impossible for us to retrace our steps, un- | Speech. No, Sir, it was no supplement to v in deference to the general voice of the Queen's Speech; but it was a step the country. That is the opinion I have which I think we were bound to take after always entertained, and which I still en- the language which had been held by tertain. The hon. and learned Gentleman hon. Gentlemen opposite with regard to has alluded to my noble Friend Lord Derby Her Majesty's Speech. They have comin terms which I was very sorry to hear plained of ambiguity; but, I must say, I him employ. I think the expression of am rather disposed to think they have only the hon. and learned Gentleman was, that arrived at a foregone conclusion, and that it had been reserved for my noble Friend they wished to consider the language now at the head of Her Majesty's Govern- of the Speech ambiguous. As the anment to be the first Minister who acceded nouncement in the Queen's Speech was to power in this country, avowing that he not held to be sufficiently distinct, hon. did so without principle. I really don't Gentlemen opposite moved a Resolution wish to say anything disrespectful of the declaratory of their principles; and we felt hon. and learned Gentleman, for whom it to be our duty to move a Resolution generally I entertain the utmost respect, showing that we do not desire to shrink but I can only treat such a declaration as from a plain announcement of our intenan absurdity in itself. I deeply regretted tions. I must say, however, that I think to hear him use such language. I do not there is another answer to the question believe that any statesman ever more dis- why the Resolution of the hon. and learned tinctly enunciated principles- [Derisive Gentleman opposite was proposed. I cancheers and laughter from the Opposition, not help thinking thut it is very much the and loud cheers from the Ministerial same Resolution with which we were threatbenches.] I do not think any statesman ened in April last. It was not considered ever enunciated principles more distinct or politic then to bring that Resolution forbetter defined, more worthy of his high ward; and I cannot help suspecting that it and noble character, than my noble Friend has been brought forward now in the hope Lord Derby did when he took the reins of that four distinct parties on the opposite office. The hon. and learned Gentleman side might be combined in one vote, it has asked a question which I think we might being very difficult, perhaps, to find any rather have asked him-why has this Re- other subject on which they could be comsolution been brought forward? I admit bined. It seems, further, to have been that is a matter I cannot understand, ex- thought desirable to effect this combination cept upon the painful principle to which I before Her Majesty's Government had had have before adverted. The noble Member the opportunity of bring their measures for the City of London has this evening before Parliament. By the good spirit again dwelt upon what he calls the am- which has been shown, however, and by biguity of the language in the Queen's the readiness with which hon. Gentlemen Speech. I most distinctly say that I can- opposite have subscribed to the arrangenot concur in his opinion. I fully admitment that has been suggested, whatever that this House had a right, after the cir- schemes might have been entertained have cumstances of the last election, to know signally failed; and I believe and hope that what are the intentions of the Government the country-who look not to these petty with regard to the great question of free-personal matters, but to the great and imtrade; and I contend that the announce-portant question of what is to be the fument of those intentions was conveyed in ture policy of the Government-will have the Royal Speech with as much distinct- the satisfaction of seeing that future policy ness as was consistent with the language affirmed by an overwhelming majority, and which Ministers are in the habit of ad- by a Resolution free from the objectionable vising the Sovereign to use. I know language and the objectionable purposes not what language you could have more which, in my judgment, lurk in the Resodistinct, or what expression could be more lution which has been moved by the hon. intelligible, than the expression of "un-and learned Member for Wolverhampton. restricted competition," which was the phrase used in the Speech delivered from the Throne. The noble Lord then spoke of the Resolution moved by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as a supplement to the Queen's

Sincerely apologising to the House for having detained them so long, I will only express my earnest hope that the majority upon this occasion may be an overwhelming one, and that the House will not be dis posed to join in a form of vote which, in my

mind, is unworthy of those who are parties to it, and derogatory to the character of this House.

House adjourned at a quarter before One o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS,

Friday, November 26, 1852. MINUTES.] Took the Oaths.-The Lord Carleton.

peared since the publication of Mr. Webster's letter at all calculated to throw any light upon the subject. Now he believed that that letter truly represented the real state of the case; and if that were so, it was difficult to comprehend how it happened that the Foreign Secretary of the United States should be so misled as to suppose that such an intention as that which he announced existed on the part of the British Government. He knew but of two suppositions which could by possibility explain the circumstance. The first was, that some communication to the Government of the United States was couched in such terms as conveyed that impression to them; and the other was, that no communication whatever had been made by this Government to that of the United States-no intimation on the subject, such as was required by the ordinary rules of courtesy observed in diplomatic transactions, and that the United States were left to put their own construction on the acts of the British Government. Which of these two suppositions was right he knew not; but it was not unfair to suppose that the noble Earl opposite, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, would be not only ready, but even anxious, to give an explanation on this subject which would

THE AMERICAN FISHERIES. LORD WHARNCLIFFE said, that he rose to put a question to the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on a matter of great importance to a great number of Her Majesty's subjects in a distant part of Her dominions, and also to the inhabitants of a great State in friendly relations with us. The matter to which he referred was the Fisheries on the coast of our North American colonies. Their Lordships would probably have it in their recollection that in the month of July last intelligence reached this country that the people of the United States, and more especially a certain portion of them in the Eastern States, had been greatly excited by the publication of a letter from Mr. Webster, the then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the American Go-be satisfactory not only to their Lordships vernment, announcing that new instructions had been sent by the British Government to its officers in the Colonies to enforce the regulations of the treaty between the two countries as to the fisheries on the coasts of our North American Colonies, and informing them that this Government intended to put a new construction on that treaty, and warning such of the population of the United States as were interested in those fisheries, to beware of the penalties following on any infraction of the treaty, and promising to take the whole subject into the consideration of the United States Government. In answer to that letter, nothing, that he knew of, had yet appeared giving a satisfactory explanation of the state of the case, or of the motives which had induced the American Secretary of State to write and publish such a letter. There was published in the American papers shortly afterwards a paper purporting to have been received by our Minister at Washington, Mr. Crampton, and stating that there had never been any intention on the part of the British Government to put a new construction on the treaty. That was the only document, he believed, which had ap

and the country, and our Colonies, but also to the American fishermen, who were also deeply interested in the issue of this question. There was another matter connected with this question, which, in his opinion, entitled him to ask it. Rumours were cur rent, and especially in the United States and in the Canadas, that in connexion with this subject of the fisheries, it was proposed to make fresh arrangements, by negotiations now pending, to improve the commercial relations between our North American Colonies and the United States. Having no documents before him, he could only speak of these statements as rumour, but he knew that they formed part of the current opinion on both sides of the Canadian border. That was, in his opinion, an additional reason for asking the noble Earl opposite to communicate to the House and to the country the present condition of these transactions. The question which he now wished to ask was information as to this point-whether the correspondence and negotiations between the two Governments, which had been going on for some time past, on the subject of the fisheries on the coast of our North American Colonies,

were now brought to a conclusion; and, if | knew the influence which periodical events so, whether he would consent to lay the exercised in those localities, might perhaps papers connected with them at once on the table; or, if not at present, whether he would have any objection to lay them upon the table upon a Motion made to

that effect?

be able to account for the appearance at that time of a correspondence which at another period might never have seen the light. He asserted that Her Majesty's Government were not to blame for anything which had occurred either on this or on the other side of the Atlantic. With respect to the notice to be given to the Government of the United States, he had only to assure the House that notice was given to it as soon as the change of our naval arrangements was made; not that he believed that it was necessary for us to give any notice at all, save on account of the usual diplomatic courtesy. If any person thought that, on the part of Her Majesty's Government, he should have given that notice earlier, or that our new arrangements should have been postponed until the American Government had had a longer notice of them, that was no compliment to the American Government, as it presupposed that it was privy to the acts of aggression on our shores, which some American sub

The EARL of MALMESBURY said, that the noble Earl who had just sat down had in no way exaggerated the importance of the question to which he had been referring a question which during the last five months had occupied the attention of Her Majesty's Government as much as it deserved. The noble Baron had referred to the letter of the late Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in the United States, Mr. Webster, complaining of the conduct of Her Majesty's Government, when that Government issued orders for the employment of a new description of vessels, and also of a greater number of vessels, in protecting our North American fisheries. The noble Baron had attempted to account for the publication of that letter. He supposed that it might perhaps have been published because the orders of the British Government to its colonial officers were couch-jects had been long in the habit of pered in such terms as were not pleasing to petrating. As to the present state of the the United States, or from another reason negotiations of which these events had -namely, in consequence of Mr. Webster been recently the cause between the two having supposed that Her Majesty's Go- countries, he was obliged to tell their vernment intended to put a new construc- Lordships that they were in such a state tion on the treaty of 1818. Now he said, that he must, though with regret, refuse on behalf of Her Majesty's Government, to lay the papers regarding them on the that it had written to its own officers in table. He might even say that the negoCanada and elsewhere, and also to the tiations were only just begun. Before the officers of the United States, and that it lamented death of Mr. Webster, he had had not used any language to any of them entertained the proposal of Her Majesty's which it was not fitting to employ on such Government, and had agreed to negotiate occasions. He would add, also, that Her on a large and wide basis, including not Majesty's Government had placed no new only all the disputed points regarding the construction on the treaty-that it had fisheries on the coasts of our North Ameriasserted no new claim whatever for itself can Colonies, but also the trade between on the American Government-that it had the United States on the one hand, and made no addition to the material force al- Canada and our other Colonies on the ready on the station-that it was more a other. He gladly admitted that from the police regulation than anything else. A moment of commencing the negotiations, new and more useful sort of vessel was Mr. Webster had acted in a true principle employed, and in greater numbers than be- of conciliation, and that he had expressed fore the number of cannon was even to our Minister, Mr. Crampton, that it was diminished and nothing had been done his most anxious desire that the trade becalculated to excite the jealousy of the tween the two countries should be carried American Government. He (the Earl of on upon a greater principle of freedom, Malmesbury) knew nothing of the source and that all possible causes of dispute of the discontent prevalent in the United should be removed between two such great States to which the noble Baron had re-nations. On all accounts Her Majesty's ferred; but the noble Lord who had just sat down, and who had been for some time a resident in the United States, and who

Government regretted the death of that great statesman; but more especially on account of the particular period at which

it occurred, for it had interrupted the ne- | Irish and Scotch distillers were treated ungotiations which were commenced; and at justly by the existing law with reference that moment he had no official information to duties upon spirits in bond. The right of any successor having been appointed to hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Sehis (Mr. Webster's) office. He was happy cretary to the Treasury, the hon. Member to inform their Lordships that Her Ma- for Liverpool (Mr. F. Mackenzie), and the jesty's Government had received the same Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireassurances of goodwill from the President, land, supported that Resolution. Acting Mr. Fillmore, and the same expression of upon that Resolution, the Irish and Scotch his anxious desire that the question should Members submitted a Bill to the House, be settled, not on a narrow footing, but on on the back of which Bill were the names a broad field. They had been met in the of Lord Naas and Mr. G. A. Hamilton; same spirit by Commodore Perry, who had but unfortunately the Bill was lost. He been sent by his Government to watch should certainly be glad to know whether over the property and to promote the in- it was the intention of the Government to terests of the American fishermen, who afford any relief to those suffering interests were exercising their rights, not near our for which they had, when in Opposition, so coasts, but around our shores. In fact, frequently expressed their smpathyy. from the American Government, with the exception of the first letter, which was written by Mr. Webster in a moment of excitement, when he was suffering from the illness which terminated in his death, they had had nothing but friendly assurances. There had not been a single word said by any official personage in the United States which did not give Her Majesty's Government sanguine hopes that these negotiations would be brought to a satisfactory conclusion, and that every cause of dispute between the two countries would be amicably settled. When that period arrived, it would afford the greatest satisfaction to him to lay on the table of the House the papers which the noble Baron had asked for.

House adjourned to Monday next.

HOUSE OF COMMONS,

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, he was sure that the House would admit that it was scarcely fair that he should be pressed to make a communication with respect to the remission of duties, or the intentions of the Government in that behalf, on the eve of the financial statement. The hon. Member would soon have an ample opportunity for explaining his own views, and learning those of the Government, on the subject to which he referred.

COMMERCIAL LEGISLATION-FREE

TRADE-EXPLANATION.

MR. J. L. RICARDO said, he rose to ask a question of some importance to the House. There was a Resolution, moved by the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton (Viscount Palmerston) as an Amendment to the proposition of the hon. Member for Wolverhampton (Mr. C. Villiers). Now he perceived that that Resolution was differently worded in the Votes issued that morning to what it was on the previous MINUTES.] NEW WRITS.-For Abingdon, v. Ma- evening. Those very important words jor General James Caulfield, deceased; for which they were told the right hon. BaroBury St. Edmund's, v. Sir John Stuart, Vice-net the Member for Carlisle (Sir J. Graham) Chancellor; for Durham City, v. Thomas Colpitts Granger, esq., deceased; for Oldham, v. John Duncuft, esq., deceased; for Peterborough, v. Hon. Richard Watson, deceased.

Friday, November 26, 1852.

DUTIES ON HOME-MADE SPIRITS IN
BOND.

MR. ROCHE said, he wished to put a question to the right hon. Chaucellor of the Exchequer in reference to the remission of duties upon home-made spirits in bond. It would be in the recollection of the House that, in the Session of 1850, the Scotch and Irish Members, with the aid of some English Members, succeeded in carrying a Resolution to the effect that

had inserted, were left out of the Votes of that morning. He wanted to know whether the Resolution as it stood upon the paper, was the Resolution which the Government had adopted in abandoning the Amendment of which they had given notice?

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: On the paper which I hold in my hand the words alluded to are not omitted, and that is the Resolution now before the House.

MR. J. L. RICARDO was understood to say that the words he had alluded to were omitted in the Resolution which ap

peared in the paper that was issued that morning. It seemed, however, that in the paper issued since, the Resolution had been given correctly.

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Well, the Resolution before the House, and which the Government had determined to abide by, was that which had been proposed by the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton.

MR. J. L. RICARDO said, it was important to know whether the Government intended to adopt the Resolution of the noble Lord in lieu of the Amendment which they had themselves proposed.

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I never said that I adopted any Resolution. What I said was, that in deference to the feeling of the House I would withdraw my Amendment on the Motion of the hon. Member for Wolverhampton, and, therefore, the Amendment of the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton was the only Amendment which was lying upon the table of the House.

RELATIONS WITH ROME.

MR. HINDLEY said, he begged to ask the hon. Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the interview which Sir Henry Bulwer, our Envoy at the Court of Tuscany, had with the Pope, some time ago, took place in pursuance of instructions from the Government and whether there would be any objection to lay any communications which might have passed upon the subject between Sir Henry Bulwer and the Foreign Office upon the table of the House?

be present on the spot an official of higher rank than a Consul. That was the object of Sir Henry Bulwer's visit to Rome; and, being in Rome, Sir Henry Bulwer did certainly avail himself of that opportunity to hold several interviews with members of the Papal Government on subjects interesting to both countries; but Sir Henry Bulwer went to Rome charged with no instructions, invested with no powers, and not in any manner accredited to the Papal Government. Whatever interviews might have passed between him and members of the Papal Government were entirely of a private and unofficial character. Under those circumstances, he (Lord Stanley) did not think it would be advisable to lay on the table of the House any communications relative to those interviews. As the subject had been brought under the notice of the House, he might take that opportunity of remarking that certain alleged reports as to the conversations to which he had referred, which had appeared in the columns of the daily press, were totally and absolutely incorrect.

CASE OF EDWARD MURRAY. LORD DUDLEY STUART said, he would now ask the hon. Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to state House the result of the steps taken by the Government on behalf of Edward Murray, at Rome; and whether the correspondence on the subject was now in such a condition that he could lay it before the House?

LORD STANLEY said, the result of the steps taken by the Government on behalf of Edward Murray was, that his life had been saved-that the capital sentence pronounced against him had been commuted to a sentence of perpetual imprisonment — and he had been removed to a more healthy and convenient place of confinement. Sir Henry Bulwer had been instructed to press for a further mitigation of that commuted sentence. That was the case, and the Government was not without hopes that some mitigation of the sentence might be obtained; but it might be injurious to the prospect of success if the correspondence were at present to be laid before the House.

LORD STANLEY said, he was perfectly ready to reply to the question of the hon. Gentleman, and he should do so with the most entire unreserve. The hon. Member's question, as he (Lord Stanley) understood its general purport, was, that he wished to know what was the cause of, and what were the circumstances attending, Sir Henry Bulwer's visit to Rome? The cause of Sir Henry Bulwer's visit to Rome was this: At the time when he went there, Edward Murray, a British subject-concerning whom there was another question on the paper-was lying under sentence of death. There was no fault whatever to be found with the manner in which the British Consul at Rome, Mr. Freeborn, had conducted COMMERCIAL LEGISLATION-FREE the negotiations respecting Edward Mur- TRADE-ADJOURNED DEBATE. ray, and his consular duties generally; Order read, for resuming adjourned Debut considering the interest the case had bate on Amendment proposed to Question excited, both in England and in Italy,[23rd November] "That it is the opinion it was thought désirable that there should of this House, that the improved conditión