Bill, which consequently failed to carry out the original intention. If that were the case, it was desirable that the House should be in possession of the evidence which induced the Committee to come to their conclusion. Considered as amended-Thames Embankment Third Reading-London Coal and Wine Duties REPORT ON THE RIVER SHANNON. QUESTION. COLONEL FRENCH said, he rose to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, When Mr. Bateman's Report on the Shannon is to be laid upon the table of the House? MR. PEEL said, in reply, that the Report had been received, and would be laid on the table in a few days. THE "CHALMERS TARGET." QUESTION. MR. ASPINALL TURNER said, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, Is not the principle upon which the "Chalmers Target" is constructed the same LORD LLANOVER said, that the noble as the plan furnished by Mr. John Clare, Earl was quite right; but, after the objec-junior, per Admiralty Order dated 22nd tion of the Admiralty was allowed, the Committee were of opinion that the scheme was still a most convenient one, and that access to the line might be had from all the other railway stations. as June 1855, on the 25th June 1855; and is LORD CLARENCE PAGET said, in reply, that the other day he had answered a very similar Question. The history of Mr. Chalmers' Target was this:—That gentleman proposed, at his own expense, to construct a target, and allow the Admiralty to test it at Shoeburyness. The target was tested upon these conditions, but the Government had purchased no vessel and had built no vessel in the form of that target. They had merely given the target a trial at Mr. Chalmers' request, and therefore it was not the province of the Government to decide whether this construction was or was not an infringement of any existing patent. With regard to the second part of the Question, he had to say that that cause had been already tried in the Court of Queen's Bench, and it had been decided that Mr. Clare's patent had not been infringed. THE CASE OF MR. HARVEY. QUESTION. MR. NEWDEGATE said, that the Question he was about to ask related to a gentleman who, forty years ago, when he entered the service, was induced by the late Government of India to subscribe to the Fund on the understanding that the Government would supplement the contribution by an addition which would make that investment far more advantageous than any of a similar character. He now wished to ask the Secretary of State for India, Whether any, and what, Reply has been given to the letter of Mr. Harvey (late Accountant General for India), dated the 29th December 1862, and addressed to the Managers of the Bengal Civil Annuity Fund, in which application is made for the refund of the excess of his contributions above the half value of his Annuity; and whether he will lay upon the table of the House a Copy of the above Letter, with any reply thereto; and if no reply has been given, whether he will lay upon the table of the House a Copy of the above Letter, together with Copies of the Despatches and Documents therein referred to? aware. VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: It is well until known, Sir, that Egypt is part of the Turkish Empire, and is under the suzerainty of the Sultan. The law of Turkey is, and has been for a long time, that there is no power to compel labour. But in Egypt the system of compulsory labour has, a very recent period, prevailed. The Pasha and the Sultan have now determined to put an end to all forced labour in Egypt. Of course, that applies to the Canal and to any other work which is going on. Majesty's Government entirely approve that determination, and have assured the Sultan that he will receive, and the Pasha Her SIR CHARLES WOOD, in reply, said, will receive, the most energetic and active that the letter referred to was addressed support of England in enforcing that which to the Managers of the Bengal Civil Fund, is obviously a proper law for the whole which was a private body. Whether they empire. I do not understand whence any had sent any reply or not, he was not aware, opposition can arise, because, in the first and he could not undertake to produce a place, the Sultan has a perfect right to reply of the existence of which he was not legislate for his own subjects, and, in the He had received Mr. Harvey's second place, England and France, as two letter to the Bengal Annuity Fund as an of the five great Powers, have entered into inclosure from India, but he could not an engagement by treaty to respect the whether any answer had been given to independence of the Sultan and the inteit. With regard to the conditions of sub-grity of the Turkish Empire. Therefore, I scription, one of them was that no refund apprehend that both England and France ing of the surplus subscriptions should ever would feel themselves bound in honour to be made. Those conditions having been support the Sultan in so wise and humane accepted by the subscribers, he did not ad- a resolution, and I do not understand from mit any claim to refund. what other quarter any opposition could arise. say MR. NEWDEGATE said, he wished to ask if he might understand that the right hon. Baronet would produce the letter of Mr. Harvey? THE BOURBON-NEAPOLITAN COMMITTEE IN ROME.-QUESTION. SIR CHARLES WOOD said, he should SIR GEORGE BOWYER: I rise, Sir, object to produce the letter of Mr. Harvey to ask the noble Viscount at the head of alone, because it would not give a correct the Government the Question of which I The "In Rome there is a French garrison. French garrison protects the ex-Royal family of Naples. Under the shelter of that foreign garrison [that is the French garrison] there exists a Committee of, I believe, no less than 200 people, whose constant employment is to organize bands of murderers, the scum and refuse of every nation, and to send them forth into the Neapolitan territory to commit every sort of atrocity." The Question I have to ask the First Lord of the Treasury is, What are the proofs of a statement that there exists at Rome a Committee of no less than 200 persons; by whom bands of murderers are organized and sent forth into the Neapolitan territory to commit every sort of atrocity; and whether he will lay upon the table any Official Correspondence or other Documents in support of that statement? VISCOUNT PALMERSTON : Sir, if the hon. and learned Baronet had read fully what I stated, he would see that I said I spoke from belief-that I had no positive proof of that which I stated, but that to the best of my belief it was the fact. I have no documents to lay upon the table. The truth is, that I am in the habit of receiving from time to time very interesting information with regard to men and things in many parts of the world; and if I were to state to this House the names of the persons from whom that information is derived, I should very soon know as little about things as the hon. and learned Baronet himself seems to know. But, Sir, I think I can refer the hon. and learned Baronet to an authority which, probably, he will admit to be a good one; and from that authority, I have no doubt, he will be able to obtain the most accurate information with regard to this, not secret Committee, but this Committee of Bourbonists sitting at Rome. I happen to have seen to-day a statement which I apprehend is correct, that on Sunday, the 3rd of this month, a certain Jesuit Father Curci, in the Church of Santo Spirito dei Napolitani, preached, by selection of the Cardinal Sforza, Archbishop of Naples, a sermon to the ex-King of Naples, the whole of his Court, and a large Bourbonist congregation; and in that sermon he told them that "He was sorry to find that they could not submit to the decrees of Providence, and make their minds up to that state of things which for them unfortunately existed, and he reproached them and said that by promises of money and inflammatory writings they kept stirring up the ignothem on to pillage and slaughter; and while they rant masses in Southern Italy, and kept hounding were ready to pay for the outfit of brigands, they would not give a single bajocco to their suffering fellow-countrymen in Rome, who, but for the charity of the Romans, would die of starvation." If the hon. and learned Baronet would only communicate with Father Curci, I have no doubt he will obtain most accurate information of the numbers of which this Bourbon-Neapolitan Committee in Rome consists. THE MAIL-PACKET SERVICES. QUESTION. the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he MR. DUNLOP said, he wished to ask proposes to take on Monday the Votes for those Mail-Packet Services for which new contracts have been recently entered into, without having previously laid upon the table those contracts, in accordance with the Resolutions of the House of the 24th of July 1860. MR. PEEL said, the control of the House in the case of these contracts had been fully provided for, and would not depend on the time at which the Votes were taken. At the same time, the Government thought it only proper that those new conbefore Votes in full were asked for them. tracts should be approved by Parliament Under these circumstances, it was proposed to take only a Vote on account next Monday, exept in the case of the Dover contract. SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE said, he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman in what form it is proposed to take the Votes on account. He wished further to inquire whether it will be competent to any hon. Member to move the omission of the qualification annexed to the contract with Mr. Churchward; and, if so, whether the Government will accept a Vote on that Motion as a decision on the question whether the contract is to be put an end to or not at the time proposed by the Govern ment? moved in the terms of the Estimate. He MR. PEEL said, the Votes would be could not undertake to say whether it would be competent to any hon. Member referred to by the hon. Baronet; but the to move the omission of the qualification Government would accept a Vote on that question as an expression of the opinion of the House on the continuance of the contract. CHARITABLE BEQUESTS IN IRELAND. QUESTION. MR BLAKE said, he would beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he intends withdrawing Resolution 18 in Ways and Means, relative to imposing Legacy Duty on Bequests intended for charitable purposes in Ireland; and, if not, on what day after the Whitsuntide Recess he will be likely to move the said Resolution? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER replied, that the proposal referred to by the hon. Member had formed a portion of the plan brought forward by the Government in respect to the taxation of charities. That plan having been abandoned, it was not his intention to move a Resolution imposing Legacy Duty on charitable Bequests in Ireland. ALLEGED OUTRAGE IN CIRCASSIA. QUESTION. VISCOUNT RAYNHAM said, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether her Majesty's Government are aware of certain outrages that have recently been committed by Russian Troops on the Circassian Tribes of the Eastern Shores of the Black Sea, with which were combined an insult to Her Majesty; and whether Her Majesty's Government are prepared to support those clauses of the Treaty of Paris which provide for the free navigation of the Black Sea in the cases of certain vessels which are about to trade with Circassia? It was reported that some troops of the Czar, availing themselves of the absence of the guards of certain outposts on the Circassian territory, had fallen on defenceless persons, and killed a number of them, including old women and children. VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: We have no report, Sir, of the occurrence to which my noble Friend alludes. At the same time, there have been so many acts of the same kind committed by Russian troops in different parts of world that I do not at all dispute the accuracy of the information to which the noble Lord refers. As to the navigation of the Black Sea, the Treaty of Paris was very clear on the subject. With regard to the coast of Circassia, my noble Friend is aware that for a considerable time there have been some very undecided questions connected with it, because the Russians contend that by the Treaty of Adrianople Turkey gave them possession of the Quartermasters were invariably raised from being irregular on the part of those the ranks, and there existed therefore a officers, that memorial could not be offivery natural ambition amongst the young cially received; but if a copy of it had men of the regiment by good conduct been preserved at the War Office, he should to entitle themselves to the position of be glad to have it laid on the table of the Quartermaster. He was one of the House. In 1862 a second memorial, signed last men in the House to bring for- by twenty other quartermasters, containing ward a question interfering with the disci- similar statements to the former one, was pline of the army, because he felt that it transmitted to the Horse Guards or War could not be left in better hands than in Office through General Pennefather, then those of his Royal Highness the Field commanding at Aldershot-that gallant Marshal Commanding-in-Chief, who de- and distinguished officer fully concurring voted his attention almost exclusively in the justice and equity of the claims set to improve the condition and comfort forth in the document. He (Sir Frederic of the soldier, whilst maintaining at Smith) supposed he should be told that that the same time the discipline of the memorial could not be received either, army. This question, however, was one inasmuch as it was deemed a somewhat of pure finance, and he thought that as irregular proceeding. In order to get such it was one which he was fairly enti- over this difficulty of form, a memorial tled to submit to the consideration of the was subsequently presented to the War House and the Government. It was noto Office, signed by one quartermaster rious to all regimental officers that no only, but which embodied very nearly duties were more difficult, more responsible, all the arguments and statements conor more severe, than those of the quarter- tained in the two previous memorials. master. He was promoted generally from A reply was given to that memorial, to the staff sergeants of the regiment, each of the effect that something had been done for whom received a pay of 4s. 5d. a day, and he those officers in the previous year, and was required merely to keep up the position therefore that nothing more could be of a non-commissioned officer. Yet, when a granted them. Now, what had been done staff sergeant was promoted to the rank of for them? Nothing whatever, either in the quartermaster, he became a commission- shape of increased pay or rank; but the ed officer, and received 6s. 6d. a day quartermaster was told that at the end of only. Now he (Sir Frederic Smith) asked his service, when he would be no longer rethe House and the Government whether quired, that he should have an honorary they thought it possible for an officer to rank and a larger retiring pension than maintain a respectable appearance, and to before-namely, 108. instead of 88. 6d., support a wife and family (for they were not in fact rewarding him for present, generally married men), upon so miserable but for past services-a more absurd prina pittance? Formerly the quartermaster ciple could hardly be conceived. He was also purveyor of the corps; he assisted should be the last Member in the House to the colonel in the clothing of the regiment, press upon the Government a claim that for which he received a gratuity, and would not stand on its own merits; but he was allowed a profit on articles sold when he saw adjutants, often taken from retail to the soldiers, which he purchased non-commissioned officers of a lower standwholesale; and he was enabled by the ing, receiving 8s. 9d. a day, while the perquisites and profits arising from his quartermasters only got 6s 6d., he thought dealings to add perhaps £100 a year to that was a state of things which ought not his ordinary pay. Since 1854, however, to continue; and when the Army Estimates a different arrangement in that respect was next came before the House, he (Sir Fremade, and the quartermasters were no deric Smith) hoped that there would be no longer allowed to possess these advantages. objection to give this meritorious and reIle was not now allowed to trade in any sponsible class of officers increased pay. way he did not interfere with the clothing Many of these quartermasters, though they -he merely received his bare pay with fuel were now reckoned as non-combatants, had and lodging. In 1861 a memorial, signed been promoted for distinguished services; by ninety-one quartermasters of the army, and he believed that if some small increase was forwarded to the General Command- of pay were granted to them, there was not ing-in-Chief, in which they stated their an officer or soldier in Her Majesty's service grievances, and prayed for redress. In who would not rejoice. He did not go the consequence, however, of that proceeding whole length of the memorial, because it |