pared to blow hot and cold with regard to it. It was also shown that it was not necessary that any Englishman should hold land of his own. All that was necessary was that he should locate himself or his agent in some thickly-peopled district where the land had been settled, and make advances to the Native farmer or ryot, and then apply his skill in preparing the cotton for market in a superior manner to that which was usually the case with the cotton exported from India.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

LOSS OF THE SHIP "CONQUEROR."

PAPERS MOVED FOR.

SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONE said, he wished to move for a copy of the correspondence of the Board of Admiralty in reference to the late naval court-martial

Amendment proposed,

To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "there be laid before this House a Copy of the Correspondence of the Board of Admiralty in reference

tion. He had no objection, at the same time, to state the circumstances in which the Admiralty order originated. Sir A. Milne, than whom there was not a more zealous or excellent officer, had occasion to remark that several of Her Majesty's ships got aground on the North American station, and that the captains were inclined in those instances to throw the responsibility on the masters of the vessels. Sir Alexander Milne thought it incumbent on him to issue an order to the fleet which he commanded, pointing out that it was a mistake on the part of the captains to suppose that they were not responsible for the grounding of their ships; and the Admiralty, when the order was sent home, taking order, in which that point was insisted exactly the same view, issued a general upon. The hon. and gallant Baronet miralty had punished the captain of the was quite wrong in stating that the AdConqueror. Under the circumstances, he hoped the Motion would not be pressed.

held at Bermuda, which acquitted the Captain of the Conqueror for the loss of that ship. He also desired to ask the Attorney General whether it was his opinion that LORD NAAS said, he thought the Adthe Admiralty had acted legally in punish-miralty had gone a great deal further than ing by reprimand an officer who had been would appear from the statement of the fully acquitted by the sentence of a court- noble Lord. They had not merely exmartial; and also, whether it was in accordance with law to visit with censure an the duties of commanders under all circumpressed a general opinion with regard to officer for the arguments adduced by him stances, but they entered into the merits of as a prisoner in his defence? the particular case and declared that they entirely disagreed from the finding of the court-martial which acquitted the Captain of the Conqueror. They had taken the very unusual course of reversing, to a great extent, the finding of the eight able and distinguished officers who investigated the case on the spot, and who had all the facts before them; and they declared they "considered Captain Sotheby to have been highly culpable in not taking the necessary precautions." After that officer had been tried by his peers with the greatest impartiality, the inquiry lasting eight days, he must say that the Lords of the Admiralty had inflicted extreme hardship upon him by reversing the verdict which acquitted him in the most complete manner, and by holding him up to the country as culpable for the loss of his ship, without giving him any opportunity of being heard in his own defence.

to the recent Naval Court Martial held at Ber

muda which acquitted the Captain of the Con

queror for the loss of that ship," -instead thereof.

LORD CLARENCE PAGET hoped that his hon. and gallant Friend would not press for the production of the correspondence between the Admiralty and Admiral Milne; but he should have no objection to produce the general order which had been issued in consequence of the court-martial referred to, and the object of which was to correct the erroneous view taken by the officers composing that court as to the responsibility of a captain on occasions when a ship was in danger. The communications between the Admiralty and its officers, although they were conducted as public correspondence, were to all intents and purposes departmental and to a great extent confidential. If that system were altered, the result would be that officers would make their reports with a view to publica

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL said, that the hon. and gallant Baronet had asked two Questions-whether the Admiralty had acted legally in punishing, by reprimand, an officer fully acquitted by court-martial, and in visiting with censure arguments used in defence? It was in

convenient to discuss abstract questions of a clause empowering the Admiralty to anlaw in that House; and he preferred to nul, modify, or suspend the sentence of a address himself to the facts of the case. court-martial; but it was not intended Captain Sotheby was in command of the that the Admiralty should avail themselves Conqueror, which was wrecked on a coral of that clause for the purpose of aggrareef. In his defence before the court- vating a sentence. He thought that clause martial he claimed for captains a large ex. was brought forward in consequence of the emption from responsibility, with reference old story of Admiral Byng being a victim to the navigation of a ship, and sought to to the inability of the Admiralty to relieve cast the main responsibility on the master. him from the sentence of a court martial. The court-martial seemed to adopt that The change was made in order that the view for they entirely acquitted Captain law might not be so Draconic as it had Sotheby, and reprimanded the master. It been. It was quite true the Admiralty was only natural and right, therefore, when had the power of cashiering an officer Captain Sotheby had put forward doctrines without trying him by court-martial; in his defence which they disapproved, and but when a court-martial had been held when those doctrines had been ratified and on the captain of the Conqueror, and he sanctioned by the officers composing the had been pronounced innocent, it was concourt-martial, that the Admiralty should trary to all our notions of English justice declare their opinion that those doctrines that the Admiralty should declare him were exceedingly dangerous, and were, guilty of culpable negligence. No court in fact, a misconstruction of the printed in this country, with the exception of the orders issued for the conduct of officers. Star Chamber, had ever exercised such a He thought it was quite within their com- power. petence to express such an opinion; and he did not see how it could have been more legitimately made known than in a general order, which Admiral Milne was instructed to communicate to the officers under his command. Captain Sotheby himself, having come home, as a matter of fairness received a copy of the letter addressed to Sir Alexander Milne: but this was no formal act of " censure, as the terms of the Question supposed. The Lords of the Admiralty were Commissioners for executing the Office of Lord High Admiral, and there could be no doubt that such a functionary, if he existed, being charged with the maintenance of the discipline of the navy, would have full power to publish any order calculated to correct a prevalent opinion fraught with consequences dangerous to that discipline.

MR. DILLWYN said, he was of opinion that the country viewed with great satisfaction the course adopted by the Admiralty in this case. If they had not interfered, the doctrine would have gone forth that captains were not responsible for the navigation of their ships. The law had been laid down very clearly by the hon. and learned Attorney General.

COLONEL DICKSON said, he could not agree with the hon. Member who had just spoken, that the law had been laid down very clearly by the Attorney General. That hon. and learned Gentleman did not think it advisable to treat of abstract questions of law in that House; but the question before them was not an abstract question. It was a question of the honour of an officer, which honour had been most grossly outraged by the Admiralty. PerSIR JOHN HAY said, it must be sub-haps hon. Gentlemen were not aware of versive of all discipline in the navy to learn that a solemn expression of opinion by the Lords of the Admiralty that a particular officer's conduct had been "highly culpable" was not to be looked on by that officer as a punishment. He believed that no punishment could be more severe to a high-minded man than to pronounce that he had been guilty of culpable negligence. It was the very first instance in which such a course had been attempted on the part of the Admiralty. The only way in which it could be attempted to justify the measure was by the Navy Discipline Act of 1860. In the Act of 1860 there was

the effect which the words "highly culpable," as applied to a gallant officer's conduct, would have on his prospects. He could not but think it a most outrageous thing for the Admiralty to have come forward and stigmatized Captain Sotheby in the manner they had done, after he had been fully and honourably acquitted by the officers appointed to try him.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: Sir, I can quite understand that hon. Members may take an interest in the individual captain the subject of this discussion; but I trust the House will take an interest in the ships of Her Majesty's navy. Now, I think the

Main Question put, and agreed to.
Supply considered in Committee.
House resumed.
Committee report Progress;
again To-morrow.

to sit

Admiralty performed their duty in this come to some sort of understanding with the case. It must have been an unpleasant London and North Western Company and duty, but a duty they had to perform. It the City of Dublin Steam Packet Comappeared to them, on looking into the pany that they would abide by their constatements in the case, that Captain tract. The Treasury were in almost daily Sotheby was culpable in not having taken communication with those companies, and the precautions he ought for the safety of he hoped the matter would be shortly arhis ship; and, however unpleasant it must ranged. have been to them to pronounce their opinion on an officer against whom a courtmartial had not expressed an opinion, I think it was a duty they owed to the service and the country to make a statement with respect to a matter involving the safety of Her Majesty's navy. It is no light matter that one of the finest ships in the navy has been lost by inattention to those physical circumstances an attention to which might have saved her. My hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General says the Admiralty did not exceed their legal powers, and I agree with my hon. Friend (Mr. Dillwyn) that they only did their duty, however painful the course adopted by them may be to the friends of the officer concerned. They did not alter the sentence. The officer has not been dismissed the service. They in no respect altered his position in the service, though

WAYS AND MEANS.
Order for Committee read.
House in Committee.
Resolved,

"That, towards making good the Supply granted to Her Majesty, the sum of Ten Millions be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland."

House resumed.

Resolution to be reported this day.
Committee sit again To-morrow.

LEAVE. FIRST READING.

they expressed as they ought to have done, AFRICAN SLAVE TRADE TREATY BILL. their opinion that sufficient attention had not been paid in a case where attention might have saved one of the finest ships in Her Majesty's navy.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."

The House divided :-Ayes 67; Noes 42: Majority, 25.

HOLYHEAD HARBOUR.-QUESTION. COLONEL DUNNE said, he rose to call the attention of the House to the alleged inconvenient and dangerous state of the landing pier at Holyhead; and to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether the Government intend to take any and what steps so as to secure the safety of the Irish steam packets and the passengers from and to Ireland during the next winter? The landing pier at Holyhead was at present in an inconvenient and dangerous state.

LORD CLARENCE PAGET said, Her Majesty's Government were anxious to carry out the necessary improvements of the pier at Holyhead; but, however important it was that the work should be carried on during the fine weather of the summer, it was positively necessary to

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON said, he rose to move for leave to introduce a Bill to carry into effect the treaty between Her Majesty and the United States of America for the suppression of the African slave trade. The American Government had behaved in the handsomest manner in reference to the treaty. They had long been aware that the American flag had been perverted as a cover for carrying on the slave trade, and sensible of the evil and inconvenience to which that practice had given rise, they had of their own accord proposed the treaty, which was in all respects adapted, as far as their flag was concerned, to put an end to the perpetration of the crime.

Leave given.

Bill to carry into effect the Treaty between Her Majesty and the United States of America, for the suppression of the African Slave Trade, ordered to be brought in by Viscount Palmerston and Sir George Grey.

Bill presented, and read 1°; to be read 2° on Monday next, and to be printed [Bill 160].

House adjourned at half after
One o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS,

Friday, June 20, 1862.

MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.-2° Petroleum: Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation; Partnership Law Amendment.

30 Merchant Shipping Acts, &c. Amendment; Salmon Fisheries (Scotland); West India Incumbered Estates Act Amendment; Sale of Spirits.

POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) (No. 2) BILL.
[BILL NO. 15.] COMMITTEE.

Order for Committee read.
House in Committee.

Clause 11 (Property hitherto exempt from rating as being used for charitable or public purposes to be rated).

SIR EDWARD GROGAN said, he wished to move the insertion after the word "purpose," of the words "except churches and chapels used exclusively for religious worship and open to the public, graveyards where no charge is made for interments, school-rooms used for the gratuitous education of children, court-houses, gaols, and bridewells." He thought, that whilst the intention of the clause was that property of all other kinds should be subject to the payment of poor rates, all descriptions of property which were used for public or religious purposes ought to be excluded from the necessity of contributing to such payment.

MR. VANCE expressed his concurrence in the Amendment. A Select Committee on the subject of trading had recommended that charities and buildings used for scientific purposes should not be taxed.

SIR GEORGE GREY said, he ob. served that several hon. Members had Amendments on the paper to move the omission of the clause altogether. He would suggest, therefore, with a view to save time, that the House should agree to the Amendment, and then discuss the question as to whether the clause should stand part of the Bill.

MR. MONSELL said, he had no objec. tion to that course, but he should Vote against the clause.

Amendment agreed to.

On Question, "That the clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill.

MR. POLLARD-URQUHART said, he should move the omission of the clause, there being a strong feeling against taxing institutions established for charitable purposes, and he hoped the right hon. Baronet would give way on that point.

LORD NAAS said, he did not desire to exclude from exemption buildings wholly devoted to religious purposes, but it was his wish to limit the exemption to certain cases. Year by year the evil of

property being exempted from the payment of poor rates was increasing. In the two unions of the city of Dublin property of the value of nearly £67,000 a year was exempted from poor rates altogether. Under the operation of the law there was no definite rule to guide the Valuation Commissioners, and the consequence was that several inferior institutions in Dublin were exempted. Amongst them was the office of the Royal Agricultural Society, the Committee House of Charitable Societies, in Circus Street; sextons' dwellings, the Irish Church Mission House, the residence of the governor of the military prison, the Canteen, Royal Barracks, the School of Medicine. Trinity College, however, a building wholly devoted to educational purposes, was not exempt. In the year 1861-2, a Vote of £60,000 was taken by the Government in aid of the local assessment to the poor rate, upon property in their possession, thereby admitting the principle that that class of property ought to contribute. But, perhaps, the worst case was that of Dublin Castle, occupied by persons living in commodious houses and drawing Government salaries, but who contributed nothing to the rate. He was in favour of the clause as amended, not wishing that exemption should be extended beyond the classes of property comprised in the Amendment.

SIR ROBERT PEEL said, he concurred with the noble Lord in thinking that a great deal of property was improperly exempt from poor rates. It would be, however, better to deal with these exemptions by a Tenement Valuation Bill, and he therefore thought it would be judicious to expunge the clause.

SIR EDWARD GROGAN said, he was opposed to the omission of the clause. By passing the clause, as amended, they would exempt all property which was entitled to be exempted from the payment of rates, and would leave all other property rateable. The clause would not interfere with tenement valuation. It would exempt places of worship and schools from taxation; but not convents, and buildings of that character.

MR. BLAKE suggested that the landlords should pay the rate on buildings used

MR. SCULLY said, he would move the SIR EDWARD GROGAN said, he omission of the word "five" in order to should support the clause, which rendered insert "two," his object being to limit the it necessary to renew proxies once in five time during which a person should be en-years, and preserved power in the landlords titled to hold a proxy for the election of to revoke them at any time. a guardian to two years instead of five. Such was the law of England, and he could see no reason why a different law should be made to apply to Ireland.

LORD NAAS said, he thought it would be a fair compromise to substitute" twenty un for "ten as the limit of proxies which any one person was entitled to hold. From