The Cardiff Times

MAJOR BOND AND MR COL- LINGS, M.P. ACTION FOR LIBEL COMMENCED. The "Press Association" learns from a good source that Major Bond, lately the chief-constable for Birmingham, has commenced an action for libel against Mr Jesse Collings, M.P., based upon a letter published by the latter in Monday's Timet. The Press Association is further informed that the action is taken under the Libel Act, which, whilst protecting members of Parliament from any consequences arising out of speeches made in the House, renders them liable for anything of a libellous character which they may issue in print. At Tuesday's meeting of the Birmingham Watch Committee the Chairman denied that the question put by Mr Collings in the Commons re- lating to Major Bond's Irish appointment emanated from the committee. The Mayor added that immediately the notice came to his knowledge he telegraphed to Mr Collings, urging the hon. member not to proceed in the matter.

THE HOME SECRETARY AND THE MINERS. Mr Crawford, secretary of the National Miners' Union, in reply to the communication recently sent to Sir William Harcourt from that body, has received a letter from the Home Secretary to the effect that he fears the deputation which attended at the Home Office on February 2nd misappre- hended some remarks he made on the occasion. He certainly did not think it right to encourage too sanguine expectations that all the objects desired could be accomplished by legislation, but he did not intend to convey an opinion that no legislation was required. On the contrary, he thought the subject capable of considerable amendment, and they might rely upon his giving it most careful consideration, with a view of obviating the terrible risks to which the lives of miners were exposed.

A NEW USE FOR THE LOCOMOTIVE. A singular adaptation of the railway engine has just been made in Russia. Information having been made to the authorities at Alexandrovo, on the Polish frontier, that the locomotive of the ex- press leaving that station for Warsaw had been ingeniously converted into a receptacle for smug- gled goods, it was carefully examined during its sojourn at the station. Though nothing was found wrong, it was deemed advisable that a custom- house official should accompany the train to its destination, where the engine furnace and boiler were emptied and deliberately taken to pieces. In the interior was discovered a secret compartment containing 1231b. of foreign cigars and several parcels of valuable silk. Several arrests were made, including that of the driver, but his as- tonishment at finding the engine to which he had so long been accustomed converted into a har- dened offender against the laws was so genuine that he was released and allowed to return to his duties.

A BOY CHARGED WITH ATTEMPTED MURDER. At the Warwick Assizes, before Lord Justice Baggallay, Joseph Payne, a boy 11 years of age, was indicted for throwing a child named Emily Webb into a canal at Birmingham, with intent to murder her. About six o'clock on the evening of January 4 last a young man named Albert Stringer, whose conduct was warmly commended by the learned judge, was crossing over a canal bridge, when he saw the bands of a c'lild in the water about four yards from the bank. He ran down the bank, dived into the water, and rescued the child, who was carried to a neighbouring house and restored. The child was only two years and nine months old, and had been safe at her mother's house at twenty minutes to six, About twenty minutes past six the prisoner. who had in the meantime fetched a doctor, came to the mother and told her that her little girl was in the canal. Shortly afterwards the child was brought home and said in the prisoner's presence that a boy had thrown her into the water and that the prisoner was the boy. Another little girl proved that the prisoner and the little girl were walking together along the canal, that she heard a splash, and, looking round, saw that the little girJ had disanpeared and the prisoner had run up the bank. On the following morning he was taken to the house of the child s mother, when he said he was very sorry for what he had done.—Mr FitzGerald, for the defence, contended that the evidence was insufficient to rebut the presumption of law that a child between the ages of seven and 14 years is doli incapax, andithat the facts were quite consistent with the child having fallen into the water by accident.—The jury acquitted the prisoner. It transpired that the witness Stringer had previously saved two lives from drowning, and the Judge and jury both ex- pressed the hope that he would be suitably re- warded for his bravery by one of the humane societies.

EXTRAORDINARY BREACH OF PROMISE CASE. In the common pleas division the case of Strick- land v Coleman was heard. This was an action to recover damages for breach of promise to marry, and the defendant by his pleading alleged unchaatity on the part of the plaintiff. Mr Cook, in opening the case, said that it was, he thought, exceedingly unfortunate that it should have to be a, Jy°nnS woman, lived at Moldreth, Cambridgeshire, and the defend ant was the eon of a farmer, who had occupied a very good position at Barrington, in that county, and since his father's death he had carried on the business of a corn dealer, and he also let out machinery for hire. At the death of his father he came into possession of about £ 5,000. In 1870, when the plaintiff was about 17 years of age and the defendant about 30, she had a brother, who was a butcher at Barrington, and she went there to keep house for him. Whilst there she made the acquaintance of the defendant, who proposed that he should marry her, but said that he could not do so so long as his father lived, for fear he might be disinherited. Under this promise he seduced the plaintiff, and in 1872 she had a child, which, however, afterwards died. Then the defendant broke off his relations with her, and she became intimate with a man named Morgan, and in 1873 or 1874 she had a child by him, a fact of which the defendant had full know- ledge. After some three or four years plaintiff and defendant again met, and he renewed his promise to marry her when his father died. On this Understanding they lived together, and two children were born. On the death of the defen- dant's father he was pressed to perform his promise, but the defendant hung back and made excuses, and, in the end, married another lady. Some negotiations took place as to compensation to be awarded to the plaintiff, and Mrs Hart, who acted as the defendant's friend, made a sugges- tion as to the defendant receiving £175. An arrangement of this kind was actually put into writing, but the defendant declined to carry it out, and the plaintiff was therefore compelled to bring this action. The plaintiff was called as a witness, but before she was examined, his lord- ship suggested that the case was one which might well be settled out of court. After a consulta- tion, a verdict was taken by counsel for the plain- tiff for J6125.

A Liverpool telegram says that seven men, part u creV of the ship Bosphorous, of London, of ttie there their vessel having been s:r £ cr»'"»'"d tL maunng two in a li a • vT> Bad LkG3 KKUFTIOXS OF THE S ,RRD DIAECTLY UY 1HK BURKS, SCALIW, w01Mierful application for E«vmANSALVE.-Them<«t year,. every kind of Sores. j by it in two or standing liave^been completely «io^ ho treet. aud Mr Alunditsr. Duke-street utwrcuu.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—MOSDAT. Their lordships met at five o'clock. THE IRISH SUB-COMMISSIONERS. Lord ORANMORE and BROWNE moved for returns of the names of the sub-commissioners appointed under the Land Act, with explanations of the means taken to ascertain that they pos- sessed a practical acquaintance with the value of land in Ireland, as required by the act also showing in what cases the commissioners or sub- commissioners have availed themselves of the power of directing independent valuers to report; also showing in all cases tried before them,settling fair rent, the time spent by the sub-commissioners in each locality visited, and the profession or occupation of each sub-commissioner. With regard to the sub-commissioners, he urged that care ought to have been taken to, ascertain that they were thoroughly competent for the duties imposed upon them, and he complained of the mode by which they had arrived at the valua- tion on which they had acted in fixing the judicial rent. He said their lordships could have no idea of the number of law-abiding people who would be ruined by the manner in which their property had been interfered with under the power of the act. Lord CARLINGFORD said the noble lord had never given any hint that he intended to make a long statement in asking for these returns, and he thought that it would be better that he (Lord Carlingford) should reserve what he had to say until another opportunity, when it would be more appropriate to put it before the House. As to the returns asked for, those as to the cases decided had already been furnished, and there was no objection to give the rest, with the excep- tion of that involving an explanation in each case, as to the means taken by the Lord-lieutenant to ascertain that the sub-commissioners possessed a practical acquaintance with the -value of land in Ireland. The resignation of Mr Fottrell, who had been accused of writing a seditious pamphlet aiid circulating it under the name of Mr Godley, the cleric to the commission, had been tendered and accepted. Lord DUNSANY complained of the want of care displayed in appointing a man like Mr Fottrell to such a position. Earl FORTESCUE complained that Mr Fottrell should have been allowed to resign. The case was one which at least demanded dismissal. I Earl STANHOPE asked whether the Govern- ment had estimated the amount of time that would be required to adjudicate on all the cases before the commissioners. It was said they could not be completed for a century. Lord CARLINGFORD said the result depeuded on various facts, as to which there was no absolute assurance. It was known, however, that the number of cases being settled out of court was daily increasing. The Marquis of SALISBURY deprecated the manner in which the Government seemed to treat the question relative to Mr FottrelL If it were true that he had bad a hand in the concoc- tion of the pamphlet complained of, he (Lord Salisbury) should have heard with satisfaction that some graver notice had been, taken of his conduct than even a refusal to receive his resig- nation. Moreover Mr Godley must either have been exceedingly careless in sanctioning the pub- lication of the pamphlet, or he must nave been impressed with the idea that his superiors would view without distaste the encouragement thus given to that side of the Irish controversy which was hostile to the landlords. Earl GRANVILLE said as an important debate was to take place in that House on the working of the Land Act in Ireland, he thought it would be more satisfactory to withhold what he had to say on the subject. just raised till that occasion. At the same time be quite agreed with. the noble marquis that it was very reprehensible for a public officer to sanc- tion a publication without having acquainted him- self with the contents. The motion for returns, With the exception made by Lord Carlingford, was then agreed to. The House adjourned at 6.25.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY. The Speaker took the chair at four o'clock. THE ADJOURNED DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS. The debate on Mr Justin McCarthy's amend- ment to the address, in answer to the speech from the House, was resumed by Mr PLUNKET (C., Dublin University), who commenced his observations by congratulating the Solicitor-General for Ireland upon his first appear- ance in the House. He rejoiced that the Govern- ment could find some signs of improvement in the condition of Ireland, but they would be unwise to look with too much confidence to the evidence of the improvement, inasmuch as the gaols were full of agitators. Public meetings had been sup- pressed, and newspapers had been seized. Two years ago there was a wonderful absence of crime in Ireland, and the responsibility for the subse- quent suffering and wrongs of his country would, at first sight, rest upon those who had in the meantime charge of the Government of the country. It had been attempted to shift the responsibility upon the late Government, but it was not true, as had been represented, that the ministry of Lord Beaconsfield had no Irish policy except coercion, that they neglected the wants of Ireland, or that they refused enquiry upon proper occasions into the operation of the Land Act. When they entered office they found one of the strongest Coercion Acts in force that had ever been placed upon the statute-book, but they modified it to a very material extent without any injurious effect, and they succeeded in passing an University Act, and an Intermediate Education Act for Ireland. Under the late Government the Land League had begun its work, but was con- fined to a small area, and had not developed that dangerous principle which it afterward enunciated. Lord Beaconsfield recognised the gravity of the crisis, and staked his reputation as a statesman upon the necessity for dealing effectually with the new agitation that was beginning to manifest itself. The present Government, however, chose to adopt au exactly opposite view. They took an optimist view of the situation in Ireland, and the Land League had then been enabled to attain proportions which rendered drastic mea- sures of reprefcsi< >n absolutely necessary. The President of the Board of Trade had made a speech on the subject, which left the impression that he thought it fair, constitutional, and politic to ab- stain from strong measures against the leaders of the league, upon the ground that if the agitation had been interfered with at an earlier stage, the great reform which the government desired might not have been carried out; but he hoped to hear from the right hon. gentleman that that was not his meaning. The Land Act was passed to remedy exceptional cases of hardship, and ought to have been administered in a broad spirit—(hear, hear);—but it appeared that' large estates and small estates, well managed and ill-managed properties, old rents and rents lately fixed, were all treated very much in the same way, the average reduction j being 22 or 23 per cent. If the rental of the land- 1 lords of Ireland was to be reduced all round, fot high political purposes of state, unless compensa- 1 tion was granted there were no words too strong to characterise the injustice that would have been I worked upon them. The strength of the league 1 might now be broken down, but he feared that the next bad season would see its revival, and one of the most deplorable effects of two years of un- 1 checked agitation had been the undermining, to a great extent religious feeling and the demoralisa- tion of the people of Ireland. Turning to the Prime Minister's speech, which had been inter- preted as a promise of favourable consideration to 1 a project for giving Ireland separate representa- ( tive institutions, he wanted to know whether home rule was in future to be considered an open ques- tion ? Within the last two years the Irish people 1 had learnt to look more and more to America 1 than to England for a close alliance, and under 1 those circumstances it would be well that tne question whether the idea of separation should be entertained should be spoken of by statesmen with no uncertain voice. J Mr CHAMBERLAIN (President of Board of Trade), adhered to the statement that the Con- servativo party had no Irish policy excipt coer- cion. When social disorder had arisen to a great height, and had been based upon long-standing agrarian discontent, admittedly founded upon just causes of grievance, the Conservative party had no remedy to suggest but coercion more rigorously applied. True it was that, when in office, they appointed an agricultural commission which included Ireland, but commissions were the 1 Conservative method of shelving difficult ques- 1 tions. Those who complained of the tone of his £ comments upon the conduct of the Conservatives £ seemed to forget that during the last recess no stone was left unturned to discredit Ministers, or to embarrass them in the difficult and delicate task of the government of Ireland. No insinua- I tion had been too gross, no accusation too mon- strous, to be hurled against their devoted leaders 1 in regard to their Irish policy. It had been said r that they had, for party purposes, suffered crime 1 and outrage to go unpunished that the policy of the Government differed only in a slight degree from the Land League and the tf No Rent" mani- festo, and that the Prime Minister and Mr Par- nell might almost change places. Was that criti- cism which was altogether free from factious f motives ? The charge against the Government was that they ought to. have suppressed the Land £ League very much earlier than they did but having determined in the first instance to rely uj»on the operation of the ordinary law, they were f bound to wait'for some fresh circumstance m con- r nection with.the.league before they.proceeded to take a different line of action. He called upon Mr Northcote to prove or apologise for the state- ti ment.that; in his speech at Liverpool, he (Mr 1 Chamberlain) had admitted that the"Government Iff permitted brutal murders ?nd maimings to take Elace in order that they might pass a confiscatory iand Act. What he had said was exactly the J1 reverse, for he said that the Government would not tolerate outrage of any kind as a means of effecting political objects. He had not said that 11 they suffered agitation in order to pass the Land ° Bill but he did say that if agitation had been stifled, and, in consequence, no reform had been possible, that would have been a course fraught with danger. The decisions of the sub-commissioners showed that rack-rents had prevailed much more extensively than was supposed at the time when the Land Bill was before Parliament ? and that the sub-commis- n sioners had not acted unfairly was proved by the fact that agreements had been made out of court t for reductions to an even greater extent than 6: under the orders of the courts. The course the ? Government had taken had not tended to their personal advantage, nor to strengthen their party c] position but they had honestly endeavoured to do their duty, and to steer an even course be- J, tween extremes. He believed that in the main their policy had been just and necessary, and 1 that it would, after a reasonable lapse of time, contribute to restore in Ireland that peace and tranquility of which it stood so much in need, and on which alone the prosperity and welfare of its people could be established. Iv. Mr NORTHCOTE justified the reference I I made at Exeter to Mr Chamberlain's Liverpool iT speech. He did not, he said, accuse the right hon. Ii gentlemen personally of conniving at the out- gi rages, but he adhered to tho opinion that they { f< had, in order to pass the Land Act, shown cr'minal hesitation in dealing tvith them. Mr MARUM supported the amendment, and Mr BLENNERHASSETT defended the ministry, who, he said, had been associated for a long series of years with great political services to Ireland, and who, in his view, wore deserving of praise for hesitating to apply coercive measures against the land agitation. A great responsibility rested upon those whose advice drove tenants from their farms, and whose action in the House of Commons tended to divide Ireland still more from England,, and to postpone reforms which their country much needed. The land law had been made just, and must be obeyed, but for per- manent improvement in the state of Ireland Irish- men must rely mainly upon themselves. Mr BARRY (H.R., Wexford Co.) considered that the absence from the Queen's Speech of any reference to Irish legislation, except the continua- tion of the Coercion Act, afforded sufficient justi- fication for the amendment. Mr DICKSON (L., Dungannon) believed that if the Land Act of 1870 had been loyally accepted by the Irish landlords, 1he present crisis, if felt at all, would only have arisen in a very mitigated form. He was able, from personal observation, to bear testimony to the satisfactory working of the land court, but expressed the opinion that either the number of sub-commissioners would have to be doubled, or Griffith's valuation would have to be resorted to as a. temporary expedient. Lord GEORGE HAMILTON (C., Middlesex) read an extract from Mr Chamberlain's speech at Liverpool to show that the idea pervading it was that the Government deliberately restrained their hands from repressing the Land League, be- cause the agitation carried on by that organisa-, tion was of assistance to the Government in the passing of the Land Act. The delay was an act of deliberate power, and the result had been that Donegal, which 15 months ago was selected as a specimen county of order, had been given over to the rule of the unwritten law of the Land League. The Chief Secretary for Ireland had had to per- form difficult and painful duties at a critical period, and he believed that had that right hon. gentleman had his own way from the first, Ireland would now be in a very different position. One of the consequences of hot using at once the powers with which Parliament armed the Government was that Roman Catholic priests were forced to join the league, but a more serious matter had been the effect upon the administra- tion of the Land Act. The Act, as administered by the sub-commissioners, was not the Act as sanctioned by Parliament, and when the reductions' that had been made were traceable to the disturbed condition of the coun- try, and that disturbed condition was due to the conduct of the government, then, he argued, the government must be held responsible for the decisions of the commissioners. Owners of land in Ireland were induoed to support the government on the understanding that the government would, at all risks, maintain law and order in Ireland, and that whatever alterations they made in the land laws they would in no way accept the prin- ciples which they denounced as public plunder. The landlords had found both those conditions reversed, and that the Land Act, having been, passed by the assistance of the Land League. | was being interpreted by the sub-commissioners in the sense of some members of the league, and contrary to the interpretation put upon it by the government while the bill was before parliament." He invited the Prime Minister to consider what would be the verdict of posterity upon an Irish policy which made capital out of ridiculing the warnings of his predecessor, and ended in coercion, outrage, and spoliation. MrSHAW-LEFEVRE denied that the Land Act had been administered by partisan commis- sioners, or that the administration had resulted in publio plunder. Not only was there no evidence whatever that the act had resulted in injustice to. the landlords, but there was distinct proof that it had remedied immense evils and immense injus- tice to the tenants. The Land Act was the result not of the League, but of pledges given at the general election, and he knew of nothing more im- moral than the change of front of Mr Parnell and other leaders of the agitation in demanding when the act had passed the confiscation of tho land- lords' property. Nor did he know of anything more scandalous or audacious than the issue of the no rent" manifesto from the prison at Kil- mainham. Mr GRAY, replying to an observation of the previous speaker, quoted the statement of Mr Parnell, that he would have nothing to do with the League except a step in the direction of the legislative independence of Ireland. He con- tended at greatlength that Mr Parnell had done nothing, or said nothing, to call for bis arrest, and bitterly complained of the misrepresentations of different members of the government in their attempts to justify it. The debate was again adjourned, on the motion of Mr SEXTON. Mr REDMOND wished to state that he never had made in the house any statement which he had not made in Ireland, and after the arrest of Mr Parnell he bad urged his constituents not to pay rent, and was glad to say they had taken his advice.

WELSH SUNDAY CLOSING BILL. LEAVE TO BRING IN MR WARTON'S BILL REFUSED. Mr WARTON moved to bring in a bill to amend the Sunday Closing (Wales) Act, which was opposed by Mr Dillwyn and others, and on a division negatived by 51 to 18. The House adjourned at 2.20 &.m.

HOUSE OF LORDS—TUESDAY. THE PROPERTY OF MARRIED WOMEN. The Lord Chancellor took his seat at five o'clock, and shortly afterwarde presented a bill to consolidate and amend the act relating to the pro- perty of married women in England and Ireland. He reminded their lordships that the subject was considered by a select committee of the House of Commons last year, and stated that this bill was, with some modifications, the result of their deli- berations. The bill was read a first time. EGYPT AND TUNIS. Earl DE LA WARR asked the Foreign Secre- tary when it would be convenient to lay upon the table the papers and correspondence relating to Egypt, and if any information could be given with regard to the present relations between this country and the regency of Tunis. It was, according to his view, in a great measure owing to past intervention in Egypt that the present un- easiness existed. Earl GRANVILLE, in answer to the com- prehensive question of the noble earl, had to state, first of all with regard to Egypt, that a week ago the Marquis of Salisbury expressed a wish for papers to be presented on the subject if it could be done without detriment to the publio service, and in reply he rather intimated that at that particular moment Her Majesty's Government were of opinion that the papers should not be presented. He was glad to recognise that, though the general feeling of the House upon the subject was one of very considerable divergence, it was the wish of their lordships to avoid prema- ture discussion. He could only say with regard bo these papers that he quite shared the desire of the noble earl that they should be pre- sented as early as the Government could properly do so, and they had a great wish to present them, in order that their whole course of action might be CMvsidered. He could not, however, say that anything had occurred since last week to create a change in his opinion that it would not be desirable to publish the papers at that moment. With regard to Tunis, tie was not aware of any change in the relations between the Bey of Tunis and ourselves having occurred during the six months that had elapsed since the statement he made in answer to a question put to him in that house. With regard to the Treaty of Bardo, Her Majesty's Govern- ment had never been asked to give any formal recognition to the treaty, and they had not done 10. They had not thought it their duty in all the circumstances to show any hostility to what was undoubtedly the interest of France in that dis- trict, as on the other hand they had firmly asserted ;he right of that country tomaintainany privileges ¡hat we had obtained by treaty. Their lordships rose at half-past five o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—TUESDAY. The Speaker took the chair at four o'clock. THE COURSE OF BUSINESS. Baron DE WORMS, on the motion to postpone the orders of the day till after the debate on the Address, asked the Prime Minister whether he would afford facilities for a discussion on the per- secution to which the Jews in Russia have been lubjected. Sir H. D. WOLFF wished to know if it were ;rue that a compact had been entered into between ;he whips of the Government and of the Irish tarty that the debate on the Address should be >rought to a close that night, inasmuch as there vere several important matters on which hon. nembers desired to make remarks after the Irish [uestion had been disposed of. Mr R. POWER (H.R., Waterford) denied that .ny such compact as had been indicated had been ntered into between the whips. Mr GORST (C., Chatham) said there were ome important questions in reference to the i Transvaal arising on the Address. He wished, [)r instance to ask questions in reference ] I) parts of the treaty that had never < een fulfilled by the Boers, and were never ] ikely to be. It was also important that attention < houid be called to the case of a chief who had een placed in a position of great peril owing to ) is loyalty to England. f Colonel BARTTELOT (C., Sussex, W.) urged ( tiat the question of agricultural depression re- uired more consideration than had yet been iven to it. t Mr GLADSTONE said if the debate on the mendment now under discussion closed that ] ight, he proposed to take the report on the fol- > )wing day. With regard to the question as to i lie persecution of the Russian Jews, he concurred f l the observations made on that subject that i bjects of humanity were not likely to be for- a aided by debate on this matter. He had great oubt whether any debate that could take place in c lat House might not have the effect of raising in t portion of the population of another country a irther feeling of exasperation. This being so, he c as not in a position to give the hon. gentleman ] 3aron de Worms) assistance towards the attain- « tent of his object. t Mr GLADSTONE, in reply to Mr Dawson, I M.R., Carlow) and Mr Grey (Northumberland S.) ( lid he was in hopes that any remarks which £ ould follow the present amendment to the Ad- j rosa would not prevent the Irish Borough Fran- tiise Bill from being discussed to-morrow. He mid not, however, postpone the consideration of le Address in order to ensure the discussion of the ill

:ilE DEBATE ON THE AD ] DRESS. i THE DIVISION. The debate on the Address was then resumed by 1 Ir SEXTON (H.R., Sligo), who said the Land 1 league leaders had been accused of complicity t l the outrages and crime that had taken place in 1 reland, and the debate had resolved itself in a t reat measure into an attack oøtha hon. member I, )1: Cork, and Mr Sexton weut on to point out < that the present state d<vjings had been originated by the extreme rack rentals enforced by a needy class of landlords, until the tenants were unable to pay at all, and had even to pawn their clothes and furniture to sustain existence, while eviction notices fell like snow- flakes over the land. It was At this crisis, which occurred in 1879, that the Land League was established. The objects of the league were to put an end to rack-renting, to stop evictions, and to do away with landlord oppression. The first of these objects had been effected by the Land Act, and the time must come when British states- men would recognise the necessity of carrying out the second. He denied that the object, principles, and mode of action of the league had been changed in any way between the time of its establishment and its suppression. He also denied that the league had any connection with the outrage and crime that had been perpetrated in different parts of Ireland, and with.regard to the. system termed boycott- ing, he contended that-ths principle on which it rested was not peculiar to Ireland, but was known all the world over, and was just as much recog- nised and acted upon in Pall Mall as it was across the; Irish Channel. In point of fact, it sprang fromanirresistiblekistinct which drove men to resist injustice and wwmg. The object of that system was that by social and negative action the people should discountenance such things as evic- tion, the taking of farms from which the tenants had been unjustly evicted, and so forth. Boycott- ing, from the Land League point of view, had nothing to do with outrage, and in the speeches he (Mr Sexton) had scattered broadcast through Ireland he had always advised the people to con- fine themselves to the course recommended by tho league. It-was obvious that if heand his friends had taken any other course they would have been doing harm to the movement, because there could be little doubt that coercion would follow con- tinued outrage, and -coercion would have em- barrassed and hampered the movement. But for the Land League, ha argued, the Government would never have dealt with the question as they had done. With regard to what had happened in America, he denied that the Land League were in any way. responsible for what had appeared in thei/rM. World newspaper, but he said he thought the Government had no need to be sur- prised at finding that there was an- Ire- land in America, when they called to mind the thousands upon thousands of evicted and ruined tenants who had been compelled to cross the Atlantic, and-who had gone away with two: feelings in their hearts—love for the country they would never see taore, and fierce and eternal bate against the Government Of England. Speaking of the arrests made by the Government of the leaders of the Land League movement, the hon. member called attention to the fact that both Mr Parnelr and Mr DHhm 'Were put in prison' immediately after their repMes to the Prime Minister's speech at Leeds, and having stated the circumstances attending ins own arrest, which, he argued, was not justified by anything he had said or done, he entered into some details as to the treatment he had received while in gaol, ac- cusing the Chief Secretary of having used the fact of .his illness as an excuse for refusing to allow his friends to visit liitn, and of having caused him to be punished by. seven daya- solitary confinement for having signed the no rent" manifesto. He also stated that for reasons assigned L_ in the case of the: lowest class of convicts at Portland i and elsewhere, he was not allowed to receve only one visitor at a time. Speaking of the, light in which the administration of Mr Fonster would be regarded in the history of Ire- land, he said the right hon. gentleman would be Temembered by the Irish people as a sort of common-place, clumsy Cromwell, possessing the will to tyrannise over the country, but lacking the genius and capacity which belonged to the Protector. The hon. gentleman justified the re- commendation that certain test cases should' be selected for adjudication in the Land Court as a method of saving innumerable applications, and of promoting the settlement of a large number of cases out of court. With rwjaid to the no rent" manifesto, he contended that that had been necessitated by "the action of the Go- vernment, and if the Government were to restore to the Irishpeoplè their liberty and their constitution, that manifesto would be a dead letter to-morrow. He asserted that the 'Land Act had already been proved a failure; first, owing to its enormous cost, and next tecause it was wanting in the effect it was intended to have on the tenants. He believed the rents payable next March would be less than they were in Sep- tember, and that those of next September would be less than would be forthcoming, in March; The effect of the imprisonment of Mr Parnell had been that he would come forth stronger than ever in the affections of the people and, it was to be hoped, capable of leading to victory a people; taught-by bitter adversity to siiffer without 'giving.- way, and to struggle in dark and evil da3rs with- out losing hope. The House then divided, and the numbers were x<or tne amendment 30 Against 98 Majority against 68 The SPEAKER then put the question that the address be presented to Her Majesty, and' the House again divided, the-numbers being- For 87 Against 22 Majority 65

'THE MURDER OF CAPT, BROWNRIGG. Sir JOHN HAY (G., Wigtown Boroughs) called attention to the murder of Capt. C. Brown- rigg, R.N., and to the unsatisfactory state of our relations with France in our operations for sup- pression of the slave trade on the East Coast of Africa. The hon. baronet detailed the manner in which Capt. Brownrigg was killed by the crew of an Arab dhow, who had deceived Mm by having hoisted French colours, and spoke in highly eulogistic terms of the bravery he had dis- played in defending his launch against the Arabs. He recommended that the-system undwr which the right to carry French coloars was granted to all comers on a certain payment should be made the subject of representations tIJ the French Government, with the view of securing its ire- vision. He moved for papers. Sir C. DILKE said the French Government had shewn great reluctance to submit to any re- gulations such as would meet the present case. The hon. baronet detailed a number of instances in which representations had been made on the subject, and added that the French Government had expressed its willingness to do its best for the suppression of the slave trade. The papers on the subject would be presented to the House. Mr BENTINCK (C., Whitehaven) said Capt. Brownrigg had been assassinated by the crew of a vessel flying the French flag, and he could not but think that such an event would not in former days have been passed over by the English Go- vernment as quietly as had been the case in regard to this particular calamity. He regretted that on the occasion of the murder of a post cap- tain, no sufficient remonstrance had been offered, and hoped to hear from the Government that steps had been taken to obtain from the French Government an assurance of their regret at the circumstance, and of the intention to do what they could to prevent such proceedings in the fuhirn Mr TREVELYAN (AdmirSty) sptakh^g 'on behalf of the Admiralty, said the service of watching Arab dhows was a very peculiar and arduous one, requiring great care and vigilance to prevent, what often occurred before the capture of one of these vessels, the getting rid of the cargo. Captain Brownrigg's, services had been attended with very beneficial results, the number of slaves rescued during his command being upwards of 800, instead of something like 80, which was the usual number As far as the Irench Government were concerned, they had stated that the dhow whose crew committed the murder Jlnd no ri«bt to fly the French flag, and those of the crew who had been captured had been sentenced bv the Sultan of Zanzibar to imprisonment for life.' A COUNT OUT. At the suggestion of Mr WARTON, the House was counted, and there being fewer than 40 members present, tho House adjourned at 6.25

HOUSE OF COMMONS—WEDXESDAY. The Speaker took the chair at 12.30.

OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS. On the report of the Address, Sir H. D. WOLFF (C., Portsmouth) said he desired, before the report was agreed to, to put one or two questions to the. Government. Her Majesty's speech spoke of the cordial harmony existing between herself and foreign powers. He wished to know how far this European concert had been adopted in oarrving out those reforms in European and Asiatic Turkey which formed part of the original programme of Her Majesty's Government. As far as he could see all thoSpromises of reform made by Turkey were still unfulfilled, and lie hold that while they were allowed to remain unfulfilled great danger was likely to accrue to Europe. The hon. baronet went on to say that at tho present moment there were outrages going on in Armenia and Polish Russia similar to those which were reported from Ireland, whUe in the island of Cyprus the needed reforms had not been introduced, and the people still remained under the same despotism on the part of her Majesty's Commissioners as existed before her Majesty's Government came into office.. Turning to another matter connected with our foreign re- lations, the hon. baronet B&id he desired to point :ltlt the extraordinary conduct of her Majesty's with regard to their recent comma- aications through Mr Errington, whom he de- Icribed-as an animated telephone, with the Vati- can. He (Sir H. Wolff) had asked several questions ipon this subject, and all he had been ible to ascertain was that Earl Granville had transgressed not once, but twice, as he had com- nunicated with the Vatican not only through Mr Srrington, but also through Lord O'Hagan. He vished to know whether, these communications vere or were not on record in the Foreign Office, °F a' .l,refien': appeared as if Lord Granville cept these papers in his private despatch box, and ulowed nothing to be known outside his own ■oom upon the euHject. If this were so, it was a leliberate attempt on the part of the Government o conduct negotiations with the Vatican in the nost unconstitutional manner as to keep the iomuiunications secret from Parliament. He (Sir 1 I.i no objection to relations being sstablished with the Vatican on the contrary, he hought that such a course would be desirable )ut he protested against the course taken by the government. He wished to ask the Under 'e secretary whether Mr Errington's expenses were n\id. (Under Foreign Secretary) re- plied that Mr Errington.had ho remuneration. Sir H. D. WOLFF said then he would assume ;hat Mr Errington's expenses were paid, and that his was the reason why he still remaiuded in tvome. What,_ he aaked, was the object of Mr [irrmgton's visit? Was it in consequence of the i>iMt of Iving Humbert to.the Emperor of Austria, >r one of the results of the "hands off" of Her )rone of the results of the "hands off" of Her Vlajesty s present Government? It could not »ave been the negotiation of, a committee, because ■ne rope, unfortunately, had no commercial re- atittns with anybody. Was the hon, gentleman tO remain at Romp, or was he to be repla-^d bv a permanent official ? At any rate, the Government >u £ rut to see that the reports of what ■ okice -5 I on the subject were placed on record in the usual way. Mr ASHMEAD-BARTLETT (C., Eye) com- plained that her Majesty's Government, notwith- standing the credit it took for what had happened with regard to Greece, had only succeeded in obtaining for that country three-fifths of what was promised, while on the other band Greece was left with a debt of seven millions, while her Government had been destroyed, and even her monarchy was in peril. With regard to their Egyptian policy, the Government had, he said, lost a large share of their influence, and had erained nothing in return save the friendship of a fallen French Minister. He warned the Govern- ment that in the course they were taking of in- sulting Turkey in every possible way they were building up trouble, which might disturb ou r Eastern empire, and cost the country hundreds of millions af money, and thousands on thousands of lives. He asserted that by the course of policy pursued by the present administration they had created in Austria and Germany a strong feeling of hostility and distrust towards her Majestyis Government; and with reference to what had been done in Afghanistan, he expressed his disapproval of their action in reversing the policy of the late Govern- ment, and pointed out that Russia had of late made great advances towards Herat without remon- strance or check, and that some day or other— perhaps at a time when India was in revolt and an army obliged to be retained in Ireland—a war would be forced upon this country at a time to be chosen by the Russians themselves. Sir C. DILKE, referring to a statement made v? denied that the recent visit of Mr Goschen to Berlin had any connection with the Government or in any way touched on our relations with Germany. With regard to what had been said by Sir H. Wolff, the hon. baronet said he failed to see how the carrying out of the promised Turkish reforms could have had any effect in preventing a rising in the Herzegovina which wasdlrectcd against Austria. He said Sir H. Wolff had no right to have stated, without giving an authority, that the expenses of Mr Errington were to be paid by her Majesty's Government. Sir H. WOLFF said he made the statement on authority, and he believed Mr Errington was to be paid out of the Secret Service fund. j Sir C. DILKE said he took upon himself to denyoir H. Wolff s statement, and to say that Mr Errington was not to receive remuneration in any shape or form. He went on to contradict the statement of Mr Ashmead-Bartlett that the Eng- lish Government had encouraged Greece to mobi- lise her army, and had thereby very nearly been the cause of war. The fact was the English Government was the very last "to withdraw the objections which she and the other powers had lodged against the mobilisation of the Greek army, so that not only was the hon. gentlemen wrong, but the very converse of his statement was the truth. With regard to Egypt, the hon. baronet stated that all that the present Govern- ment had done was to endeavour loyally to carry out the policy of the late Govern- ment. The intention to do this had been distinctly recognised by Lord Salisbury, the leader of the Conservative party in the other tlouse, -.v <•» endorsed the action of Her Majesty's Government in ^ning the three points agreed upon, viz., the suprei* fK„ Sultan the liberties of the Egyptian people as guar»«^J. by the firman, and the European obligations with regard to the joint note. He denied in the strongest manner that there was any difference between the Prime Minister and Lord Granville on that subject. The difficulties of the present Government in Egypt had not come from revers- ing but from adopting the policy of the late Go- vernment. He denied that the dual note was a breach of precedent. On the contrary. it followed the precedent established by Lord Salisbury, With regard to what had been said as to Central Asia, he denied Mr Ashmead- Bartlett's statement that the Russians had ad- vanced 700 miles nearer to Afghanistan since the Candahar debate, and as to the allegation that England had broken up the European con- cert, he stated that the official relations of England and Germany were never more cordial than at the present moment. Her Majesty's Government believed in the concert of Europe as affording a means of dealing with questions arising both in and outside Europe which no other means would give. Indeed, in spite of recent difficulties, Her Majesty's Government did not despair of seeing the European concert used even in relation to the affairs of Egypt.

THE GOVERNMENT OF LONDON. Mr RITCHIE (C., Tower Hamlets), referring to the paragraph in the Speech relative to the question of the government of the metropolis, called the attention of the House and the Govern- ment to the importance of an improved water supply for London, and the necessity of speedy legislation on the subject. Sir W. HARCOURT (Home Secretary) said the question was one that had better be left for future consideration, and, if a new metropolitan government were established under the measure about to be introduced and considered by the House, this matter would necessarily engage its attention. After some remarks from Sir R. A. Cross (C., Lancashire, S.W.), Mr Firth (L., Chelsea), and Mr W. H. Smith (C., Westminster), on the same subject,

IRISH AFFAIRS AGAIN. Mr MACFARLANE (H.R., Carlow Co.). turned the debate back to the policy of the Government with regard to Ireland. Repudiating the idea that he could, though an Irish repre- sentative, be supposed to be biased hy Irish national sentiment,he asked how it was that there was no Irish member in the Cabinet, and who was it that the Chief Secretary for Ireland was in- variably an Englishman? Speaking as a calm spectator of the action of the Government, and giving due credit to the Irish Secretary for his good intentions, he regretted the way in which they had administered Irish affairs, and disre- garded the feelings. and the wishes of the Irish people. He compared the Irish Secretary to a new face on a clock, which only altered its ap- pearance without changing the time, and he added that one of the great mistakes made in re- gard to tho Dublin clock had been that it was always made to keep Greenwich time. He warned the Chief Secretary that the war he had entered on was one to which he was unable to see an end, as every man put in prison only came out of it more disloyal than he was before. Mr MACARTNEY (C., Tyrone) complained of the manner in which the sub-commissioners had discharged their duties, and, speaking of the existing agitation, said it was the agitators, and not so much the alien owners of property in Ire- land, who throve upon the proceeds of the Irish soil. Speaking of the loyal section of the Irish people, who, he said, had been termed by the Nationalists the English garrison," he admitted that they were the English garrison in the sense, that they intended to maintain the bond of union with England and, inasmuch as they had not rendered a bad account of themselves in former times when their services were needed, they would ill like manner be found not so easy to be got rid of should there be in the future any appeal to physical force. After a few words from Mr MITCHELL- HENRY (H.R., Galway), Mr DAWSON (H.R., Carlow) replied to some observations made by Mr Macartney, and denied that he had been actuated by meanness in not having given the usual banquet to the Lord Lieutenant, adding that he had put away J3500 of the fund awarded to the Lord Mayor of Dublin for a purpose that was far higher than the giving of banquets. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND (Mr Johnson) pointed out that although the Lord Mayor of Dublin had boycotted the Lord Lieutenant, the Lord Lieutenant had not boy- cotted the Lord Mayor, for on the last occasion when he (Mr Johnson) was at Dublin Castle he not only met the Lord Mayor there, but aJso the Lady Mayoress. The right hon. gentleman was continuing- his speech, and was speaking in defence of the com- missioners when, at a quarter to six, the debate stood adjourned. NEW BILLS. Leave was given to introduce the following bills:—Mr Robertson—bill to amend the law re- latiug to the use of gunpowder in mines; Col. Colthurst—bill to enable loans to be made to industrial and reformatory schools in Ireland Sir J. Lubbock's—bill to consolidate and co- dify the law relating to bills of exchange and pro- missory notes Mr Anderson—bill to amend the banking laws of Scotland; ditto to amend the law relating to patents for inventions.

THE PROCEDURE RULES. Mr GLADSTONE gave notice that to-morrow, at half-past four, he will move that the orders, after the termination of the debate on the Ad- dress, be postponed till after the resolutions to alter the rules of procedure. The House adjourned at 5.55 p.m. ;—«—

HOUSE OF LORDS.—Thursday. The Lord Chancellor took his seat at & o'clock. THE ATTACK ON BRITISH OFFICERS IN ALBANIA. < Lord BARRINGTON inquired whether the Government had any information to give with reference to the attack upon British officers by Albanians near the Sea, of Marmora, and ex- pressed his opinion that the lamentable occurrence was in a great measure due to tho indiscretion of the officers in going upon such an excursion with- ■ out being accompanied by some one acquainted with the language of the inhabitants. 5 Eari GRANVILLE thought the best answer he could give would be to read two telegrams he had received from Lord Dufferin I with reference to that most deplorable business. t The first telegram was dated 14th Feb., 1882, 9.15 p.m.I am sorry to say that Captain Selby, of H. M.S. Falcon, whilst out shooting j yesterday, near Artaki, on the south coast of the Sea of Marmora, in company with Capt Greufell, of the Cockatrice, was attacked by Albanian shep- yesterday, near Artaki, on the south coast of the r Sea of Marmora, in company with Capt Grenfell, of the Cockatrice, was attacked by Albanian shep- :¡ herds, without having given them the slightest f provocotion. Selby has been very dangerously r wounded oh the head with an axe, the blow hav- ing fractured his skull. When endeavouring t to take the wounded officer to the boats, t ] the party was set upon by the villagers, I their guns were taken from them and their hands were bound, until Mr Consul Wrench, who had F gone to shoot in a different direction, returned, t and induced the villagers to release them. The Falcon has returned here. Selby is in a very 1 dangerous state. The Admiral at Malta, the I Admiralty, and Captain Selby's mother have been telegraphed to by Captain Grenfell. I am in the I act of bringing this sad affair to the notice of the Sultan and of the Prime Minister, and will leave d nothing undone to secure the punishment of the t perpetrators of the crime. The man who first attacked Selby and Capt. Grenfell might have been r easily shot, but Selby laid down his gun in order v that he might not be provoked into firing at him. e One of the sailors seized Captain Selby's gun, and I fired it at the assassin, and Captain Grenfell then 1 fired at his assailant, but the guns being only ] loaded with simple shot, neither of the men was I seriously hurt. I should be glad to know if yonr ( lordship has any special instructions to send mo in c reference to this case." There was another tele- ( gram from Lord Dufferin, dated February 15th, ] 1882, delivered at 2.1& p.m., and it wail to this < effect-;—" Cautain SeUisr kas sleet tranquilly, tot J six hours, and has taken some food. There is to be a consultation of doctors this afternoon. He is conscious, but has an imperfect command of the words he wishes to use." As regards the sugges- tion that the officers had been guilty of some im- prudence in landing without an interpreter, it ap- peared that they had with them a person per- fectly capable of making himself understood by the Albanians.

MR ERRINGTON, M.P., AND THE VATICAN. Lord BALFOUR asked whether Mr Errington had received any authority from the Foreign Secretary to enter into communication with the Vatican on matters of interest to Her Majesty's Government, and to the papal see whether any letter had been addressed to Mr Errington by the Secretary of State, with the view of being shown to the Cardinal Secretary of State, pointing out Mr Errington as a gentleman whh could treat confidentially with the Vatican on such matters and whether Cardinal Jacobini had in consequence received Mr Errington as the recommended agent of the British Government: whether any communication had beeu made by Mr Errington to the Secretary of State, as well as to Cardinal Jacobini, as the result of such an arrangement; and, if so, whether these communications would be laid on the the table. Earl GRANVILLE had no addition to make to the answers already given on the subject in another place. Mr Errington was not asked by Her Majesty's Government to go to Rome. Mr Errington had received no appointment. Mr Errington had no authority from him or from any member of the Government to negotiate with the Vatican, or to make proposals or requests to the Vatican. Mr Errington had received no re- muneration. Mr Errington told the Government that he was going to spend the winter at Rome, and he (Earl Granville), after consultation with one of his colleagues, told him that the fact of his having a good position in the House of Commons, of his being well known in Rome, and of his pos- sessing the full confidence of her Majesty's Government, gave him very great opportunities of giving useful and authentic information. During the time that there were paid diplomatic agents residing in Rome, their instructions were on several occasions asked for and refused, and it was not usual to lay before Parliament papers which were not of a diplomatic and official character. It was exceedingly inconvenient to answer in detail a series of leading questions with regard to papers whi<» Ministers were not prepared to lay before Parliament. In the other House, after the declara- tion of Sir Charies Dilke that Mr Errington had received no remuneration, an hon. member said he knew for a fact that Mr Errington's expenses were defrayed out of the secret service money. Sir Charles Dilke pointed out the exceedingly embarrassing- position in which ministers were placed in being called upon to give a negative to such an assertion, and the dangerous precedent that might be created by making any reply in such a case. Behaving, however, with his usual judg- ment, the Under-Secretary, after taking the advice of some of his colleagues, replied at last by a complete denial of the statement, and, with great courage, added that he had not the authority of Earl Granvflle f6r the course he was taking, bis object being to guard against the charge, wh" might result from establishing a precedent for inquiries as to the application of the secret service money, fits (Tiord Granville) was per- fectly conversant with the fwtq, and knew that not a shilling had been authorised to be given to Mr Errington. But after what had Jccurted he thought it better to get Sir Augustin Pago*, t'. agjj Mr Errington if he had received any money n. I any shape from Her Majesty's Government with reference to his visit to Rotne. The answer which has just come to hand was as follows "In reply to your note, I beg to say I have not received any money, directly or indirectly, from Her Majesty's Government, or any meniber of it, for. any pur- pose whatever. I have incurred no ex- penses, except in travelling for my own pleasure." He thought it right to make this statement, especially to guard himself from the obligation of answering assertions with reference to matters which ought not to be made known to the whole world, and to protect him- self from the supposition that if he did not give a positive answer, he admitted the truth of the suggestion contained in the question. The Marquis of SALISBURY thought the noble earl did not perhaps fully appreciate the meaning that might be put upon his state- ment that Mr Errington had the full confidence of the Government, and therefore would be in a condition to give information. These words might be interpreted to mean that Mr Errington was fully acquainted with the policy of the Government, and was in fact an unpaid and un- accredited diplomatic agent. He did not blame the noble earl for the communication he had thought fit to make, but his impression was that the reticence observed would rather injure the object the noble earl had in view, and the people would attach more importance to the statement on account of the doubt and ambiguity that hunr over Mr Errington's position. Tne House adjourned «t^10 minutes to 6 o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS. —THURSDAY. The Speaker took the chair at 4 o'clock. WELSH SUNDAY CLOSING. Sir WILFRID LAWSON (L., Carlisle) said the hon. member for Bridport had asked leave to introduce a Sunday Closing (Wales) Amendmen Bill. That bill he was not allowed to bring in. (MrWarton: Sunday Closing (Wales) Explanation Bill.)—He (Sir Wilfrid) was under the impression that it was the duty of the House to initiate legis- lation, and to amend previous legislation, but that it was not the duty to explain acts of Parliament, that being reserved for courts of law. He wished to know if the hon. member was in order in en- deavouring to introduce under another name a bill which the House had already refused leave to in- troduce. The SPEAKER said he was not prepared to answer the question. The notice of the hon. member for Bridport was irregular, if the bill he now proposed to introduce was substantially the same as that for which the application had been refused by the House on a late occasion. Mr WARTON said the hon baronet courteously sent him a note yesterday to say he meant to out this question. The bill he (Mr Warton) proposed introducing now was for a totally different object to that of the previous bill. He had been asked in the smoking room what the object of the firt bill was, and he told the hon. member who in- quired that it was a bill to exempt certain places in Wales. The SPEAKER said the hon. member was not in order in referring to a bill which the House had refused him permission to introduce. Mr WARTON said he would not refer to it again, but lie was going to say he would satisfy the hon. baronet that there were two very different objects in those two very different bills. The first was to exempt certain places in Wales. (" Order.") This last bill was not for the purpose of exempting, but for explaining the legal effect of the Sunday Closing Bill itself. He might say that those who brought in last year's bill did not understand the bearing of the bill itself. ("Oh "t Sir WILFRID LAWSON was understood to say that the hon. member could not bring in a bill to explain a legal point.

THE ACCIDENT TO THE QUEEN. The Marquis of HARTINGTON (Indian Secre- tary), replying to Mr Warton's question, said that neither himself nor either of his colleagues had received any information as to the rumour of an accident to her Majesty, and he bad no reason to think there was the slightest foundation for it. (Hear, hear.)

THE PROCEDURE RULES. The Marquis of HARTINGTON, on behalf of the Prime Minister, said that as there apjieared to be no probability of the debate on the address finishing at an early hour, his right hon. friend did not intend to move the resolutions in reference to the procedure cf the House until Monday. Lord R. CHURCHILL (C., Woodstock) asked why, when the debate appeared about to close yesterday, did the Attorney-General for Ireland diligently talk it out. {" Ofi, oh," and laughter.) The Marquis of HARTINGTON said he was not present, but he understood that there was no probabity of the debate closing yesterday after- noon, as several members rose at the same time as his right hon and learned friend. The Marqnis of HARTINGTON, in answer to I Mr M. Henry, said there was no intention of pushing on the discussion of the new rule de die in dim and, indeed, without the consent of tho House, that could not be done. Mr GORST (C., Chatham) wished to know if the first rule were dropped would it be applied in the discussion of the others. (Hear, hear.) The Marquis of HARTINGTON replied that must depend on the action of the House, and was not to be decided by the Government. AN EXPLANATION. Mr GRAY, in reference to what Mr Forster iiad stated on Friday as to his conversation with Mr Fottrell upon the appointment of the latter as solicitor of the Land Commission, asked Mr forster if he could give the House any further explanation. Mr FORSTER then explained that he had been nistaken in saying that what he had said in -aference to Mr Fottrell's action in negotiating the mrchase of Mr Pigot's newspaper from the Land League was the result of a conversation with Mr iottrell himself. His information must have been eceived from some other gentleman. In answer to questions from Lord John Manners md others, Mr FORSTER then read letters on the subject rom Mr Fottrell, Justice O'Hagan, and Mr Sash, law adviser to Dublin Castle; and from hese it appeared that, after his appointment, Mr .ottreUmformed Justice O'Hagan that he had 7 .cted for Mr Parnell and others in the transao- ions for the purchase of Mr Pigot's newspaper, 'ut Mr 0 Hagan did not attach much importance o it, for it v. as a matter in which any solicitor night have acted.

THE REPORT OF THE ADDRESS. I On the order for the resumption of the adjourned lebate on the report of the Address, in answer to he Speech from the Throne, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND ose for the purpose of continuing the speech which The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND oso for the purpose of continuing the speech which ras interrupted on the preceding day by the action of the standing order requiring that all de- )ates shall cease at a quarter to six o'clock on Wednesday. He said it was complained that the jand Act had not produced its intended result, low, he asked, could it be expected to do so Jnly four months had elapsed since it came into operation, and during that period it had had to encounter the unremitting opposition of the Land League. It was not, he said, the intention of the government to sweep a drag net over Ireland, .w.. the ffaois. but simply to exercise with a wise discretion the powers entrusted to them by Parliament. Unnecessary severity was not part of tne policy oftlis Liberal party. Replying to Lord Randolph Churchill, of whom he said an Irish newspaper had predicted that he c. intended to go for Mr Gladstone, and to wipe off a large balance of arrears by as crushing an onslaught as the forms of Parliament would allow," the right hon. gen- tleman pointed out that the noble lord, who was the son of a duke, under whom, as Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, he had the opportunity of studying Irish politics, taunted the Government with not having used the Coercion Act as similar acts had been used—acts which were directed against un- scrupulous persons being unuecessarily unscrupu lously used. He (Mr Johnson) thought that the greatest praise that could be conferred on the Government was that it had not been unscrupu- lously used. Referring to the action of the Irish national press in regard to the Land League agitation, the right hon. gentleman stated that the paper called United Ireland, which the Government had seized for its seditious articles, was published by a company, entitled the Irish National Newspaper Publishing Company, Limited. The persons re- sponsible for this journal included,' among its proprietors, Mr Parnell, holding 236 £ 10 shares Mr Egan, 237 shares Dr. Kenny, 10 shares Mr Biggar, 10 shares. The hon. gentleman called at- tion to the large inflow of money from America and elsewhere, pointing out that this was depend- ent on the maintenance of the Land League prin- ciples and the no rent" manifesto, and then pro- ceeded to quote from the speeches made by the leaders of the Land League in proof of the charges made against those wno had been subjected io- arrest, arguing that no Government oould possibly have retained office and not have arrested Mr Parnell. He cited a case in which Mr Dillon, as chairman of a public meeting, had stated that it was a rule of the Land League that the Land Act was not to be tested without the assent of the League. Having gone into some details as to the outrages that had been committed in various parts of the country, the right hon. gentleman remarked that crime was not to be handled with kid gloves, and that so long as he was public prosecutor in Ire- land he would take care that no part of the law was surrendered byanyactionof his. He described the members of the League working through the Ladies' League as men who, being afraid to lead the van, sheltered themselves under the petticoats of the women. This was not brave or heroic, but it was the result of the advice and action of the Land League. He desired, however, that those who were keeping up this agitation should under- stand that it was the intention of the Government that the law should be obeyed, the Queen's authoaity vindicated, and the integrity of the empire preserved. Mr T. D. SULLIVAN (H.R., Westmeath), who followed, complained of the tone adopted by the Attorney-General for Ireland, and accused him of having greatly exaggerated the actual con- dition of affairs in Ireland. He said the fact that Mr ParneU had advised that the agitation should be kept within constitutional lines had been over- looked by the Government, who preferred to seize on isolated and random phrases, which they chose to regard as incitements to criminal or illegal practices. Mr G. BENTINCK, who thought that the Irish question had been already sufficiently dis- cussed, and who only wished to remark upon it that after the stimulus given to agitation by the Land Act, no remedy was left but the proclama- tion of martial law, desired to call the attention of the House to the condition of our navy, which he believed was such as not only failed to justify the statement made in the Queen's SpMch, but, the case of a great European struggle being b'"M-"k about, would not ensure either the main- tenance O't. 't)pur and dignity of the country -Safety. He advocated an SSsere ex'ftmg fleei w » number of swift Mr LABOUCHERE, referring to the Irish question, reminded the House that the Govern- ment had promised not to administer the Coercion Act against the Land Leaguers as such, but he contended that contact with the officials of Dublin Castle had injured the moral fibre of the Chief Secretary, and he soon began to alter the views with which he had gone over to Ireland. If Mr Parnell had been arrested for preventing tenants from going into the Land League Court, why did the Government not arrest some of the landlords, several' of whom had threatened to evict their tenants if they went to the court. Turning to the question of Home Rule, he quoted from a speech made last autumn by Mr Gladstone, in which the Prime Minister said he would hail with satisfac- tion any plan for improved local self-government m Ireland that did not interfere with the supre- macy of British rule, and he expressed a hope that Mr Gladstone would undertake himself to bring forward a measure that would carry out this senti- ment. ^• LOWTHER trusted that the Prime Minister would either speedily satisfy the hope just expressed, or allay the fears of those who in- ferred that he was abjut to do so. Referring to a speech in which Mr Gladstone had spoken himself, as having had the go by given to his assertions with regard to the state of Ireland by the vote of the Dublin Corporation, in- refusing to confer the freedom of the city on Mr Parnell. the right hon. gentleman reminded the House that since then the freedom of Dublin had been conferred on the member for Cork, while the city which Mr Parnell represented had followed the I exifflple of the Irish metropolis. He repeated his I former assertion, with which Mr Gladstone had found fault, that there was evidence showing that a large majority of the Irish people were opposed to the British Government. Mr O'CONNOR POWER deprecated, in strong terms, the tone and policy of the late Chief Secretary, whom he accused of belonging to a section of the Tory party who were disposed to perpetuate the division between England and Ire- land. Mr GLADSTONE characterised the speech of Mr Lowther as a memorable one, but said he had expected from him a different reply from that which he had received from that gentleman to his appeal to all sections of the people to support the Government in the performance of the duty it owed to Ireland. The right hon. gentleman had stated that the majority of the Irish people were opposed to British rule—language calculated to add force to the force with which the Govern- ment Were contending, and to reduce the force which the Government were able themselves to I exercise. Mr Gladstone went on to recall the opposition offered by the Conservative party to the Land Act, and expressed his dissent from the statement that the Land League represented the sentiments of the bulk of the Irish people. He was not prepared to give to Ireland anything that he should not be willing to give to Scotland. With respect to the crisis in Ireland, that crisis which was created in October was created not by the Government, but by the Land League, who at about that time made new ad vances, which had led to the arrests that were made. Col. BARTTELOT (C., Sussex, W.) moved the adjournment of the debate. The motion was agreed to. Mr MONK (L., Gloucester) moved the second reading of the Churchwardens Admission Bill. The object of the bill was to facilitate the admis- sion of churchwardens by reducing the fees and simplifying the forms. After some further discussion the House divided, and the numbers were—For the second reading, 86; against, 20. Leave was given to bring in the following bills:- Mr Fawcett-A bill to authorise the use of reply postcards. Sir H. Holland-A bill to amend the law of distress. The House adjourned at 1.45.

THE CLOTURE. The Press Association" has reason to believe that before rule 1 of Mr Gladstone's procedure resolutions was adopted by the Cabinet, several Liberal members were invited to express their opinion as to either two-thirds or three-fourths majority, it was only then that the Cabinet de- cided upon proposing the cloture by a bare majority.

SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE ON CURRENT EVENTS. Sir Stafford Northcote attended a banquet given on Wednesday by the Balham Branch of the East Surrey Conservative Association. Responding to the toast of the Conservative cause, he said though the Conservatives were in a decided minority in the present Parliament they had upon one occasion been able by the help of some who were politically opposed to them to check the power of a majority. He pointed out the danger to the Conservative cause arising from the spread of revolutionary principles. Progress might be too rapid. Referring to the letter of the Liberal federation from Birmingham, calling upon Liberal members to support Mr Gladstone's reso- lution, he said members were dictated to by a caucus. Speaking of the procedure in the Rouse of Commons, he said when attempts were made to curtail the liberty of debate, ministers were treading upon delicate ground. He should do his utmost to bring these rules into such shape as would facilitate the business of the House with- out curtailing the privileges of private members. Government must always be one having the con- fidence of the country, but the present Govern- ment, which had the confidence when they entered office, where gradually losing it. Reckless language of ministers had induced great diffi- culties in Ireland, and caused much mischief which might have been avoided had they fully realised the position of affairs when they cauie into office. J

KICKED TO DEATH BY A HORSE AT PENARTH. A sad accident has occurred at the Highlands, Llandough, formerly the residence of the late Mr Alderman Bow er,. Samuel Grace, 60 years of age, who had been in Mr Bowen's employ for upwards1* of 25 years, and since the death of his master has been in charge of tho house at tho top of Llan- dough-hill, met with a fatal accident on Wednes- day. It appears he went to the. stable for the purpose of feeding the pony, and it is supposed that he afterwards commenced to clean out the stall, and that the pony became excited and vicious, as it lias not done any work f( r several months past. It is certain, however, that Mr Giace was knocked down, trampled on, <wid se- verely kicked about the head and thigh. The ribs c'f one side of his body were completely broken in. He managed to get out and crawl to the back-door of the house, where his groans were heard by Mrs Grace. Medical assistance was im- I mediately sent for, but no hope of recovery was held out, as internal hemorrhage set in, and t!;(; poor fwiiow died at two o'clock i.n Thursdav morn { ing. He leaves a widow and one daughter!

Mr A^;Oardaer, who ha, remained at I;rid- Hospital since the oata-tmphe tr- the Killoon Salaam, left there on Thursday tuorniiiz far Jjondou,

■■ ■ 1- -rTTMia. y CA RDIFF (CANTON WA RD> MUNICIPAL ELECTION: NOMINATION OF CANDIDATES. MR CORBETT'S CANDIDATURE. The following nominations for the seat in Uie town couucil vacant by the resignation of Mr W J. Newbery were made at the office of the tow» clerk on Thursday :— William Sanders, Doncaster Villa, Canton, manager of building society. Nominated by 0. » ii Dulwich House, and James Home, Suf- T?ouse' Second nomination: Clias. Thoni«»- S?.n.> Preswylfa, and David Morgan, Sunny Book. Third nomination W. P. James, Roinilly-cres- oent, and George Dobson, Romilly.road. Fourth nomtnatian Henry Marshall, 49, Holmesdale- street, and Samuel Mildon, Clive street. Fifth nomination: W Grimes, 22, Kent-street, and Thos. Diamond, 34, Kent-street. Sixth nomina- tion: Chas. Abraliamson, Bromsgrove-street, Grangetown, and Thos. Alexander, 11, Lucknow- street, Grangetown. James Andrew Corbott, Pontcanna Farm, Llandaff, solicitor. Nominated by Thos. Vaughaa Yorath, Romilly-crescent, and \Villiain GoorgtL King's-road. "Second nomination Daniel Lloyfl Lougher, Manor House, Leckwith-road, and Joba i Stibbs, 11, «Conway-road. Third nomination: William Richards, 33, Kent-street, and Edward William Penn, 2, Thomas-street, Grangetown. Fourth nomination William Headford, 2, Knofo- street, and William Harry, 14, Wyndliam-cre*- cent. Fitth nomination: Chas. Earnshaw, 51, Kent-street, and James Green. 62, Hewell-stroet, Grangetown. MrJ. A. Corbett, one of the candidates fortht representation of the Canton Ward at the Cardiff Town Council, addressed a crowded meeting aft- the National School-room, Canton, on Wednes- day evening. Mr Councillor Yorath presided, and there were present among those supportidg the candidate, Mr R. E. Spencer, Dr. VacheM, Mr J. W. Vachell, Mr J. A. Ie Boulanger, Mr K" H. Capper, Mr Councillor Lougher, and Mr E. Grogan. The CHAIRMAN, in opening the proceedings, remarked in connection with the Bute Dock BiII," that if the people of Cardiff allowed this oppeitU> nity to pass by it might not recur for seven, tea, or 20 years. The measure had the support of all, or nearly all, the influential members of the cor: poration, but there were a few Radicals who did oppose it, and no doubt these gentlemen would be remembered at the next municipal election. (Ap- plause.) Mr CoBBETT, who was received with applauae. remarked that he did not attach sufficient impor- tance to the address of Mr Sanders, however numerously signed it was, to be at aU frightened by it. He had not been able to extract one hint from Mr Sanders's addNllisas to what that gentle- man's views were on ant question affecting the ward or borough. Proceeding to expound his own views, he referred to the Bute Dock Bill, and said that, judging Mr Sanders by the company he he thought it was fair to assume that Mr SamMM) would have voted ft- the amendment at tin council meeting on Monday. That amendment was rather an ingeniously worded one. Tt based upon the feeling which he could best describe by the quotation, Willmf to wound and yet afraid to strike." Its undoubted object was to prevent the corporation of Cardiff expressing the views of the town in a petition to Parliament in favour of ttie bill. He was in favour of the bill. Indeed, that was the principle reason why he was there that evening, for it seemed to him most important that whoever was selected at this juncture by the electors should have plain and pronounced opuuontt upon that subject. Upon this he invited them to eucit an opinion from Mr Sanders when they had the opportunity. If Mr Sanders said he was in favour of the bill, then he (Mr Corbett) thought rt. WOvJ1 ^e strongest possible evidence tnat tne why*of Cardiff was unanimous in support of it. ir, ^e other hand, Mr 84 not favour of the measure, ^e"th.Kre would. issua tween them—an issue which he ahlced th* oWbrWv to decide on Saturday week. That, be thought, would be a more suitable test question thaa whether Mr Sanders had served his part v well in the registration court or not. (Applause.) A vote of confidence in Mr Corbett was pro- posed by Mr HUTCHINGS, and seoonded by Mr BAUQH. Mr E. H. CAPPER supported the candidature of Mr Corbett. He remarked that it was impossible for Mr Sanders to take any l&ut a one-sided view of every question which came before the tows council, for he was a paid servant of the Liberal Association, and no man whose livelihood de- pended upon bis political views was fit to be a member of the town council. Mr LOUGHKK, Dr. V ACRELL, and others sap- ported Mr Corbett's candidature, the expenditure of half a million of money in connection with the docks being frequently alluded to. The vote of confidence in Mr Corbett was carried unanimously. A meeting of ratepayers of Grangetown WM held at the National Schoolroom, Grangetown, on Thursday evening, to support the candidature of Mr James Andrew Corbett. Although the meet- mg was announced for 8 o'clock, th« proceeding* aid not commence till half-past 8 o'clock, aud then the room was only very partially filled. Mr Penn was called upon to preside. Mr Corbett delivered an address. He depreciated politics, and felt that men might make very good town coun- cillors with whom they widely differed on ques- tions of foreign policy. He professed himself in favour of carrying out the private improvementB as soon as the buildings were completed in tMt streets. He was also in favour of having an ex- elusive cattle market for Canton. Passing on to increased dock accommodation at Cardiff, he spoke strongly in favour of Lord Bute's bill, for the employment it would afford during its con- struction, and the stimulus it would give to trade. He referred to the speech of Mr J. 0. Riches at theshipowner's dinner, and also to the speech made by him at the meeting of the chamber of commerce on the previous day, when he endeavoured to show that the construction of additional docks at Cardiff was useless now, and that they should have been commenced years ago, as by the time the dock was constructed Cardiff would have passed its zenith of commercial prosperity.—A vote of confidence in Mr Corbett having been proposed and seconded, Mr Hnrtnett, a Roman Catholic elector of Roath, delivered some re- marks, criticising the conduct of Mr Sanders, the Liberal candidate, and asking what he had done for Cardiff or Grangetown.—Mr Marshall, a resident of Grangetown, rose to reply, in answer to the question what had Mr Sanders done. He said that he was quite willing to support Mr Corbett, on another occasion, and would like to see Mr Corbett, and more particularly Mr Forrest, member of the town council, but at this election be should support to the utmost of his power Mr William Sanders. He referred to the meeting of the corporation on Monday, and pointed out that those who opposed the bill M ure not opponents to it in the sense imputed to them. Mr Rees Jones opposed it on the ground that there was one: clause in it which gave Lord Bute a monopoly of labour. Take out this clause, and Mr Rees Jones would support the bill as far as he could. The monopoly of labour was one of the worst things that could hapten to the working man, and he (the speaker) hoped that the bill would be opposed by every working man in Car- diff until the clause was expunged. (Cheers.) Mr Hartnett had asked what Mr Sanders had done for Grangetown. (A voice: "Nothing but leave us to walk about up to our knees in mud.') He admitted that they had to walk about in mud, but before Mr Sanders was elected as one of the members to the council they had to walk through the same amount of mud in darkness. Before he entered the council all the members said that it was a private road and they could not light if but Mr oanders said they could, and the result svax that the gas lamps were placed there. Then again as to the rating quest.on. It was through his efforft that the change had been made. The borough rate was then 8d in the pound, now it was 6d In the pound, and that was 2d in the pound saved to the ratepayers by Mr Sanders' action. These things were worthy of their consideration, as working men, and the great reason why they ehould on this occasion use all their influence to secure Mr Sanders's election. He intended to use all his efforts to secure Mr Sanders's re-clec- tion, although on a future occasion he would quite as willingly support Mr Corbett. Mr Marshall was well received, and at times loudly applauded. After some other short addresseslthe resolution, approving- of Mr Corbett's candidature, wa* put to the meeting and carried.

LISVANE PLOUGHING MATCH The seventh annual ploughing match took place oil \V ednesday on fields belonging to Mr G. W. G. Thomas, The Heath. Despite the nufavour-' able weather, 13 teams put in an appearance, and the work done reflected great credit on the com- petttors. Messrs Akers (Pentrebano, St. Fagans), W. Evans (Coedygloran), and John Williams (Lisvane), acted as judges, and Mr John lioberts, Malthonse Farm, Lisvane, very effi- ciently carried out the duties of secretary The follow ing were the awards :— CHAMPION ( I.ASS.— Open to 11.11 comers—1st prize £4. loomas Griflitlis, Lisvane; 2nd, £ 2, Jolin Mead. Monachly 6n! prize divided between HowlandThouuw and. Lewis Oartlett. • —t^pento all who have not won a first prize in tll! cl;¡'c;'J-ht pri1..e, M. Lewis Junes, lAneuare; 211d, ^hoiuas Marshall .)roll, £1, Kduiund Watkiiu: nth, Charles Sims. Cr,Ass III.—1st prize, David Thonvn, Llani.shen 2nd, Wiliiatn nusband, Lisvane. After the match about fifty sat down to A sumptuous repast not the Church Inn, I.Ianisi,en. prepared by Host Lewis. Mr Wri te presided, and Mr Roberts occupied the vice-eliair. Aftet the cloth was removed the usual loyal and patriotic toasts were proposed and drunk with musical honourp. The CHAIRMAN then proposed the "Health of the Judges and Secretary," coupling with the toast the names of Mr Titus Llewellyn, Mr V\ ilhamSj and Air Rolterts. ^i-^vki.lyn responded, and said that it wa* wit U reluctance he rose because lie had not acted as judge, but it afforded him great pleasure to be present. He thought it was the duty of every agriculturist to support societie of this kind. Had it not been for competition he did not think our country would be what it is at present, both in regard to its agricultural and commercial business. Hy competition the differ- ent classes were enabled to bring out their talent. and slctil. Mr WIWIAHS AIGO responded, and said if thejr were to travel oil England and Wales he did not T'G^ c witness keener competition, ■vi' r< ^ext pri)j<>sed the "Health of i • '/T- Th'unas, The Heath, and said the tjisvane Ploughing Society were fFeatly indebted w him for no handsomely subscribing to its funds, and fuI' placing his fields at their disposal. Mr l >ONNi £ responded. Other toasts followed, and a pleasant evening w as spent.

Sir Will Harcoun. iia-8 written t" Mr Arnold Moik v, M.i\, am-ounein" that having had iaid before him the application on behalf of Henry Westbv, under sentence of death for murder at Nottingham, he had, after further medical inquiry, ad vised hM Majesty to rebate the ORPU-H! eeuteuea.