government. The same authorities had apprised the
Hospodar that this course was not taken for the purpose
of altering the existing order of things, but that it had
been deemed necessary that the sovereign power should
be temporarily suspended during the military occupation
of the provinces. His lordship said that he was
also informed that a similar intimation would be given
to the Hospodar of Wallachia, but such a course had
not been taken up to the 22nd of July. In the event of
such intimation being given, it was the intention of the
Sultan to order the Hospodar of Wallachia to retire from
that province and to abandon his functions. Under
such circumstances, his lordship said that he should
consider it highly improper for the British consuls to
continue to exercise authority in those provinces, and he
had lost no time in communicating such opinion to Lord
Stratford. He further informed their lordships that a
messenger would leave London that night for St Petersburg,
with instructions to Sir Hamilton Seymour to
demand from the Russian government the explanations
to which her Majesty's government were entitled.

Lord TORRINGTON presented a petition from merchants
and planters in Ceylon, complaining of the Treasury
minute which permitted the Mixing Chicory with Coffee.
He supported the prayer, and denounced the unwholesome
mixture forced on the public.—The Earl of ABERDEEN
said that the minute had been rendered necessary
by previous abuses, and he defended the mixture in
question as harmless, and as generally preferred. Half
the coffee in Europe was, he said, chicory; but as the
mixture was compelled to be duly described, pure coffee
could be purchased by any one who desired it.

On Friday, August 5, the second reading of the
Government of India Bill was moved by Earl
GRANVILLE, who took a review of the discussions which
had previously taken place.—Lord MALMESBURY
complained of the delays in the preparation of a measure
which had at length been thrust upon the house at the
close of a session. He said that Lord Derby and his
friends washed their hands of the consequences of this
measure, which they left upon the shoulders of the
ministry.—The Earl of ABERDEEN defended the conduct
of members. As to delay, the bill could hardly have
been prepared in less time; and there were important
matters which necessarily preceded it. Instead of a
slothful session, he believed public business had never
been more forward.—The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH
reminded Lord Malmesbury, that there had been ample
opportunity for discussing almost every question
connected with India in that house—Lord Ellenborough
himself, as he had been reminded by Lord Granville,
having spoken no fewer than sixteen times, and thus
having already made his speech on the bill clause by
clause. Lord Malmesbury was not justified in throwing
off from himself all the responsibility which attaches to
the passing of this measure. Lord Ellenborough
compendiously described the system which the bill
establishes, and partly renews, as containing something
good and something bad. "But, at the same time, I
think that the greatest part of what is bad is not new,
and that what is new is not bad."  Generally, it is an
improvement on the present system. He made merry
at the expense of the self-mutilation imposed on the
Court of Directors, and objected to the continuance of
the Court of Proprietors as a constituency. What would
a farmer do in a similar case. "Would he, if he were
in his senses, continue to breed from a stock which
always gave a bad breed? Would he, if he were asked
to sell instead of breeding, retain in his farmyard the
three oldest, most diseased, and incapable beasts of the
lot, such as ought to have no place in a farmer's
establishment, and which certainly should have no place
in a government concern? " He touched on the power
of the Directors to recal the Governor-General. "The
Bible says, 'No man can serve two masters'; but the
government says the Governor-General of India shall
serve two masters, and that too without the condition
which is said in the Scriptures to attach to the service
of one of them—namely, that of despising him." He
concluded with an impressive warning lest the change
should gradually sap the constitution of India, and act
like that Indian poison which gradually wastes away
the body, but never betrays its presence but by the
slow decay of every faculty. Several Peers bore a
part in the remainder of the debate. Lord Monteagle
took up an Indian Reform position; the Duke of
Argyll did duty in defence of the government; Lord
Ashburton supported the East India Company; the
Bishop of Oxford treated of the moral aspects of the
measure; and Lord Wharncliffe looked upon it
as temporary.  Earl Granville replied, and the bill
was read a second time without a division.

The Combination of Workmen Bill was withdrawn,
on the motion for the second reading.—Lord TRURO
denied that there was any difference of opinion as
to the construction of the law; and the LORD CHANCELLOR
thought the bill would only mislead the working
men.—The Earl of HARDWICKE said, the very events
of the time—the frequent strikes—showed that the
bill was not needed; if it passed, masters must combine
for their own protection. Under these circumstances,
Lord Kinnaird withdrew the bill.

On Monday, August 8, ministers were again questioned
by Lord Clanricarde, Lord Malmesbury, and Lord
Ellenborough, respecting the Turkish Question.—The
Earl of CLARENDON said in reply that he could not give
any answer materially different from that which he
had given five days ago. He agreed in all that had
been said as to the results of a permanent Russian
occupation, but he had no official information on
the subject. He was not prepared to deny that many
acts which had been described had been committed
by Russia, but he had only the same sources of information
as Lord Clanricarde, and it was impossible for the
government to act upon rumour. Negotiations were
tending to peaceful results, but he did not consider
that exciting debates in either house of parliament
would tend to that issue. Such negotiations had taken
the character all must desire, namely, a European
character, and all the powers were acting together to check
designs which they considered directed against the
balance of power or the territorial distribution which
was deemed desirable. He hoped not to be pressed
to go into more details, but he would say that nothing
had been done at Vienna without the consent of
France and England, and that the latter powers would
consent to nothing which did not maintain the independence
of Turkey.—He added, that he had no hesitation
in saying at once that he regarded immediate and
complete evacuation of the principalities as the sine
qua non of any negotiations whatever. Government
had never shrunk from discussion, and he thought
it most desirable that the country should know everything.
Nothing would prevent the government giving
all information, except the reasons which had hitherto
availed—those of the public service.

The house then went into committee on the Government
of India Bill. A number of amendments were
moved, but none of any importance was carried, except
that on the new clause introduced in the House of
Commons relating to the salt monopoly.—Lord
ELLENBOROUGH strongly condemned this novel interference
with the financial system of India. He opposed it
on principle, but also believed that it would not produce
the benefits which were anticipated to the importer.
He hoped that their lordships would strike the clause
out of the bill. India ought to be treated as a
perfectly independent country in matters of finance.—
Lord ALBEMARLE cited statistics to show the deprivation
sustained by the native of India in regard to salt,
and hoped that the Indian authorities would be
instructed by the home government to alleviate this
state of things.—The clause was struck out of the bill,
which then passed through committee.

On Tuesday, August 9, the Duke of NEWCASTLE
moved the second reading on the Landlord and Tenant
(Ireland) Bill, the Tenants Improvements Compensation
(Ireland) Bill, and the Leasing Powers (Ireland) Bill.
His grace suggested the advisability of the bills being
passed through that stage, in order to allow their full
discussion in committee.—The Marquis of CLANRICARDE
thought that the bills had better be postponed till
next session, and he moved that they be referred
to a select committee.—The Earl of MALMESBURY
would not object to go into committee on the first two
bills, which had been under the hand of the Irish