great powers of Europe to attend, for the purpose of a
conference on the affairs of Russia and Turkey. The
minister of his Majesty the Emperor of Russia did not
attend; but the minister of England, of France, and of
Prussia attended that conference. Certain terms were
then agreed upon, which, in the opinion of the
representatives of the four powers, might be accepted with
honour by the two governments of Turkey and of Russia.
Those terms have been assented to by the governments
of England and France; and, according to our belief,
have been transmitted from Vienna to Petersburg and
Constantinople. . . (In reply to a question, Lord John
added): The proposition, in fact, was an Austrian
proposition, although it came originally from the
government of France."

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE called attention to the defective
state of the law or the trial of Controverted Election
Petitions, as illustrated in the case of the inquiry into
the withdrawal of the Norwich petitions. He urged
upon the government the necessity of remedying the
evil.—Lord J. RUSSELL admitted, without any special
reference to the Norwich case, that the state of the law
was defective. He assured Mr. Buncombe that the
necessity for a remedy should not be lost sight of; adding
that some progress had been made in drawing up a
bill on the subject.

Mr. J. G. PHlLLlMORE moved an address, praying
that the Case of the Parsee Merchants Jevavjee Merjee
and Pestonjee Merjee might be referred to the judicial
committee of the privy council. The two Parsees had
lent money to the Nizam to enable him to pay up his
contingent; and he had secured the debt on a mortgage
of land, placed in the possession of the merchants. But
when the Nizam thought they had paid themselves, he
drove them out; and the land is now in the hands of
the East India company, who have accepted it in
payment of the debt due to them from the Nizam. It was
argued that the British Resident virtually guaranteed
the loan; and that the Company was morally bound to
see it repaid.—Mr. J. B. SMITH seconded the motion,
and enforced the same views.—Sir Charles WOOD
looked at the matter in a different light. It was solely
a question between the merchants and the Nizam—an
ordinary mercantile transaction; and so far from giving
a guarantee, the British Resident had especially and
formally refused to do anything of the kind. The
assignment of the land was simply deposited at the
house of the Resident. Lord Hardinge and Lord
Dalhousie had both decided against this claim; and it
is contrary to our policy to interfere with the debts of
the native princes.—A. long discussion followed. Mr.
H. Liddell, Mr. Digby Seymour, Mr. Bright, Mr.
Ingram, and Mr. Hume, supported the motion for
inquiry; Sir James Hogg and Mr. Mangles resisted.
On a division, the motion was negatived by 111 to 69.

Lord J. RUSSELL postponed the second reading of
the Colonial Church Regulation Bill until Monday, on
which Mr. KINNAIRD moved the postponement of the
bill for three months.—On this question a long discussion
arose, resulting in Mr. Kinnaird's proposition being
adopted, Mr. GLADSTONE intimating the acquiescence
of the government.

On Wednesday, August 3rd, on the motion for the
second reading of the Capitular Estates Bill, Mr.
WIGRAM moved that it be read a second time that day
three months.—Sir R. INGLIS, in seconding the amendment,
observed that all the capitular bodies in the
country viewed the bill as a measure of injustice, and
considering that a commission was now sitting upon
this very subject, and also considering the late period
of the session, he thought it better to reject the measure
for the present.—Mr. S. HERBERT, while admitting
that the question was one upon which parliament ought
to legislate, was decidedly of opinion that it would be
inexpedient to proceed with the bill until they were in
possession of the report of the commission now sitting
upon the subject.—The Marquis of BLANDFORD
observed that he did not now propose to proceed further
than to ask the house to affirm the principle of the bill
by passing the second reading, and thus declare its
opinion that ecclesiastical property ought to be placed
under the management of laymen. The salaries of the
clergy should be made fixed instead of fluctuating, as
was the case under the existing system; and all that he
now called upon the house to do was to affirm this
principle.—Sir B. HALL supported the second reading of
the bill.—Lord J. RUSSELL advised Lord Blandford to
postpone the bill to a future session. He would not say
that the principle of the bill was one which parliament
might not hereafter adopt; but, for the reasons which
others had already stated, he should be compelled to
vote against the second reading, if the noble lord pressed
the question to a division.—The Marquis of BLANDFORD,
in deference to the strong feeling which the
house had expressed, withdrew the bill. He had,
however, the permission of the government to lay the same
bill on the table next year without opposition.

The house then went into committee upon the
Expenses at Elections Bill, after a violent opposition from
Col. SIBTHORP. On clause 1, disqualifying candidates for
employing bands, bell-ringers, or flagmen, Mr. COWPER
moved that the penalty should be £100, instead of
disqualification.—On this there was much talk; during which
Sir James GRAHAM suggested that the best course would
be to give up the bill, and go on with the next order on
the paper—the Lunatics Care and Treatment bill.—This
suggestion provoked the indignation of Mr. Henry
BERKELEY; who complained, that in the face of the
majorities on previous stages of the bill, an attempt
should be made to pick it to pieces by the first lord of
the admiralty in command of a minority. After two
divisions, the amendment was adopted by 73 to 48—
Mr. LIDDELL then moved that the penalty be 100s.
Upon this there was more debate. Mr. W. F. HUME
moved that the Chairman report progress, and ask leave
to sit again on that day month. Carried, by 66 to 45.
Thus the bill is virtually defeated.

On Thursday, August 4th, the Charitable Trusts Bill,
as amended in committee, was considered.—Lord
John RUSSELL moved a clause providing that
Roman Catholic trusts should be entrusted to persons
of that persuasion. He thought that there was foundation
for the suspicion on the part of the Roman
Catholics, that the bill might be directed against their
charities—many of which are asserted to be illegal. He
would have no objection to take the same course with
regard to Jews and Quakers, if they demanded it.—Mr.
HEADLAM supported it; but moved a proviso, limiting
its operation to two years, in order that time might be
allowed for the consideration of a more permanent
arrangement.—The clause, as amended by Mr. Headlam,
was agreed to by 87 to 86; and the bill was ordered to
be read a third time on Monday.

A discussion took place as to the duties of the Speaker
of the House, in consequence of resolutions moved by
Sir R. INGLIS having the object of enabling the chairman
of ways and means to preside over the discussions
of the house whenever the Speaker might be unavoidably
absent.—Mr. HUME and Sir J. PAKINGTON
strongly urged the necessity of considering some means
of improving the mode of conducting the business of
the house. The former denounced the late sittings,
and the latter was in favour of a different arrangement
of the session, and the reappointment of the committee
on public business to take the question into consideration.
The resolutions were agreed to.

Lord J. RUSSELL took occasion to state the intentions
of the government respecting the Colony of Jamaica.
He referred, in the first instance, to the dispute between
the House of Assembly and the Council on the subject
of the bills passed by the former, and to the important
changes which had taken place in our West Indian
colonies, by the total abolition of slavery and the
competition they had to encounter with foreign sugars,
and which had produced much discontent on the part of
the colonists. There had been a distinction, however,
in the effect which these changes had produced upon
three of the most important of the colonies—British
Guiana, Trinidad, and Jamaica. In the two former the
exports of sugar, which in 1840 were 824,000 cwt., in
1852 amounted to 1,321,000 cwt., showing an increase of
more than 50 per cent. In Jamaica exports of sugar,
which in 1840 were 517,000 cwt., in 1862 were only
511,000 cwt. There was a similar difference in regard
to immigrants, of whom British Guiana imported,
between 1840 and 1853, 49,000, and Trinidad 24,000,