NARRATIVE OF PARLIAMENT AND POLITICS.

In the House of Lords, on Tuesday, June 26, Lord
LYNDHURST called attention to the Treaty of the 2nd
of December, 1854, and the Vienna conferences, his
reason for making the motion being to obtain some
explanation from Lord Clarendon as to the present position
of Austria with regard to the allies. He proceeded to
contrast the relative positions of Austria and Prussia,
and to show, however servile the latter power might
have shown herself on all occasions to Russia, that better
things were to have been expected from Austria, who
yet had missed a grand opportunity of vindicating her
own rights and maintaining her own interests by entering
into an offensive and defensive alliance with France
and England. Instead of doing this, after deceiving
those powers in every way during the recent diplomatic
proceedings, she had virtually declared her neutrality,
and it was impossible to avoid the conclusion that she
had a secret understanding with Russia, acting on which
she had withdrawn her troops from the Gallician frontier,
and disbanded a great portion of her army. There could
not be a doubt that our recent plenipotentiary to Vienna,
however great his ability, had been deceived by false
hopes and promises of peace, and there was as little
doubt that the conduct of the late government, in
deserting the seat of government at a most important crisis
of the campaign, and leaving the war to its fate, while
they betook themselves to their country seats, was
disgraceful in the extreme. Popular indignation had driven
that government from power. It was not for him to say
how far Lord Palmerston had realised the expectations
of the public, but he warned him that nothing but the
greatest vigour, decision, and activity could maintain
him in the position which he now filled.—Lord CLARENDON
thought, in spite of the able statement of Lord
Lyndhurst, that no good could arise from the censure
which he had cast upon Austria. The indiscriminate
blame which had been heaped on her in particular and
Germany in general had greatly estranged the
sympathies of that country, which had once been with the
allies, and diverted them into another channel. So far
as the government were concerned, it would have been
an unpardonable oversight to neglect to secure the co-
operation of Austria, and this the government had done;
but, while showing great deference to Austria, they had
not allowed that feeling to influence their preparations
for war; and though they diplomatised at Vienna, the
warlike operations before Sebastopol were carried on
with the utmost vigour. Even now nothing could be
further from his intention than to create any misunderstanding
with Austria; her conduct neither justified
censure nor merited praise, and the result of the recent
negotiations with her, though they had failed, had left
England and France free and unfettered to make peace
on their own terms.

On Thursday, June 28, the Duke of RICHMOND asked
Lord Panmure whether the government was about to
take any steps to Increase the Comfort of Soldiers in
Barracks, and whether Recruiting for the Regular
Army was Proceeding in a Satisfactory Manner?—
Lord PANMURE replied that the point to which the first
part of the Duke of Richmond's observations referred
had been long under the attention of the government,
who, though they might differ from the noble duke as
to the best way of effecting that object, would certainly
do everything in their power to advance the comfort of
the soldier. With regard to the second question, it
could not be denied, though recruiting was going on at
the rate of 1000 men a-week, that the total force of the
British army was far below the amount voted by
parliament. The government had therefore determined to
endeavour to make the service more attractive by giving
double pay to every soldier actively engaged before the
enemy. This additional pay it was proposed to invest
in savings banks until the soldier's return, or, if he fell,
it would be paid to his relatives. This scheme would be
made public in a few days by proclamation, and he
trusted it would be found to answer better than the
increase of bounty which had been proposed.

On Friday, June 29, in reply to the Earl of MALMESBURY,
Lord PANMURE contradicted the report which
had been circulated that Lord Raglan had Resigned
the Command of the British Army; Lord Raglan was
suffering from indisposition, and in the interval General
Simpson acted for him. The government had the fullest
confidence in that officer's ability.

On Monday, July 2, Lord ST. LEONARDS called the
attention of the house to the number of convicts who
had been thrown back on society by the Ticket-of-Leave
System, and suggested that some other method should
be devised for the disposal of desperate characters.—
Lord GRANVILLE promised that the subject should
receive every attention from the government.—Lord
MELVILLE hoped that the Secretary for War would take
care that no repetition occurred of a recent case, in which
it appeared that one of these ticket-of-leave men had
enlisted into the line.—The Duke of CAMBRIDGE
protested against the infusion of so pernicious an element
into the military service, which was a profession of
honour.

On Tuesday, July 3, a royal message, announcing her
Majesty's gracious intention to confer a Signal Mark of
her Favour upon the Family of Lord Raglan, in
consideration of his brilliant services, having been read,
Lord PANMURE, who was evidently much moved, in
proposing that it be taken into consideration, delivered
an eloquent panegyric upon the character of Lord Raglan.
Warm tributes to his memory having been paid by Lord
Hardinge, the Duke of Cambridge, the Earl of Cardigan,
Earl Granville, and other peers, the motion was
unanimously agreed to.

On Thursday, July 5, the Earl of ELLENBOROUGH
urged many objections to the proposed plan for Giving
Double Pay to the Soldiers on Service in the Crimea.
He expressed a preference for the introduction of some
relaxation in the existing restrictions upon enlistment,
which he considered uselessly stringent, as well as in
the present regulations respecting allowances, stoppages,
and other arrangements whose effects were harassing or
injurious to the men.—Lord PANMURE defended the
plan of the government, but intimated his consent to a
modification by which the soldiers would be permitted
to receive at once sixpence out of the additional shilling
of pay per diem in the character of a field allowance.

The Earl of HARDWICKE called attention to the
deficient provision now made for the Instruction of Naval
Cadets in the Royal Service. He suggested the re-
establishment of the Navy College existing in 1832.—
Earl GRANVILLE intimated that some communications
had been exchanged with the First Lord of the
Admiralty on the subject, and without making any pledge as